4 ms·
The main finding is that happiness correlates with log wealth, and what people were missing from the $75,000 ceiling before was that they weren't taking the log
by metacritic12 2y ago
The main finding is that happiness correlates with log wealth, and what people were missing from the $75,000 ceiling before was that they weren't taking the log.
In fact, it takes only $300 (real 2000 USD) /year to survive, and historically (>300 years ago) most humans were earning this much for millenia. At times, e.g. China was considered rich for earning $1000/year and considered a "rich country".
It would be absolutely bizzare if happiness just happened to not respond to wealth at exactly $75,000, which is 200x susistence or 75x historical rich.
The way going from $75K->$150K or $150K->$300K brings happiness seems more or less the same as $35K->$75K or $20K->$40K.
- sofixa 2y agoFor the majority of human history, the majority of the world's population were subsistence farmers at best. They didn't "earn money". They made enough food off their farm to be able to survive, and traded the rest for tools, other food, etc. Or were serfs or slaves where even that was beyond them.
- metacritic12 2y agoExactly, the $300/year is imputed value for the amount of food they grew and housing services from the houses they build. They rarely received $300 as e.g. gold that they declared.
- Suppafly 2y ago>In fact, it takes only $300 (real 2000 USD) /year to survive, and historically (>300 years ago) most humans were earning this much for millenia. I get the point you're trying to make, but this isn't accurate. It takes more than $300 or $2000 to survive now. You can't just adjust historical values for inflation and claim they apply today when the historical values were derived from a system that didn't function like today's.