2 ms·

The first thing I tend to do when finding a study reporting in a way that seems counter-intuitive, to say nothing of one that contradicts previous findings, is

The first thing I tend to do when finding a study reporting in a way that seems counter-intuitive, to say nothing of one that contradicts previous findings, is to go to their methods. There are quite frequently some pretty glaring differences, and that's certainly the case here [1]. The original study was carried out by directly surveying people, and measuring their subjective perspectives. Their answers were then contrasted against their income. The later study was carried out with a smartphone app, which participants opted into at their discretion, asked at a frequency completely up to the participants, and then asked them about their experiences just prior to the notification. I'm not really sure what that's measuring, but it seems fairly safe to say that it's something quite different. For instance ask a grossly obese man how he feels at any given point in time and it's probably pretty good. He's likely relaxing, eating, and otherwise engaging in various forms of self indulgent behavior. But gauge him on his overall life satisfaction and it's likely to be abysmal. Vice versa, query a mother who's raising 4 young children and, at any given point in time, and they're often not going to be having the best of times. Yet, nonetheless their overall life satisfaction is likely to be quite high. Basically look at any poll on various forms of contentedness, Gallup carries out an annual one here. [2] And you'll find the results are nothing like what you'd expect, even more so if one thinks money can provide anything beyond what one can buy. The 'most positive' places are in Latin America - Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala, Columbia, Mexico, etc. The 'least negative' places are in Eastern Europe and Asia: China, Kyrgyzstan, Vietnam, Estonia, Poland, Kazakhstan, etc. These results don't leave much room for money doing anything beyond ensuring ones base needs can be comfortably met. [1] - https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2208661120#sec-3 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2208661120#sec-3 [2] - https://www.gallup.com/analytics/349280/gallup-global-emotions-report.aspx https://www.gallup.com/analytics/349280/gallup-global-emotio...

RandomLensman 3y ago
I always considered it of utmost importance for the rich to ensure the belief that money does not aid in happiness beyond the most basic needs, that it is in fact a burden beyond that.
- somenameforme 3y ago
  Even if you want to take this sort of world view, I think going the other direction makes more sense. Trying to sell the idea that you can be happy if you just earn a few more dollars, or buy this product, or take this drug, is an amazing incentive for trying to ensure people keep spinning in a endless hamster wheel, and creating artificial demand for basically anything and everything imaginable. If people actually stopped to introspect, or stopped believing that money was like a drug for the ails of their life, our entire economic system would come to a screeching halt, to say nothing of absolutely wrecking the profits of near to every major corporation in existence. There's actually even historical precedent for this. One of the hypothesized factors for the fall of Rome was the rise of Christianity. You went from a nation massively dedicated to product in pursuit of glorification of the Gods, alongside an emperor holding a pseudo-deistic role, to one where you have 'the meek shall inherit the Earth', 'it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God', and so on. It was probably just a minor factor but it almost certainly played at least some real role.
  - RandomLensman 3y ago
    Having a lot of money is indeed something that isolates against a lot of problems as you can just get people to solve them/don't need to care for unexpected costs. If you are not afflicted by some bad diseases or certain personal problems, a lot of money brings a lot of freedom to pursue whatever you fancy. That said, a few more dollars are indeed irrelevant to happiness beyond a certain level, but orders of magnitude might not be.
    - somenameforme 3y ago
      Hahah, you know - I think you might have just explained that magic $75k number. In thinking about your post some of the most obvious examples of this would be things like your car breaking down, or needing to take a week off work, and other such things. $75k (a decade ago) is that point where you can cover these costs, whether in NYC or Bodunk, with a pretty minimal amount of discomfort. Get down into that $50k range and you're doing pretty okay (especially in Bodunk), but that's still at an income point where something like a car failure is going to be really pretty stressful.

RandomLensman 3y ago

I always considered it of utmost importance for the rich to ensure the belief that money does not aid in happiness beyond the most basic needs, that it is in fact a burden beyond that.

somenameforme 3y ago
Even if you want to take this sort of world view, I think going the other direction makes more sense. Trying to sell the idea that you can be happy if you just earn a few more dollars, or buy this product, or take this drug, is an amazing incentive for trying to ensure people keep spinning in a endless hamster wheel, and creating artificial demand for basically anything and everything imaginable. If people actually stopped to introspect, or stopped believing that money was like a drug for the ails of their life, our entire economic system would come to a screeching halt, to say nothing of absolutely wrecking the profits of near to every major corporation in existence. There's actually even historical precedent for this. One of the hypothesized factors for the fall of Rome was the rise of Christianity. You went from a nation massively dedicated to product in pursuit of glorification of the Gods, alongside an emperor holding a pseudo-deistic role, to one where you have 'the meek shall inherit the Earth', 'it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God', and so on. It was probably just a minor factor but it almost certainly played at least some real role.
- RandomLensman 3y ago
  Having a lot of money is indeed something that isolates against a lot of problems as you can just get people to solve them/don't need to care for unexpected costs. If you are not afflicted by some bad diseases or certain personal problems, a lot of money brings a lot of freedom to pursue whatever you fancy. That said, a few more dollars are indeed irrelevant to happiness beyond a certain level, but orders of magnitude might not be.
  - somenameforme 3y ago
    Hahah, you know - I think you might have just explained that magic $75k number. In thinking about your post some of the most obvious examples of this would be things like your car breaking down, or needing to take a week off work, and other such things. $75k (a decade ago) is that point where you can cover these costs, whether in NYC or Bodunk, with a pretty minimal amount of discomfort. Get down into that $50k range and you're doing pretty okay (especially in Bodunk), but that's still at an income point where something like a car failure is going to be really pretty stressful.