Money Buys Happiness..

[Bini]

And you can never have too much. Interesting article found here.

[Vort]

Which links to a leftist, pro-income-redistribution Slate article. As much as I enjoy some Slate articles, I really, desperately hate their leftist bent. Honestly, I'm thinking that, just maybe, the John Birch Society has been right all along: The danger to our society comes from the political and social left, who control both the media (source of information) and public education (inculcation of values).

[Windseeker]

More money means more happiness which leads the brilliant author to conclude that redistribution will spread the happiness.

[NeuroTypical]

Heh - you know what else that graph says?

The poorest people in the USA, are happier than richer people who live in France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Korea, Japan, Russia, Iran, the Ukraine, Great Britain, and many others (can't tell because the lines blur together too much).

Everyone join me for a chant!

U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!

(I love statistics.)

Edited April 30, 2013 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[Mahone]

Heh - you know what else that graph says?

The poorest people in the USA, are happier than richer people who live in France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Korea, Japan, Russia, Iran, the Ukraine, Great Britain, and many others (can't tell because the lines blur together too much).

Everyone join me for a chant!

U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!

(I love statistics.)

Not strictly true. Looking at the UK vs USA, it'd be more accurate to say that the poorer in the USA are happier than the poorer in the UK and the richer in the USA are happier than the richer in the UK. It doesn't work if you say that the poorer in the USA are happier than the richer in the UK.

My wife (being American) and I (being British) have discussed/argued the reasons for this at length. Once I've spent some considerable time in the states, I might be able to come up with some reasons based on experience as to why this might be the case.

[NeuroTypical]

Well, any time you have any part of a line lower and to the right of the lowest part of the US, then by definition, people making up that part of the line are richer, and less happy.

[Mahone]

Well, any time you have any part of a line lower and to the right of the lowest part of the US, then by definition, people making up that part of the line are richer, and less happy.

True, but the further up the UK line you go, it rises well above the lower parts of the US line. It's not accurate to say that the richer people in the UK are not happier than the poorer people in the USA. It could be said that when comparing people/families of equal income in both countries, the people in the USA would be happier.

[Vort]

True, but the further up the UK line you go, it rises well above the lower parts of the US line. It's not accurate to say that the richer people in the UK are not happier than the poorer people in the USA. It could be said that when comparing people/families of equal income in both countries, the people in the USA would be happier.

The point is, find a given income level for the US and measure happiness, then find a slightly higher income level for the UK and measure happiness. The poorer US measure as happier than the richer UK.

The quantification is nonsense, anyway. And the observation that people with more money tend to be more content seems eminently "well, duh"-worthy to me. Note that Brazilians and Mexicans measure roughly equal in "happiness" to Americans, but with significantly lower incomes.

[prisonchaplain]

I volunteer to be a redistribution center. :-)

[Mahone]

The point is, find a given income level for the US and measure happiness, then find a slightly higher income level for the UK and measure happiness. The poorer US measure as happier than the richer UK.

I understand what the point was, but the statement "The poorest people in the USA, are happier than richer people who live in..." was too vague to be true, according to that graph.

[Guest]

In any case, this article and graph is written/measured by people who have absolutely no idea what happiness is.

[Praetorian_Brow]

The 2012 Legatum Prosperity Index

The bear is a symbol of Russia and Lincoln riding and taming it, is a huge stretch of the imagination. Goodness, Abe sitting on the flag is shocking.

Edited May 2, 2013 by Praetorian_Brow

[Dravin]

The 2012 Legatum Prosperity Index

The bear is a symbol of Russia and Lincoln riding and taming it, is a huge stretch of the imagination. Goodness, Abe sitting on the flag is shocking.

At first I thought those were his pants, but you're right, it looks like he has a flag saddle.

[NeuroTypical]

Not to put too fine a point on it:

The outlandish image of Lincoln with a machine gun sitting on a flagsasddle riding a bear, is supposed to be outlandish. It's supposed to satirize blind patriotism to the point where someone actually insults what they're ballyhooing. I thought it an appropriate giggle for a chart and article that was goofy and fatally flawed to begin with.

Edited May 2, 2013 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[talisyn]

Which links to a leftist, pro-income-redistribution Slate article. As much as I enjoy some Slate articles, I really, desperately hate their leftist bent. Honestly, I'm thinking that, just maybe, the John Birch Society has been right all along: The danger to our society comes from the political and social left, who control both the media (source of information) and public education (inculcation of values).

It's ok, Vort. I feel the same way about theblaze.com and the dangerous political and social right, who totally control the media and Congress

[Vort]

theblaze.com and the dangerous political and social right, who totally control the media and Congress

I love how the leftists think that a minor, little-known website constitutes "controlling the media", and when the Democrats have control of both houses for years and then lose the Senate to a narrow majority of Republicans because of their unwillingness to do anything, that constitutes the social right "controlling Congress".

Things aren't funny unless there is an element of truth to them. Absurd statements alone are not funny, unless there's a humorous context.

[Praetorian_Brow]

I realized the outlandish nature of the picture and its satire, but as most people miss sarcasm, I was duty bound to make it more obvious. Sometimes I confuse my socialist tendencies with my right to explain my right agenda. Thanks for sharing.