4 ms·
>> Utility isn’t linear in dollars. > How do you know? Empirical evidence: > Technically, the researchers found that life satisfaction rises with the log of
by throw0101b 3y ago
>> Utility isn’t linear in dollars.
> How do you know?
Empirical evidence:
> Technically, the researchers found that life satisfaction rises with the log of income[1] (i.e. multiples of income), not linear changes in income. The reason why log income is more relevant here is because someone with $10,000 might be much happier than someone with $0. However, someone with $10,010,000 is probably no happier than someone with $10,000,000. In other words, $10,000 means a lot to someone with nothing, but nothing to someone with a lot. I’ve written on how this idea applies to wealth[2] in the past and I plan on expanding on it in the future.
[…]
> In 2021, a study by Matthew Killingsworth[3] titled “Experienced well-being rises with income, even above $75,000 per year” shook the foundations of happiness research by contradicting the findings from Kahneman and Deaton’s famed 2010 paper. In particular, Killingsworth’s study found that both life satisfaction and emotional well-being continued to increase with income (i.e. the log of income), even beyond the $75,000 threshold reported by Kahneman and Deaton.
* https://ofdollarsanddata.com/money-cant-buy-happiness/ https://ofdollarsanddata.com/money-cant-buy-happiness/
- rufus_foreman 3y agoMy "how do you know" was more directed at "I’d be just about as happy with 100 million as 500 million". I agree with the log part. Wouldn't we expect them to be happier with their wealth doubled more than twice?