4 ms·
If I remember correctly though - there is a "happiness-threshold" of income, below which life-satisfaction and income are positively correlated. I think that n
by AVTizzle 14y ago
If I remember correctly though - there is a "happiness-threshold" of income, below which life-satisfaction and income are positively correlated.
I think that number for most of the US was around $70k or something. So below that number, income is correlated to happiness. Above that threshold, and the two are unrelated.
It makes sense. Different things start to matter once you have your basic physiological needs in place. But you have to secure that base.
- rlu 14y agoI learned that the threshold was actually simply poverty level which would be significantly under 70k
- AVTizzle 14y agoThis topic actually piqued my interest and sent me on a little wiki-stroll: "Money correlates with happiness, but the rate diminishes with more money. In 2010, Daniel Kahneman and Angus Deaton found that higher earners generally reported better life satisfaction, but people's day-to-day emotional well-being only rose with earnings until a threshold annual income of $75,000." This entire article is sweet, by the way. Definitely recommended reading for anyone that finds this type of stuff interesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happiness_economics#Individual_income http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happiness_economics#Individual_...
- Evbn 14y agoThat is for daily happiness of an employed individual, so for planning a lifetime, one must add overage for future retirement, disability, and medical expenses, and for any dependent spouse and children.
- hackinthebochs 14y agoI think this study is cited more than it is warranted. The study measures happiness compared to income. But it says nothing about overall wealth. It makes sense that more income helps happiness only up to a point, as the stresses of simply securing that income become the main drivers of daily stress once basic needs are met. I wonder what the relationship between hourly rate vs happiness looks like. When income is casually mentioned it is usually understood to mean wealth. This study is then implicitly an argument against focusing on amassing too much wealth, with the claim that being richer won't make you happier. But the methodology of the study just doesn't back this up. We need to be careful how and when it is cited.
- bound008 14y agohttp://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslows_hierarchy_of_needs http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslows_hierarchy_of_needs
- alttag 14y agoDownvoted, as I don't believe adding the link without commentary adds value to the discussion.
- doktrin 14y agoThe study you're thinking of noted that $75k was the level above which additional income would not significantly impact "happiness". While there are a multitude of caveats needed for any such claim, the most obvious is the fact that $75k means very different things depending on where you live. The WSJ adjusted the number for cost of living, below : http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/09/07/what-salary-buys-happiness-in-your-city/ http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/09/07/what-salary-buys-h... All of the above should be taken with a grain of salt, but the basic TL;DR is that the figure is actually ~$100k+ in most major US cities.
- nazgulnarsil 14y agoThe flip side of this is that you can also achieve many of the same objectives (i.e. things that impact happiness) on a smaller budget by paying attention to the relevant research on what really makes us happy. The value of happiness research is where it shows us how bad we are at predicting our own preferences. Incorrect predictions are expensive.
- ctdonath 14y agoInteresting things may happen when one is raised & ingrained with the correlation of income to happiness, then rise above that "happiness threshold". The basic physiological needs may be in place, but the mindset rooted in their absence is not.