10 ms·

I may sound like a conspiracy theorist but oh well: The cynic in me says such graphs are (figuratively) propaganda by the 1% (of 1% in wealth, not income), in

by volume 13y ago

I may sound like a conspiracy theorist but oh well: The cynic in me says such graphs are (figuratively) propaganda by the 1% (of 1% in wealth, not income), in that now we can define what the masses are "ok" with while we, the 1% of the 1%, can accelerate our gains further. Let the rest of them have crumbs and be content.

adwf 13y ago
The cynic in me is actually thinking it's interesting that the Scandanavian countries are left off the charts. They are usually touted as being amongst the happiest countries in the world, despite rather aggressive tax regimes to pay for it. Perhaps there is some cherry picking going on here? Either as propaganda to show that the US is the happiest, or to show that money equals happiness - which might not be true in the more socialist, high tax/lower net income Scandinavian countries. I'm probably being too cynical though. It's just surprising given the reputation of countries like Denmark and Norway for being happy, that any study could possibly leave them out.
- danieldk 13y ago
  They are usually touted as being amongst the happiest countries in the world, despite rather aggressive tax regimes to pay for it. Or, according to the World Happiness report 2013: 1. Denmark, 2. Norway, 3. Switzerland, 4. The Netherlands, 5. Sweden. The US ranks 17th. Source: http://unsdsn.org/files/2013/09/WorldHappinessReport2013_online.pdf http://unsdsn.org/files/2013/09/WorldHappinessReport2013_onl...
- rtpg 13y ago
  The paper is linked, available here (http://www.nber.org/papers/w18992.pdf?new_window=1 http://www.nber.org/papers/w18992.pdf?new_window=1) The graph they have included the 25 most populous countries, and is already a mess (lots of overlapping things). The Scandanavian countries didn't even make the cut on that one, the Economist probably took the ones that were the furthest apart. Maybe if all the Scandinavian countries fused together they could have made it?
  - adwf 13y ago
    Yeah, it'd be interesting if there was a study on population size vs. happiness. I imagine there would be an inverse correlation (smaller population, more happy). But whether you could isolate the cause would be a different matter. For example: is Norway happy because they have a small population with massive, well-managed oil reserves to pay for their social services? Or are they happy because with a smaller population it's easier to gain a consensus vote for alternative ways of life (eg. social democracy)? Whereas say, the USA might always be stuck with a capitalist democracy because the large population is too big to influence easily.
    - Dewie 13y ago
      > For example: is Norway happy because they have a small population with massive, well-managed oil reserves to pay for their social services? The oil reserves don't pay for the social services. Some of the reserves are spent in the budget, but that is mostly skimming off the "interests", and there are restrictions put in place on how much you can use (maybe you already knew this; your wording was a bit ambiguous).
      - adwf 13y ago
        Yeah I did, I was just trying to point out a potential difference between being a rich country and happy vs. a small, politically engaged country and happy.
- awakeasleep 13y ago
  Here are some interesting figures on that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income
- Dewie 13y ago
  The Nordic countries were featured in an article a year ago. http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21571136-politicians-both-right-and-left-could-learn-nordic-countries-next-supermodel http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21571136-politicians-b... If there is an agenda somewhere, it's probably not on the part of The Economist (I don't know enough about The Economist to comment on more than their apparent public face overall).
  - adwf 13y ago
    Yeah I doubt there's an agenda, I was being cynical just because there was a potential point to make. It's almost impossible to find an article about countries overall happiness without discussing the Scandinavians at the top, so their absence was conspicuous. Add in the fact that the article is pro-capitalism / money making, and the US are at the top of their happiness scale... It's contrary to the usual message, so I thought it worth pointing out.
adventured 13y ago
On a similar note I've seen it said the prevalent theory on money-happiness (that money can only buy happiness up to, conveniently, the middle class boundaries), is just propaganda to make the poorer classes feel better about their lives. The common money-happiness theory seems pretty ridiculous. As though people are happy earning $65k a year and paying on their mortgage for 30 years, worrying about education for their kids, worrying about saving a few grand, worrying about paying the car payment, etc - versus making $500k a year and not having a mortgage at all, sending your kids to Stanford, and never worrying about The Bills.

by volume 13y ago

adwf 13y ago

The cynic in me is actually thinking it's interesting that the Scandanavian countries are left off the charts. They are usually touted as being amongst the happiest countries in the world, despite rather aggressive tax regimes to pay for it. Perhaps there is some cherry picking going on here? Either as propaganda to show that the US is the happiest, or to show that money equals happiness - which might not be true in the more socialist, high tax/lower net income Scandinavian countries. I'm probably being too cynical though. It's just surprising given the reputation of countries like Denmark and Norway for being happy, that any study could possibly leave them out.

danieldk 13y ago
They are usually touted as being amongst the happiest countries in the world, despite rather aggressive tax regimes to pay for it. Or, according to the World Happiness report 2013: 1. Denmark, 2. Norway, 3. Switzerland, 4. The Netherlands, 5. Sweden. The US ranks 17th. Source: http://unsdsn.org/files/2013/09/WorldHappinessReport2013_online.pdf http://unsdsn.org/files/2013/09/WorldHappinessReport2013_onl...
rtpg 13y ago
The paper is linked, available here (http://www.nber.org/papers/w18992.pdf?new_window=1 http://www.nber.org/papers/w18992.pdf?new_window=1) The graph they have included the 25 most populous countries, and is already a mess (lots of overlapping things). The Scandanavian countries didn't even make the cut on that one, the Economist probably took the ones that were the furthest apart. Maybe if all the Scandinavian countries fused together they could have made it?
- adwf 13y ago
  Yeah, it'd be interesting if there was a study on population size vs. happiness. I imagine there would be an inverse correlation (smaller population, more happy). But whether you could isolate the cause would be a different matter. For example: is Norway happy because they have a small population with massive, well-managed oil reserves to pay for their social services? Or are they happy because with a smaller population it's easier to gain a consensus vote for alternative ways of life (eg. social democracy)? Whereas say, the USA might always be stuck with a capitalist democracy because the large population is too big to influence easily.
  - Dewie 13y ago
    > For example: is Norway happy because they have a small population with massive, well-managed oil reserves to pay for their social services? The oil reserves don't pay for the social services. Some of the reserves are spent in the budget, but that is mostly skimming off the "interests", and there are restrictions put in place on how much you can use (maybe you already knew this; your wording was a bit ambiguous).
    - adwf 13y ago
      Yeah I did, I was just trying to point out a potential difference between being a rich country and happy vs. a small, politically engaged country and happy.
awakeasleep 13y ago
Here are some interesting figures on that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income
Dewie 13y ago
The Nordic countries were featured in an article a year ago. http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21571136-politicians-both-right-and-left-could-learn-nordic-countries-next-supermodel http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21571136-politicians-b... If there is an agenda somewhere, it's probably not on the part of The Economist (I don't know enough about The Economist to comment on more than their apparent public face overall).
- adwf 13y ago
  Yeah I doubt there's an agenda, I was being cynical just because there was a potential point to make. It's almost impossible to find an article about countries overall happiness without discussing the Scandinavians at the top, so their absence was conspicuous. Add in the fact that the article is pro-capitalism / money making, and the US are at the top of their happiness scale... It's contrary to the usual message, so I thought it worth pointing out.

adventured 13y ago

On a similar note I've seen it said the prevalent theory on money-happiness (that money can only buy happiness up to, conveniently, the middle class boundaries), is just propaganda to make the poorer classes feel better about their lives. The common money-happiness theory seems pretty ridiculous. As though people are happy earning $65k a year and paying on their mortgage for 30 years, worrying about education for their kids, worrying about saving a few grand, worrying about paying the car payment, etc - versus making $500k a year and not having a mortgage at all, sending your kids to Stanford, and never worrying about The Bills.