So … people usually are happier if they can do more things they like doing. Talking about obvious conclusions…

What I think most of these happiness arguments coming economists typically neglect is the meaning of social networks and peer groups (family, friends, collegues, etc) to individual’s happiness. In my opinion it’s pretty much same how well off I am if I don’t have anyone to share it with. Of course if you count social contacts as relative wealth then maybe he’s correct.

Also, I would not take it for granted that people in “the West” (whatever that nowadays means) are really happier than people “not in the West”. We are better fed and entertained but that’s not the same thing (again, in my opinion). Happiness is a subjective and dynamic state which is, like so many other things happening in our brain, very complex topic. So as anyone who likes to thing logically can tell, one can deduct whatever from an inherently false statement.

So nothing to see here, move along.

Norberg is, again, barking up the wrong tree. The ability to choose your lifestyle is more linked to relative wealth than absolute wealth. The middle and working classes end up spending most of their income on necessities anyway, so economic growth that gives these ultra-capitalist economists a raging hard-on doesn’t actually improve their living standards all that much. More money just slips through their fingers.

I would be happy anywhere if I had a million euros

I would be happy anywhere if I had a million euros

In the Manhattan or central London housing markets, 1 million won’t get you very far. In many cases, it would be an insufficient down payment.

But sure, 1 million would buy you plenty of happiness in, say, Romania.

Most common diseases (and growing in numbers) in Sweden for women are psychic illnesses, like depression and anxiety. There are same kind of observations in Finland also. So, how is it possible to become more and more depressed, and same to become more happy?

http://www.iltasanomat.fi/uutiset/sahkeet/Ruotsalaisselvitys%3A+Psyykkiset+sairaudet+naisten+yleisin+sairaus/1063309

Many things “buys” you happiness. Money is certainly one, maybe more or less of a factor for some.

Money can’t buy happiness. Money can, however, buy you the freedom to pursue happiness. It may sound like I’m splitting hairs, but there is a difference.

Does crass materialism make anyone truly happy? Not really.

However, let’s say you have an expensive passion in life – traveling, for example. Money CAN buy you the freedom to pursue that passion. Whether you’re happy after the money is spent, though, is up to you.

Does crass materialism make anyone truly happy?

I think it probably makes one of our many, many, many low-rent sociopaths happy.

Rich people get depressed and commit suicides, too. I don’t buy it that money makes you happy. Sure, some people get very unhappy if they lose a lot of money fast but others can take that more stoically, too. If money brings things that make life easier it also depends on how you make that money. If the fast money’s criminal, pangs of conscience may eat away the happiness. If you work hard enough for the money not to have any free time left, you may stop being happy at some point. And being rich and idle is also known to make people unhappy.

What’s with this Norberg guy anyway? He seems to be totally full of crap, yet countless (usually right-wing) bloggers and other net yahoos regard anything coming out of his mouth as the Word of God.

Being not able to feed and keep my flock warm and dry would surely make me unhappy. So resonable amount of money per month is atleast helping me to keep happy. There’s not much left for savings, but I wouldn’t think any extra money would make me happier than I am on a long term. Of course few millions would be nice, but sometimes (putting more wood in fireplace, with filled stomach, kids playng around) I actually think that I am as happy as I can be.
Ahh… It’s such a bliss to be settled for so little.
As my frien said: Tärkeetä on ettei ihan koko aikaa hirveesti vituta.
- It’s important (in happiness) that you’re not pissed off all the time.
We are all individuals and set our standards on our extraordinary ways… Even those rich bastards with their BMW:s and fancy stuff…
(Whitch I do not envy, nooo…)

Another insightful and though-provoking comment from Norberg. There is absolutely no reason to have happiness studies structured so as to support anti-capitalist agendas. Yet so much of Europe’s own sense of self-worth is measured in exactly those terms.

As everyone knows, money does not buy happiness, but neither does living in a welfare state, even though that is the tacit assumption of welfare-statists everywhere.

Another wonderfully generalized and 2D statement. I doubt you’d find very many people who’d go on record as claiming that being taken care of by the State = happiness, any more then money = happiness.

It’s a shame the multifaceted nature of life in societies of all sorts doesn’t conform to such pronouncements. Life would be so much easier…

Another wonderfully generalized and 2D statement. I doubt you’d find very many people who’d go on record as claiming that being taken care of by the State = happiness, any more then money = happiness.

I’d say that money = happiness is closer to the truth. State involvement is just a necessary evil in some cases.

It’s a shame the multifaceted nature of life in societies of all sorts doesn’t conform to such pronouncements.

Another “shades of grey” argument, which tacitly assume that all proposals that go against the grain of conventional thought see the world in black-and-white terms. This is the stance of lemmings and followers, who can only react to what someone else does or says, and never offer any glimmer of original thought or policy.

A stance very well favored in welfare-statist Europe.

Apparently the Nordberg fellow has chosen his statistics very “carefully”. Here’s a bit food for thought regarding the correlation between wealth, welfare states and happiness.

http://wvs.isr.umich.edu/images/papers/genes2.gif

And more graphs (tkae a look at the first one in particular)

http://wvs.isr.umich.edu/fig.shtml

Apparently the Nordberg fellow has chosen his statistics very “carefully”.

Just go on spewing your welfare-statist propaganda. Norberg has already opened his mouth, the right-wing blogosphere has gone ooh-aah and the case is now officially closed.

This is the stance of lemmings and followers, who can only react to what someone else does or says, and never offer any glimmer of original thought or policy.

Thank god for the creative power of The Simplifiers!