"If thou wilt make a man happy, add not unto his riches but take away from his desires." Epicurus (341 BC - 270 BC)
An article titled, "Where money seems to talk" in last week's The Economist magazine points to new polls highlighting a positive correlation between wealth and happiness. I've selected several passages from the article for your background. As usual, we'll analyze the information and draw some perspective from timeless wisdom:
Ever since social scientists at the University of Pennsylvania found that mansion-dwelling American millionaires are barely happier than Masai warriors in huts, some economists have been downplaying the link between cash and contentment...
The new polls cast some doubt on that school of thought. They add weight to the contention that growth and income play a big part in boosting people's satisfaction with life and their attitude to the future...
The gap between elite and popular perceptions is especially sharp in Russia, India and China. In those countries, top people's attitudes are far more upbeat than those of the general populations...
...as the Ipsos poll clearly shows, happiness and optimism are not just different, they can be contradictory. The Chinese are dissatisfied but upbeat; Europeans are happy now but dread tomorrow...
So what should one make of the contradiction between these [polls] and previous evidence? Definitional problems may provide part of the explanation. These are self-reported polls and people mean different things by "happiness."
The new polls are interesting but they still do not successfully disprove the "new happiness" economist theories, such as those from the British Scholar, Richard Layard, or the University of Pennsylvania's, Dr. Martin Seligman. Those theories essentially say that rich countries may be generally happier than poor ones, but once extreme poverty is overcome, the connection between wealth and happiness weakens. This view makes logical sense to me. After all, it requires at least a minimal amount of money to sustain the basic human needs (food, clothing, shelter) that support our mental and physical health, which, in turn, are arguably necessary to sustain happiness.
In the interest of keeping this post a digestible length, let’s just say that polls, studies and theories, in the end, are just the self-serving result of our human curiosity and desire to scientifically define everything around us. Wisdom holds that the only thing that we should invest our time "defining" is our own personal "happiness:" Otherwise, it will be defined by others and we will then be perpetually chasing the proverbial carrot. Happiness can not be found -- it can only be created by personal definition and perception. The wisdom in this has existed for millenniums...
Once we realize that the answers to our questions already exist, perhaps we will be able to turn our attention to things that really matter and we will all be happier for it...
Good grief. Who knew you were so smart back in 5th grade?
Posted by: sistasmiff | July 28, 2007 at 11:24 AM
Good grief. Who knew you were so smart back in 5th grade?
Posted by: sistasmiff | July 28, 2007 at 11:24 AM
Sistasmiff: Because being "smart" and wise are two entirely different things! Great to hear from you Sharon! Thanks for the comment...
Kent
Posted by: The Financial Philosopher | July 28, 2007 at 04:48 PM
In my experience money can't buy my own happiness, but it can buy happiness for others, at least temporarily. Try tipping a waitress at a diner $50 and see how it affects her mood for the remainder of the day.
Posted by: Eric | July 31, 2007 at 12:54 AM
Great point. I would be even more interested to see what the waitress would do with the $50...
Posted by: The Financial Philosopher | August 01, 2007 at 11:02 AM