3 ms·

We do measure well-being and happiness, and the statistics are very interesting: https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-and-life-satisfaction https://ourworldind

We do measure well-being and happiness, and the statistics are very interesting: https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-and-life-satisfaction https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-and-life-satisfaction Some highlights: -National income and national happiness are different, but are positively correlated -Average levels of happiness have been rising internationally for decades, with the notable exception of the united states -While economic inequality has been rising in countries like the US, happiness inequality has been falling. From a happiness perspective, our lives are less unequal than they were decades ago.

s1artibartfast 4y ago
The most interesting Insight from the US data is that happiness is very poorly tied to how much people actually have, and more tied to perceptions of where they stand relative to others. It is like the classic experiment of a monkey being outraged when given less treats than another monkey, despite having more treats than they otherwise would have. It is all tied to expectations
- criddell 4y ago
  I think it's also tied to the innate sense of fairness we seem to have. For example, if everybody where you work gets a 20% year end bonus and you get a 5% bonus you would probably be unhappy even though you got a bonus.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    I basically agree. I think it is tied to the expectation of fairness and the perception of fairness. If you expect to get the same bonus, and you perceive you were slighted, you will probably be unhappy. Perspective plays a huge part. That's not to say people don't have valid grievances, but there is a huge amount of cognitive dissonance, and large gaps between expectations and reality. Take the parent example of US inequality. Low earners are unhappy that they make so much less than US high earners. Well that's unfair! However, they certainly don't gain much comfort by being a high earner globally. That's not unfair, that is deserved!
    - hbrn 4y ago
      As your example perfectly illustrates, our perception of fairness is extremely biased, and therefore is not a good metric. "Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to someone else today"
      - int_19h 4y ago
        Our perception of fairness is parochial, so it's biased against the outgroup, but it works very well within the ingroup. But in- and outgroup are not rigidly defined and can be changed. If you maximize the size of the ingroup, there's nothing wrong with innate farness.

s1artibartfast 4y ago

The most interesting Insight from the US data is that happiness is very poorly tied to how much people actually have, and more tied to perceptions of where they stand relative to others. It is like the classic experiment of a monkey being outraged when given less treats than another monkey, despite having more treats than they otherwise would have. It is all tied to expectations

criddell 4y ago
I think it's also tied to the innate sense of fairness we seem to have. For example, if everybody where you work gets a 20% year end bonus and you get a 5% bonus you would probably be unhappy even though you got a bonus.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  I basically agree. I think it is tied to the expectation of fairness and the perception of fairness. If you expect to get the same bonus, and you perceive you were slighted, you will probably be unhappy. Perspective plays a huge part. That's not to say people don't have valid grievances, but there is a huge amount of cognitive dissonance, and large gaps between expectations and reality. Take the parent example of US inequality. Low earners are unhappy that they make so much less than US high earners. Well that's unfair! However, they certainly don't gain much comfort by being a high earner globally. That's not unfair, that is deserved!
  - hbrn 4y ago
    As your example perfectly illustrates, our perception of fairness is extremely biased, and therefore is not a good metric. "Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to someone else today"
    - int_19h 4y ago
      Our perception of fairness is parochial, so it's biased against the outgroup, but it works very well within the ingroup. But in- and outgroup are not rigidly defined and can be changed. If you maximize the size of the ingroup, there's nothing wrong with innate farness.