I believe that money can buy a person happiness due to several reasons related to the costs of comfortable and healthy living. These costs include housing, medicine, and meaningful experience, which improve the quality of life. Despite the fact that luxury is often seen as an attractive point in favor of happiness via increased budget or spending, it is not necessary for well-being. Some researchers propose that happiness is dependent on the living standards and the perception of living circumstances, this is a theory of comparison (Muresan et al.). On the other hand, it is also possible to perceive happiness as the satisfaction of personal needs (Muresan et al.). Nevertheless, multiple factors are crucial to form a happy life which need to be reviewed in detail.
First of all, given that happiness is related to the satisfaction of personal needs, there is also a need to consider the essential need of human life such as housing, medicine, and food. These expenditures are continuous throughout human life. In order to be healthy, one needs medication and medical expertise to ensure long life without illnesses. Electricity and water bills need to be paid to ensure comfortable life at home, which includes cleanness, cooking, and entertainment in the form of TV programs or the Internet. Moreover, technological development led to the digitalization of numerous jobs and created the opportunity to interact with anyone despite the distance. This is essential because, without a job, there’s no source of income to pay the described bills, and connection with family and friends is known to improve life satisfaction and address humans’ social needs.
Other personal needs are often related to the purchase of things and meaningful or memorable experiences. It is well-known that a good experience may improve a person’s mood, resulting in satisfaction with life (Mogilner et al.). These experiences vary due to human individuality but are often connected to romance, socialization, personal development. Romance refers to the maintenance of a romantic relationship with a loved person. This indirectly incurs additional costs such as future marriage organization, dates, and small gifts, which contribute to the improvement of the mood. It is widely accepted that personal development leads to satisfaction with one-self. Personal development is related to the acquisition of new skills and broadening of one’s horizon or accumulation of knowledge. The services of trainers and teachers coupled with the purchase of books are not free and considered as spending outside of basic living needs. Furthermore, buying time or expenditures to free oneself from daily chores or unmeaningful but necessary tasks contribute to personal well-being (Mogilner et al.). Numerous researchers found that money spent on buying time alleviates time stress, and people who utilize these services feel happier (Mogilner et al.).
Living standards vary from country to country due to the differences in economic conditions. Consequently, higher living standards refer to higher costs for basic needs. The theory of comparison suggests that an increase in a personal income would not lead to a significant increase in happiness, given that the income of others would similarly increase. Nevertheless, studies identified that a certain threshold exists after which the effect of income on happiness is significantly reduced. For example, in the US, it is equal to 75 000$ (Mogilner et al.), while in Europe, it is close to 35 000$ (Muresan et al.). This demonstrates that an excessive increase in income is not necessary for well-being. Simultaneously, it points to the fact that below this threshold, people are not as satisfied with life and happy as they could have been.
In conclusion, money can buy happiness but only if spent correctly. The correct spending of money involves improvement and maintenance of life via memorable experiences, meaningful things, and satisfaction of basic needs. Moreover, it is not necessary to have an excessive amount of money certain threshold exists, which demonstrates that money cannot amount to complete happiness but attributes to its significant portion.
Works Cited
Mogilner, C., Whillans, A., & Norton, M. I. “Time, money, and subjective well-being.” Handbook of well-being. Edited by E. Diener, S. Oishi, & L. Tay, DEF Publishers, 2018.
Muresan, Gabriela Mihaela, et al. “Can Money Buy Happiness? Evidence for European Countries.” Applied Research in Quality of Life, vol. 15, no. 4, 2019, pp. 953–970. Web.
What is happiness? We can ask hundreds of people, and each of them would probably give different answers. One would say that happiness is to be with a loved one, the second would say that happiness is the stability, and the third, on the contrary, would say that happiness is the unpredictability. For someone, to be happy is to have a lot of money while for others – to be popular. All in all, there are plenty of different understandings of happiness.
Personally, I consider happiness as simplicity and peace when my family and friends are healthy and happy as well. I recognize that they all are dear to me and able to understand what is going on inside me. I know that they will support me in any situation doing everything that depends on them. In return, I am also ready to do much for them. What we do for others, helping them when they need our help, advice, or support and obtaining appreciation, is happiness because helping others, we are doing something very significant and necessary.
What does it mean to be happy? I think it is, primarily, a state of mind, it means to have harmony with yourself and the people around. Happiness is multi-faceted. Perhaps, the word “love” is the most appropriate one to describe my happiness as love is driven by our world. People create wonderful things concerning their job, hobby, or family. Love is life, and I am happy when I realize that I live up to the hilt.
However, some people might be unhappy even though they should be. For example, teenagers who have everything to live a happy life, including healthy family, close friends, and enough money to satisfy basic needs, ask their parents to buy the latest model of IPhone. In the case, parents could not afford it, some teenagers tend to feel unhappy. After all, one can be a successful leader and have millions as well as prestige, but do not have a loving family and emotional harmony.
In my opinion, material values are not a true measure of happiness. Happiness is the ability to be optimistic in spite of difficulties and the ability to overcome them successfully. Finally, challenges should be taken as the lessons that life presents us. Even the negative things teach something, give a new experience, or refer to the correct direction.
I believe that happiness is not a gift and not a given right as every person has its own happiness inside. Moreover, it is never too late to become happy. We can inspire and motivate ourselves and others to be happy. A stranger’s passing smile, warm rays of the sun penetrating the window, or a cup of freshly brewed coffee – happiness is in detail. Everyone chooses and prefers different sources. It is of great importance for people to enjoy moments of life, even the most insignificant ones.
We need to appreciate every moment in our lives remembering that happiness is within us. After all, time passes, and we are getting hurt by the fact that we did not appreciate the time when we had a chance. Therefore, living in peace and harmony with others, helping those who need your help, and avoiding things that you would regret about in future are paramount ways to find happiness and make others happy.
The notions that express people’s values or are in some other way related to them are often difficult to define. This may be due to the fact that, even though the values of individuals are significantly influenced by the society they live in and the ideology they associate themselves with (consciously or unconsciously), each person may have slightly (or sometimes significantly) different views than other people, and thus would define or describe these concepts in a different way. In addition, people might be mistaken (or misguided) with regard to what they want or value most. For instance, someone might believe that purchasing a new phone will make them happy; perhaps it will, but happiness from a phone will probably not last for a long period of time.
Therefore, each person might have their own understanding (explicit or implicit) of concepts such as happiness. For me, the non-obviousness of the definition of this term became apparent rather a long time ago, when I became acquainted with a family who was rather poor and often had to economize money but was, nonetheless, very happy living together. Happiness is often understood as general well-being and welfare (Easterlin, 2003, p. 11176; “Philosophical Dictionary,” 2011), which was also my opinion; it seemed to me to include financial welfare. This is why the fact that the family was happy made me somewhat surprised and caused me to reconsider the meaning of this term. In this paper, I will examine the issue of happiness by scrutinizing it through the lenses of health, marriage, and success – the three components that previously appeared to me to be necessary for an individual to be happy.
Health
Health is rather often understood as one of the crucial elements of happiness. Delle Fave et al. (2016), has conducted a study in a sample from across a number of nations, found out that health was one of the most often mentioned by lay respondents components of happiness (p. 6). It is apparent that this category can be viewed as a rather universal one, for every person who, for example, is experiencing pain, or is forced to depend on other people to do even the simplest everyday activities due to their health condition, will not be glad because of these facts. Evidence also warrants this statement; for instance, it was found out that “the life satisfaction of those with disabilities is, on average, significantly less than [of] those who report no disabilities” (Easterlin, 2003, p. 11177).
Simultaneously, the importance of health may be somewhat overestimated in common perceptions. An example related to this is provided by Easterlin (2003), who cites a study that examined the levels of happiness of victims of serious accidents. It is observed that such victims “did not appear nearly as unhappy as might have been expected” (as cited in Easterlin, 2003, p. 11177), which means that the individuals involved in predicting the level of unhappiness due to an accident had overestimated this level. On the other hand, once compared to the control sample, the accident victims were “significantly less happy” (as cited in Easterlin, 2003, p. 11177), which still corroborates the statement that health plays a crucial role in happiness.
In addition, it is possible to find examples of persons who were rather happy despite significant health problems or impairments. In fact, Oswald and Powdthavee (2008) illustrate that people who acquire disability tend to adapt to it and suffer less with time; their level of happiness may be (partially) restored despite the impairment.
Therefore, it is possible to see that I was mistaken when I believed that health was necessary for happiness. However, a weaker version of this statement appears to be true: health is important for happiness (but not necessary). So, it is a rather essential component that significantly influences the level of happiness of an individual; simultaneously, poor health or impairments do not preclude happiness. People can adapt to diseases and disabilities, and there might exist other factors which allow a person to be happy.
Marriage and Family
Other components that I believed to be essential for happiness were marriage and family. Indeed, the family is mentioned in many studies as an element that is paramount for a person to be happy; see, for instance, Oishi, Graham, Kesebir, and Galinha (2013), or Delle Fave et al. (2016). On the other hand, it is now apparent to me that the term “marriage” might not always be the best choice when speaking about relationships between people and the role that these relationships play in happiness.
A study carried out by North, Holahan, Moos, and Cronkite (2008) investigates the role that family plays in determining people’s happiness. Such key sides of the family life as the social support and the income were scrutinized. The scholars were able to find out that the income did not play a very significant role in determining the level of happiness of the family members (but, of course, a positive influence of higher-income was present; the impact of it decreased as the income levels raised). On the other hand, it was discovered that “family support showed a substantial, positive association with concurrent happiness” (North et al., 2008, p. 480). Therefore, it is possible to argue that the support that the members of a family provide for each other might be one of the key influences of the family that affects the level of happiness of individuals, although it appears to be worth investigating what other factors also have a significant impact on this level.
At the same time, marriage (as a relationship between two people that was formally acknowledged and sealed by the state and/or church) is a more controversial factor when it comes to determining its influence on happiness. In fact, a study by Bessey (2015) has shown that an interesting relationship between these two phenomena exists: the level of impact, in this case, is identity-based, that is, how much marriage affects happiness depends on what views the involved individuals have and how they perceive themselves and the world. It was found out that for people with more traditional views, i.e. for those who believe that marriage is a desideratum for a person, marriage has a significantly stronger impact on the level of their happiness than for people who do not consider it to be paramount.
Therefore, it is possible to argue that marriage is not a necessary component of happiness, as I initially thought; for some people, it may even not be significant. Indeed, it is completely possible to have a good long-term partner (or even a number of partners) without being formally married to them; furthermore, for some individuals, having only short-term partners (or even no partners at all) might also be better. On the other hand, it appears that family still plays an essential role in happiness; however, it seems that the social support that family offers might easily be provided by people who are not biological (or legal, as in case of marriage) relatives of the person in question, but are, e.g., very close friends that one lives or communicates much with.
Success
One more element that I perceived as indispensable for a person to be happy is a success. In this case, the word “success” means achieving a high position in one’s career, in society, becoming affluent, etc. In fact, it is stated that wealth is rather often viewed as a factor that leads to happiness (North et al., 2008, p.475). However, the same study found out that an increased income in a family has a positive, but the insignificant influence on happiness, as was already mentioned (North et al., 2008). Simultaneously, it was demonstrated that being well-off safeguards people from numerous problems (such as adverse income shocks), thus improving the level of happiness at least indirectly (Senik, 2014).
At the same time, the notion of success is not limited by wealth; as was stressed, it also includes obtaining better positions and having a better career, etc. In this regard, it appears clear that positive achievements do add to the level of happiness of a person. However, from the study conducted by Delle Fave et al. (2016), it is apparent that success is rarely perceived as an important factor for happiness by laymen from a number of countries. Therefore, it might be stated that, whereas success does have an influence on the level of a person’s happiness, such influence may be only marginal.
Simultaneously, it is possible to speculate that the importance of success may depend on the perceptions of a concrete person. For instance, an individual who believed since their childhood that achieving success is crucial may benefit more from becoming a wealthy businessperson than people who did not have such ambitions. (On the other hand, failing to achieve an outstanding position at work or the society also appears to be likely to harm the first-mentioned type of people much more than the second.)
Thus, it might be summarized that success may play a role in a person’s happiness, but this role is probable to be insignificant. Therefore, my initial belief in the importance of success appears to have been incorrect. Of course, it seems likely that the ubiquity of statements that deem success crucial, which can be attributed to the impact of ideology, does influence the people’s perceptions of it and may make it indeed more significant to certain individuals; however, even so, success is rarely perceived as a key element of happiness across the world (Delle Fave et al., 2016).
Conclusion
As it can be seen, happiness is a difficult concept to define, and each person might have their own understanding of it. I initially believed that the indispensable elements of happiness were health, marriage, and success; however, it turns out that I was only partially right. First, health is important for happiness, but disabled or diseased individuals can overcome the problems caused by their impairment or health problems and still be happy. Second, the family is essential, but, apparently, the family’s support can be provided by non-relatives; as for marriage, its effect is dependent upon one’s identity, and, while conservative people benefit from marriage the most, others may find it more suitable to have other forms of relationships with their partners. Third, success may be important to certain individuals (e.g., those who dreamed of achieving it for a long time), but, on the whole, it is not often viewed as a key factor for happiness. To sum up, it seems that however significant a factor is, it can be compensated (both positively and negatively) by other factors that also influence a person’s happiness.
References
Bessey, D. (2015). Love Actually? Dissecting the marriage-happiness relationship. Asian Economic Journal, 29(1), 21-39. Web.
Delle Fave, A., Brdar, I., Wissing, M. P., Araujo, U., Castro Solano, A., Freire, T.,…Soosai-Nathan, L. (2016). Lay definitions of happiness across nations: The primacy of inner harmony and relational connectedness. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(16), 1-23. Web.
Easterlin, R. A. (2003). Explaining happiness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100(19), 11176-11183. Web.
North, R. J., Holahan, C. J., Moos, R. H., & Cronkite, R. C. (2008). Family support, family income, and happiness: A 10-year perspective. Journal of Family Psychology, 22(3), 475-483. Web.
Oishi, S., Graham, J., Kesebir, S., & Galinha, I. C. (2013). Concepts of happiness across time and cultures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(5), 559-577. Web.
Oswald, A. J., & Powdthavee, N. (2008). Does happiness adapt? A longitudinal study of disability with implications for economists and judges. Journal of Public Economics, 92(5-6), 1061-1077. Web.
According to Aristotle, while most of our daily pursuits are engaged in a pursuit of happiness, happiness is frequently pursued simply as an end in itself (cited in Bolt, 2004: 117). However, most people have no idea what happiness is or really how to attain it. This is first because happiness is a very subjective subject, meaning something different to different individuals, and second because the modern world offers so many distractions that are touted as being the path to happiness. In America, for instance, we are taught that happiness can be attained once we have finally acquired a luxury car, a fine house and a stunning wardrobe to show off the tremendous body we’ve maintained with the help of our personal trainer – or some such nonsense. “To fulfill their dreams, Americans claim they need an annual income of $102,000 (Myers, 2000). Moreover, nearly three-quarters of college freshmen consider being ‘very well-off financially’ to be a ‘very important’ or ‘essential’ goal” (Bolt, 2004: 124). However, research into what happiness means, both in terms of research goals and as it personally applies to me, has revealed that few of these things are even capable of registering in the list of considerations, with the possible lone exception of the great body, simply by way of being healthy.
Discussion
For a small space of time, I engaged in listing out the 33 happiest moments of my life and then grouping these results into categories which revealed themselves as accomplishments, gifts, helping others, family, trips, nature and miscellaneous. The research supports my findings. “According to Van Boven, experiences bring more joy than material goods because they are more open to positive reinterpretations, are a more meaningful part of one’s identity and contribute more to successful social relationships” (2003). Even in those areas that might sound more like a focus on material elements, such as the gifts category, the focus is clearly more on the experience involved rather than the item itself. Perhaps the most materialistic of these thoughts was my dad’s purchase of my first car, a giant ugly machine that provided me with a safe, smooth ride and the ultimate sound system for my riding experience. I hated the car, but loved the experience and the thoughtfulness of my dad in making sure I was comfortable and safe. Trips may seem to be another category full of materialistic aims, but again, my memories are associated more with the way they made me feel about myself and the pleasure I had in experiencing these trips with someone I loved. In remembering these events, I find myself caught a bit uncomfortably between the theories of Kahneman and Seligman (cited in Wallis, 2005). Kahneman says that our memories of our experiences, (our remembering self), are strongly influenced by the highs and lows of the event, particularly in how it ends (the influences on the experiencing self) while Seligman says that our remembering self determines almost on its own what it chooses to focus on. “I think we are our memories more than we are the sum total of our experiences” (Seligman cited in Wallis, 2005). I think it is impossible for us not to be affected by the influences of the moment, yet I think it is also true that we can choose to focus on the positive elements, such as the fun my boyfriend and I had trying to win back our losses in Atlantic City, or on the negative, such as the extra money we lost as a result.
After placing my happy moments into categories, I discovered there are happier moments listed involving my family and acts of kindness by helping others. In particular, my family’s benevolence to others dominated my happy moment list. I have always been sensitive to another person’s feelings. Even as child, I remember caring more about respecting the sensitivities of other individuals rather than my own happiness. In the past, my personality projected an outgoing, positive and optimistic spirit. “A 2002 study conducted at the University of Illinois by Diener and Seligman found that the most salient characteristics shared by the 10% of students with the highest levels of happiness and the fewest signs of depression were their strong ties to friends and family and commitment to spending time with them” (Wallis, 2005). I love and enjoy the presence of people. People are like diamonds, if you look deeply into their soul, you can see the purity, richness, symmetry and weight of their heart. Everyone has something positive to offer, we just have to open our hearts to see it. Because of my ability to see the good in people, I think I am more inclined to want to do things that will help them, and these times I have done this have appeared in my happiest moments. This is also supported in the research. “Giving makes you feel good about yourself … When you’re volunteering, you’re distracting yourself from your own existence, and that’s beneficial. More fuzzily, giving puts meaning into your life. You have a sense of purpose because you matter to someone else” (Peterson cited in Wallis, 2005). It has also been my pleasure, as I see in my journals, to watch this trait be passed along to my children, hopefully contributing to my ultimate hopes for them, which is to be happy and healthy adults.
From analyzing my happy moment journals, I realize happiness has been missing in my life, when I lost it and how to reclaim it. In my present life, I feel introverted, frustrated, and empty. These feelings developed gradually over time without my recognizing a transformation had occurred. Analyzing my happiness journal, I now know why I am not happy anymore. There was an eight year span of my life that endured dramatic distress; the death of my husband, my two closest friends moved out-of-state, my children grew up and moved out-of-the-house, I lost my job, and I have invested years of my life in a loveless relationship. My husband’s death was dramatic but I did not have time to grieve. I had three children that demanded my love and my strength. I think because of their needs, I was able to be productive and did not have the time to conceptualize the loss. My friends also provided me with a source for social stimulation. However, when they both moved away, I became socially inactive and did not pursue any new friendships. Nor did I engage in any alternative activities, such as a hobby. The only child still living at home is a wonderful productive citizen, who happens to be introverted, so we rarely have lengthy conversations. During this time I thought I could replace my unhappiness with material things. Shopping became my therapy. Things provided me with instant gratification, but the feeling of satisfaction was always short lived. As the research indicates, “materialism is toxic for happiness” (Bolt, 2004: 124). Meanwhile my credit card bills continued to grow and I began to think all I needed to do to be happy was to earn more money. Again, the research denied the explanation: “Research by Diener, among others, has shown that once your basic needs are met, additional income does little to raise your sense of satisfaction with life” (Wallis, 2005). Realizing that this wasn’t a replacement for love and social stimulation and was only causing more problems, I retreated to the comfort of my home and found solace in watching TV and overeating. Occasionally, I would notice myself gaining unacceptable weight and would go on an exercise kick, but eventually would fall back into just staring at the TV. I continued this pattern for a while until I finally realized what I was doing and made a commitment to change my state of mind. I wanted to reclaim the person I once knew; happy, intrinsically motivated and filled with vitality.
To meet this crisis, I decided to go back to school, which turned out to be an excellent decision as evidenced from this single exercise. In reviewing the research, Seligman’s theories stood out most clearly to me. He suggests there are three components of happiness which include pleasure, engagement and meaning. Pleasure is used to refer to the immediate happy feelings of the experiencing self that are felt when you buy that beautiful new blouse you’ve wanted or drive away in your new car. This is the feeling that most people in America seek and the one that is maximized on TV commercials. However, it is a very shallow feeling and, as is illustrated throughout the literature, is very fleeting, lasting three months or less in most cases. Engagement refers to our level of involvement with friends and family while meaning refers to putting our strengths to some greater purpose. As Seligman says, “it turns out that engagement and meaning are much more important” (cited in Wallis, 2005). When I was younger, I had these connections. My happiness journal demonstrates I had an inner awareness of how to be happy that I lost somewhere along the way. In searching to find it again, I fell into the commercial trap of seeking pleasure as a means of attaining happiness, but in truth, what I need to do is rededicate myself to the values of my youth – working with others, spending time with family and enjoying the experiences of life.
References
Bolt, Martin. (2004). Happiness, Chap. 6. In Pursuing Human Strengths. Worth Publishers: 117-137.
Van Boven, L. (2003). Experiences Makes People Happier Than Material Goods, Says CU Prof. 2008. Web.
Wallis, Claudia. (2005). “The New Science of Happiness: What Makes the Human Heart Sing? Researchers are taking a close look. What they’ve found may surprise you.” Time. Vol. 165, N. 3: A2.
Environmental disasters affect the quality of life of all people negatively. However, minority groups or people of lower socio-economic status are especially susceptible to negative consequences. This happens for two main reasons. First, socially vulnerable people are in disadvantaged conditions, including lack of transport access, food supply, unprotected housing, etc. Second, disaster policies are designed without considering people with special needs and disabilities.
Discussion
The article “Racial coastal formation” discusses how sea-level rise disproportionately affects the colored population in the United States, displacing coastal residents. On the East Coast of the United States, vulnerable to sea level rise, 20% of homeowners are black, higher than the national average (Hardy et al., 2017). The authors note that there is a constant flow of the white population to the areas most protected from flooding and the displacement of the black population from there. Such a change occurred, for example, on the island of Sapelo, where the black population decreased from 77% to 37% in 2010 (Hardy et al., 2017). The absence of a policy to support minorities leads to a double crowding out – first socio-economic and then environmental (Hardy et al., 2017). They become victims twice, moving to flooded lands due to economic inequality and racism.
Collins et al. examined conflicting data on areas at risk of flooding, which showed that the wealthiest segments of the population are most affected. Firstly, it turned out that wealthy people lose more property, savings, and wealth, but poor people are more likely to become victims of the elements (Collins et al., 2018). Secondly, they are much less likely to seek medical and psychological help since it is not covered by insurance (Collins et al., 2018). Thirdly, the housing zones most vulnerable to flooding are low-cost and populated by minorities, black people, and poor people. The percentage of whites in the population reaches only 38 (Collins et al., 2018). Thus, such a global problem as flooding has a racial and socio-economic context that the authorities ignore. The long-term consequences of degraded environmental conditions lead to the development of chronic illnesses among the population. Therefore, health concerns lead to a decrease in the population’s quality of life and aggravation of inequality among vulnerable people.
Conclusion
The discussed post emphasizes the importance of paying attention to the vulnerable parts of the community to make society more equal and just. Even though it is a great point that should be applied in practice, it is vital to remember that control over environmental pollution and destruction is a problem that should be addressed at the state level. The government and corporations should unite their efforts in addressing the environmental challenges to ensure that the ecosystem is not destroyed due to technogenic factors.
References
Collins, T. W., Grineski, S. E., & Chakraborty, J. (2018). Environmental injustice and flood risk: A conceptual model and case comparison of metropolitan Miami and Houston, USA. Regional Environmental Change, 18(2), 311–323.
Hardy, R. D., Milligan, R. A., & Heynen, N. (2017). Racial coastal formation: The environmental injustice of colorblind adaptation planning for sea-level rise. Geoforum, 87, 62-72.
An industry of entertainment can offer a vast range of cultural products that make people happy. It is not only films, television, music, and sport but also modern technology and social networks offering viral videos, computer games, and tweeting. The idea of mass culture influencing the development of society is closely connected with a concept of a need to be happy. Television is one of the most popular cultural products because it is capable to satisfy a person’s need for happiness.
When defining cultural products it is vital to understand their importance. Lamoreaux and Morlingis explain the necessity “to study cultural products are that they can contribute directly to people’s sense of “cultural consensus,” or “common sense.” […] people’s behavior is explained not by cultural differences in people’s internal values, traits, or attitudes but rather by people’s beliefs about what others in their culture value” (300). Therefore, cultural products are forming popular culture, and television plays a great role in this process due to its characteristics. Television is mass, global, and diverse.
Television and series
Television, and series, in particular, provide the pleasure that empowers its capability to satisfy the need for happiness. Casey Bernadette et al. suggest that “television is perceived as threatening by some moral guardians precisely because it is a site of pleasures that are not always or necessarily uplifting” (197). On the other hand, the content on television is usually seen as not high-quality culture as opposed to classical cultural products like books or even movies. The question is whether television being a mass cultural product is incapable to satisfy the need for cultural growth due to its entertainment. Is it possible to satisfy both needs: the urge for happiness and personal growth? It is highly debatable that impersonal analyses of such series as Suits or The Wife and The Third Man directed by Carol Reed is possible in these terms.
The diversity of television and series results in their globalization though. The urge to satisfy the need for happiness is global despite different cultural habits. It can be proved by the export of series. Miller describes different kinds of export “once having proven successful in their domestic market, telenovelas can be exported […] as the original production in the original language, as the original production for dubbing in foreign markets or […] interpreted and reproduced in a new culture” (202). This proves the universality of the need to be happy and they wish to share this experience at the same time.
Conclusion
Television is surely uniting people, and it gives them the reason to feel attached to the society they leave in. Hence, the ability to share your cultural experience is also the need, therefore, the satisfaction of this need makes people happy. However, the research of Twenge, Campbell, and Gentile shows that “the results are consistent with American culture becoming increasingly individualistic over the last half-century” (413). Therefore, the development of society changes its cultural values, and this can be seen and analyzed with the help of television as well.
I can not disagree with Mittel in his definition of television as “an enormously y profitable industry, […] part of democracy, […] unique creative form, […] mirror of our world” (2). Therefore, it is not a surprise for me that my favorite series Suits is ironically characterized by Bellafante as “gleaming sunlight is as much a character on these series as the actual spies and cops and healers. As if in receipt of an order from the Federal Communications Commission prohibiting inclemency, the standard USA series does not depict rain” (par.3). Sun makes me happy, not rain; and I wish my friends to enjoy this sun with me
Works Cited
Bellafante, Ginia. “Nothing but Blue Skies for a Fake Harvard Law Grad.” The New York Times 22 June 2011.Web. 02 July 2015.
Casey Bernadette, Neil Casey, Ben Calvert, Liam French and Justin Lewis. The Key Concepts, New York: Routledge, 2008. Print.
Lamoreaux, Marika and Beth Morling. “Outside the Head and Outside Individualism-Collectivism: Further Meta-Analyses of Cultural Products.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 43.2 (2012): 299 – 327. Print.
Miller, Jade L. “Ugly Betty goes global: Global networks of localized content in the telenovela industry.” Global Media and Communication 6.2 (2010): 198 – 217. Print
Mittel, Jason. Television and American Culture, New York: Oxford, 2010. Print.
Twenge, Jean M, W Keith Campbell and Brittany Gentile. “Changes in Pronoun Use in American Books and the Rise of Individualism.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 44.3 (2013): 406 – 415. Print.
In his article entitled “May Be Money Does Buy Happiness After All” a critical writing in the New York Times, David Leonhardt contends the significance of Easterlin theory in elucidating the absence of a relationship between economic growth and happiness. The contention holds that money significantly contributes to individual happiness. On the contrary, Easterlin paradox indicates that human satisfaction level adjusts with increased income up to a certain level where additional money does not contribute to a higher level of happiness.
Qualification, Experience, and Credentials
David Leonhardt is an expert writer who has carved a niche in corporate scandals, culture, travel, and sports. He pursued his college education at Yale University and became a writer of the New York Times weekly column on political, policy, and economic scenes for over two decades. He has vast experience as a writer for The Washington Post and Business Week. He won UCLA’s Gerald Loeb Prize in 2004 and competed for Pulitzer Prize in 2002 writing on corporate scandals.
Credibility of the Author
David Leonhardt has a substantial edge to write about the relationship between economic growth and happiness given his credible experience as a writer in social experiences and an author of The Get Happy Workbook, which is a book that guides people on how to achieve happiness. His spirited interest in the social welfare has influenced debate on the effect of income on individuals’ happiness.
Article Summary
The article disputes Easterlin theory line of thought that there is no guaranteed positive attainment of happiness, whether linked to an individual or country’s improved economic status. The theory receives much credit from a singled case study on Japan’s economic growth after the Second World War in which the Japanese population was not entirely satisfied despite a huge milestone in the economic growth. A case study of a single target population has low external validity and limits generalization of results to the entire population. Happiness is a factor of self-fulfilling desire and the ability to meet the basic needs determined by the accessibility of goods and the value attached to individual needs (Stanca & Veenhoven, 2015). Therefore, the implication is that happiness is multifaceted and a product of several variables not limited to the financial status but attached to individual preference on a scale of needs. The needs satisfaction level of several individuals varies and thus is their happiness despite their economic situation. On the contrary, David Leonhardt believes that money buys happiness according to the rebuttal of Easterlin paradox by Stevenson and Wolfers who provided world survey data to support their argument.
Agreement with Support Strategies
Easterlin theory is self-deficient as it does not provide the scope of the research conducted, sample population, and overall validity of the research design. The validity of Easterlin theory relies on a single case study of Japanese citizens. The study was conducted immediately after the Second World War with possible confounding variables that demand further research. In his argument, Easterlin paradox claim that people in the underdeveloped countries were happy on hitting the threshold to satisfy their needs is a flawed comment as it generalized the happiness index of countries and failed to characterize different levels of satisfaction and happiness on an individual. Easterlin research only accounted for individual citizen’s happiness, but it failed to take a comparable analysis of satisfaction between and amongst different countries of the world. The process of data collection in the survey of Japanese citizens changed over time and presented some bias as the questionnaires’ items had changed.
The case study of Japanese citizens that support Easterlin paradox do not factor in the confounding psychological effects of the Second World War on the entire population and the country. Stanca and Veenhoven (2015) conclude that the value attached to human needs and life determines individual happiness. Thus, at the time of the Japanese poll, the aftermath of the world war had a likely negative effect on citizens’ value attached to needs and life that affected the poll results. Additionally, current data indicating the effects of income on happiness do not support the Easterlin theory. Moreover, no other research surveys support Easterlin theory except the Japanese poll. Easterlin claim on the happiness bar focused on attitude towards competing interests on the level of income among individuals. Besides, the theory failed to differentiate the relationship between economic growth and happiness. Consequently, based on the ability to satisfy their basic needs, people in the developed countries are happier when compared to people in the underdeveloped countries.
Evidence to Support Agreement
In the article, David Leonhardt indicates a flaw of Easterlin data collection in the Japanese case study. Leonhardt (2008) cites irregularity in the survey as “the question had changed over the years” (p. 401). The irregularity of the questionnaires indicates a biased approach of the survey as research instruments changed over the years from a subtle general approach to a complete satisfaction model. The prototype reflects a biased data collection that reduced the percentage of satisfaction justifying Easterlin conclusion detailed in the Japanese case study. The sample population of Easterlin study is one population within one geographical location and does not cut across the entire human race. The population size and region is not adequate to represent the world population given different socio-economic cultures and beliefs.
The new contradicting study to Easterlin paradox utilized the global survey methodology. The methodology incorporated the sample of the entire world population to make a representation of each geographical location. The data collected provides valid results that represent the population of each country. In this case, the scope of sample selection and study area is wider and increases the external validity of the findings. The findings of the new survey also cite extra information from other world surveys done after Easterlin publication. Additionally, the recent research approach of data collection had it basis on time series, “but it is more consistent with our story than his” (Leonhardt, 2008, p. 402). These findings add to the validity of the new findings and conclusion.
Leonhardt’s claim that the level of income matters in determining happiness receives support from various studies. He provides a global survey analysis on satisfaction by Stevenson and Wolfers, indicating “that people in richer countries are more satisfied” than in the poor countries (Leonhardt, 2008, p. 401). The global survey enhances the generalizability of the findings as it covers the entire world population and encompasses several studies done in different periods. Additionally, Leonhardt’s idea receives much support from Stanca and Veenhoven (2015) who claimed that money increases the ability to access products and enhance one’s level of satisfaction. Capacity to access goods and services means that individuals can satisfy their needs and wants. Thus, as income increases, capacity to acquire certain goods or pay services increases, resulting in increased satisfaction and happiness. The premise is that 80% the European countries studied support this claim.
In essence, consumption determines comfort that directly influences the level of satisfaction and happiness. High level of economic development associated with developed countries, thus, provides a wider accessibility to different goods and services, in contrast to underdeveloped nations. The ability to access daily needs that include relevant healthcare services and entertainment increases the level of happiness of individuals in the developed nations compared to the underdeveloped countries. According to Leonhardt (2008, p. 402), “economic growth can also pay for investments in scientific research that lead to longer, healthier lives.” The validity of the global statistical survey analysis provided by David Leonhardt indicates that people in the developed countries are happier than the ones in the underdeveloped nations. Furthermore, the global survey shows that satisfaction in the United States has not increased in the same proportion as in other developed nations. Hence, “a big reason it may not have risen in the United States is that the hourly pay of most workers has not grown much recently” (Leonhard, 2008, p. 402). Based on the global survey that increases the external validity of the results compared to Easterlin theory, it is pertinent to conclude that a strong direct relationship exists between individual income and the level of happiness.
Conclusion
The assertion by David Leonhardt that income determines the happiness of an individual is not far-fetched, for it holds a higher percentage of truth. The claim opposes Easterlin paradox that indicated no relationship between income and happiness. Unlike, Easterlin theory, the conclusion is a result of new data findings of global world survey. The general representation of the world population by the inclusive survey of all geographical locations in the new study revealed an increase in satisfaction associated with economic growth. The level of consumption and the ability to pay for services increase the happiness index. Thus, increased income increases capacity to pay for goods and services, and consequently, enhance life satisfaction and happiness. Therefore, David Leonhardt concludes that integration of happiness, as a product of income, is relevant.
References
Leonhardt, D. (2008). Maybe money does buy happiness after all. In a scanned book (pp. 399-403).
Stanca, L., & Veenhoven, R. (2015). Consumption and happiness: Introduction to this special issue. International Review of Economics, 62(2), 91-99. Web.
The concept of consumerism stretches far back to 1915 when its recording started but originally, the phenomenon of buying and consumption of goods in excess and by customers date back to the start of civilization. Consumerism entails a social and economic decree to nurture a culture of purchasing and consuming goods far above one’s basic requirements. This remains a worldwide phenomenon practiced across many societies of the world especially before and after industrial revolution and globalization.
Being an order, consumerism covers consumer protection, which involves protection of the buyers from exploitation in terms of dishonest packaging and advertisement or promotion of consumer goods and services. In this sense, consumerism advocates for setting up of policies to control and regulate the standards of production, manufacturing, and advertisement of goods and services.
Economically, consumerism stresses on the free choices made by consumers to determine the economic trends of a country. This phenomenon of over consumption meets criticism in which most of the critics argue that, it is worth considering such consumption is indeed a wasteful consumption (Glen 28). Here the critiques wonder whether having many dresses would make one dress decently.
Advertisements all over the media, books, and magazines and in streets persuade people to buy materials that they have not planned for, simply because the words used in the advertisements tend to encourage people to buy goods such as cars, clothing, or get new jobs (Glen 29). More materials do not bring a lasting happiness in one’s life.
The happiness brought about by acquiring a new property lasts for a short time, and the lack of satisfaction goes unabated as the desire to acquire a more expensive item sets in, whereby a person thinks he/she will get satisfaction by getting new things and the vicious cycle continues.
True happiness and acquisition of materials
Today’s mindset of many people in both developing and developed countries is to amass wealth through acquisition of more materials and consumption of materials at increasingly higher rate. Economic parameters judging economic growth of a country continue to favor production of goods and their fast consumption.
To the surprise of Luedicke and Giesler, “The more goods produced and consumed in the society the higher the growth rate of the economy” (112). This indicates that, economic growth rate depends largely on the amount of materials, goods or services a person or a family acquires in a society. In these societies, property of the nation is a measure of per capita income of the dwellers of the society and therefore, people buy goods to replace others they presume inadequate in terms of service provision.
Furthermore, in consumer societies, repair of broken items does not exist; instead, people buy new items to replace the broken ones. This continuous purchase of goods helps the economy from receding and depressing and improves employment creation efforts. On the other hand, the desire to own and consume materials in excess causes people to get job opportunities, which they do not enjoy doing or are not happy with, simply because they need money to acquire the much-needed materials.
A comparison between the lives of departed ancestors who had little in their possession and the current life where all is in a cat and rat race to acquire property, there is little happiness now, than it was with the gone grandparents.
According to Barber, “…today’s young adults have grown up with much more affluence and slightly less happiness and are at much greater risk of developing depression and assorted social pathology” (108). Desire to purchase more materials arouses the feeling of discontentment and dissatisfaction, which leads to unhappiness within one’s conscience.
Working to earn money for material acquisition deprives one of the time needed in social activities. Social involvement with family, friends, and relationships nurtures happiness. Thus, a person preoccupied with the hope and desire of materialism remains unhappy throughout his/ her life. Barber further explains that, “…when people organize their lives around extrinsic goals such as product acquisition, they report greater unhappiness in relationships, poor moods and psychological problems” (110).
The dissatisfaction posed by desire to have more leads to great expectations and failure to meet the expectations results into outright unhappiness to the affected parties. Happiness brought about by acquisition of a new property such as a car, house, or electronic devices may not last for long as people in consumer societies always buy items to replace others.
Large amount of property acquired by an individual or a family, on the other hand poses a threat of insecurity. As property means wealth, security for the property becomes paramount and a factor worth consideration. Over and above the cost of purchase of the property, there is additional expenses of security provision otherwise one risks losing the acquired property or damage without compensation.
The thought of insecurity can snuff true happiness in the lives of those hankering for consumerism societies. Psychological disturbance resulting from discontentment causes depression, envy, jealousy, and increase in crime rates all in the pursuit of acquiring material goods, but in this sense large amount of goods in the society or communities.
Problems of consumer epidemics
Hungering for goods is a characteristic evident in consumer epidemic societies where people feel dissatisfied. The wishes of people and desires to possess material goods escalate but income determines the purchasing power (Durning 24).
Craving for material goods preoccupies the minds of many people in the consumerism societies and this poses a threat of neglecting other important factors of life sustenance such as social and psychological factors. Thirsting for material goods can also lead people to poor working conditions or extra working to save the much-needed savings, which determines one’s ability to acquire the goods.
Philosophically, increase in ones material wealth determines the economic status of that individual or community or society and therefore, overlying other economic detecting tools in the society such as good social and spiritual values of the society. Graaf, Wann, Naylor, and Vicki however observe that, “Material wealth is the deciding factor whether a society is developing or not, spiritual values are under played” (122).
The quantity of materials owned by the inhabitants of a society remains inadequate to determine the societal development. Other major factors of the society help to propel development in the society and the measurements need not to overlook such factors as they play concerted role with per capita income to economic development.
In addition, problems of consumer good competition steps up in the market as many manufacturing companies produce large quantities of consumer goods hoping for a good sale because people thirst for the goods.
Importation of cheap goods sets further competition between the imported and locally produced goods and these competitions negatively affect the market image of the local goods posing a major problem in the performance of the local manufacturing companies. Poor performance of the local industries can threaten closure of business or can result into reduction in employment opportunities.
Drastic changes in lifestyles of many people occur due to materialism; not based on spiritual or simplistic backgrounds. People are now more reluctant than it was in the past and as Graaf et al. observes, “people’s lifestyles have changed in the sense that they are more lavish, full of material comforts rather than focusing on simplicity” (123).
Philosophers argue that there is a stiff change from the lifestyles exhibited by the older generation and the current generation in which the current generation possesses a stereotype of high consumption generation depicting the ever-increasing desire to gain more wealth through high acquisitions of material goods.
Ecological destruction continues as people push for expansion of industries in production of the much needed goods and materials to quench the spirit of consumerism. There is widely spreading natural habitat destruction due to industrial pollution leading to global warming which in turn sets in health problems to people and wildlife across the world.
Another problem of consumerism is the tumbling of some economic sectors. For instance, the desire of every person in a consumer society to own a car would oversee collapsing of the public transport sector, which would affect economic expansion of the involved community or society.
Criticisms of consumerism
Consumerism as other philosophical phenomena would not go without criticismand disapprovals. According to Barber, “there are four different ways through which an item obtains value and needs considerations during purchase to avoid purchasing of obsolete items” (111). Items of low value and utilityfrom the initialintention lead to subsequent purchase of another item simply because the first item acquired did not satisfy the primary need.
The ways focused here include functional utility, exchange value of the object, symbolic value, and sign value of the items. The phenomenon of consumerism does not put into consideration all these factors before the actual purchase of an item; instead, individuals are led by thirst to acquire property not considering and assessing their usefulness in their lifetime. It is therefore clear that lack of appraisal of items and property before purchase would cause dissatisfaction and then cause a desire to purchase another item.
Critics of consumerism also argue that the close association of some people to specific high value items such as luxury cars and expensive houses creates a social and cultural class of people. Over time, these social and cultural regroupings degenerate into social or cultural dominance of these groups over the others who probably cannot afford the expensive property (Glen 29). The social and cultural grouping kills the native cultural and social trends of the society, which would affect the subsequent generations, as there is a total loss of the indigenous cultural and social practices.
Furthermore, critics argue that, consumerism causes environmental damage as its insensitivity to environmental conservation and preservation puts natural resources into jeopardy and that underscores why critics advocate for change from materialism to simplicity of life where people would only purchase and consume items fit for them at a given time.
Due to the need for the finished goods, industries mushroom all over and their emissions pollute the environment posing a threat of global warming (Graaf et al. 119). Mining and other environmental destructive procedures in pursuit of obtaining raw materials for the sprouting industries lead to environmental degradation, which critics of consumerism oppose.
Graaf et al. warn that, “trying to reduce environmental pollution without reducing consumerism is like combating drug trafficking without reducing drug addiction” (120). This implies that, the critics of consumerism advocate for mitigation of environmental pollution and disintegration via reduction of consumerism.
Economic critics of consumerism argue that, the rate of material consumption outweighs the resources and therefore, sustenance of the high production rate would deplete available resources resulting into an economic recession.
Durning observes that, “…human society is in a global overshoot consuming over 30% more materials than is sustainable from world resources” (26). The sediments here points to the over usage of the available materials in intensive production and manufacturing of unnecessary materials which to many people are only luxury goods and not basic requirements.
In addition, many critics of consumerism oppose the idea of persuading people to purchase certain goods and thus contradict advertisements and promotions by arguing that, people have the right to decide what goods they want to satisfy their needs and need not persuasion to purchase them. In addition, the critics emphasize on peoples’ understanding and decision making concerning the items and property to use. Regular advertisement lures people to develop a desire to possess an item.
On the contrary, critics of consumerism do not agree with the proponents on the idea of consumerism and happiness cum satisfaction associated with it. The critics argue that, true happiness does not depend on the number of materials one posses or the quantity of goods that a person’s consumes but happiness settles at the satisfaction of a persons’ need by use of an appropriate item.
In the pursuit of satisfaction, the inherent desire to gain property deprives one the building blocks and essential ingredients of happiness, which include quality time with family and friends who bring happiness in one’s life. Decrease in time intended for social life impoverishes an individual’s important time to socialize and interact with others and therefore, affects one’s social status and can cause psychological problems.
Conclusion
Although consumerism remains an internationally practiced phenomenon, its initiation to different countries, nations and societies of the world met opposition and not swiftly welcomed. Some societies at first welcomed the idea but as the consequences of consumerism unfolded with time, many turned it away.
At the first glance of consumerism, one might welcome the idea quickly but its negative effects are far above its positive effects and therefore, one would consequently reject and oppose the idea as the critics of consumerism. Consumerism causes social, economic, environmental, and psychological problems in societies and thus, many turn out to reject the idea.
Contrary to previous allegations that there is a relationship between high possession of goods and happiness, philosophers have found that our ancestors lived happily with little possession of material things as compared to the present generation. Life was happier in the gone days than today although people have more material goods than in the past. It is therefore clear that, there is no true happiness, which comes out of acquisition of material goods.
Works Cited
Barber, Benjamin. Consumed: How markets corrupt children, infantalize, and swallow Citizens whole. New York: W.W. Norton & company, 1998.
Durning, Alan. “How much is enough.” The consumer society and the future of the earth 42.6 (2008): 24-26.
Giesler, Markus, and Luedicke, Marius. “Consumption as moral protagonism.” Journal Of consumer research 36.1 (2010):112-114.
Glen, Calder. “Financing the American dream.” A cultural history of consumer credit 67.1 (2007): 28-29. Print.
Graaf, John, Naylor, Thomas, Vicki, Robin, and Wann, David. Afluenza: The all Consuming epidemic.USA: Berrett- Koehler, 2002.
Whether or not money can buy happiness is a continued debate. Billions of people in all parts of the world sacrifice their ambitions and subconscious tensions on the altar of profitability and higher incomes. Millions of people dream to achieve the level of wellbeing, when earning money will no longer be a problem to them. Legal or illegal does not really matter, as long as these strategies lead individuals to the desired monetary outcomes.
Professional economists assert that more money does not buy happiness. As a result, it makes no sense for people to pursue money. Yet, the reality is quite different, as money, wealth, high incomes, and wide opportunities which they open make people extremely satisfied. Based on the current knowledge of economics, the opportunity costs of pursuing money can be extremely high. Therefore, it is better to pursue money for a purpose rather than for its own sake.
People always wanted more money. Money inspired professional economists and bank robbers. Millions of people would even try to sell their souls for a reasonable sum of money. Nevertheless, the debate on whether or not money can buy happiness continues to persist. Globalization and consumerism have turned money into the main criterion of individual and professional success: the more money you earn the better person you are.
However, professional economists suggest that money does not make people happy. The current state of research claims that, despite the rapid increase in personal incomes, the percentage of people who consider themselves happy has not changed (Lee, 2005). Similar disconnects between income and happiness were found in most advanced economies, including Japan, Europe, and the United Kingdom (Lee, 2005).
However, the general inconsistency of these research results is too obvious to ignore. First, what does it mean for people to be happy? Professional economists may have profound knowledge of economic concepts but can hardly make happiness measurable. Second, can people be happy with their incomes if they always want more? Most probably, at any given point, individuals will feel dissatisfied with what they have and will try to obtain more.
I agree that money buys happiness, but this happiness is never constant. This idea is further supported by Lee (2005), who assumes that people will make all sorts of sacrifices to get money, but their happiness will be temporary at best. Lee (2005) relies on the two main premises.
First, “happiness people realize from having more income results from having more relative to others in some reference group, not from having more absolutely” (p.389). Simply stated, individuals always compare their incomes and positions to those of other individuals. They want to have more relative to what others have or can have. However, their happiness wanes as soon as others achieve a better social position, income, or level of wellbeing.
Second, the nature of sensory adaptation in humans explains why people are never happy with what they have: human receptors become irresponsive to the continuous presence of one and the same stimulus (Lee, 2005). As a result, the more money individuals earn the happier they become; however, with time, money turns into boredom and no longer brings happiness.
Obviously, it does make sense to make money, since money is the main instrument of exchange and the source of unlimited opportunities for everyone. Money opens the gateway to a broad range of material and nonmaterial values, including health and education.
We should never belittle the significance of money merely because it brings only temporary satisfaction (Lee, 2005). Yet, it is always better to pursue money for a purpose rather than for its own sake. Money for the sake of money makes little sense. Money is not the end but only the means of achieving some goal, like purchasing a new house or curing a sick child.
Moreover, a common increase in individual wealth is always a positive externality, as richer countries experience lower childbirth mortality, fewer traffic deaths, better health, and longer life expectancy (Lee, 2005). We live in society and our wealth necessarily benefits others, through taxes and charity. Therefore, it always makes sense to pursue money to improve individual and societal wellbeing.
The opportunity costs of pursuing more money can be extremely high. Opportunity costs are everywhere, as every decision necessarily involves tradeoffs. Individuals sacrifice their families and personal wellbeing to become successful, rich professionals. Others apply to illegal activities and decisions to earn their wealth. In my own life, my decision to become educated was associated with major opportunity costs. First, the costs of education impose a heavy burden of financial obligations on me.
I could use this money to meet other life goals. Second, I spend more time at work and earn more money; I lose considerable earnings each time I pursue a better grade. Third, not all courses are equally pleasant: some courses seem not to be tailored to the specific needs and demands of the student majority (Frank, 2005). I could use this time to improve my knowledge of the disciplines that are important for my future career. To a large extent, the dollar cost of education does not reflect all opportunity costs.
Yet, many students forget that higher education provides a variety of benefits that helps to decrease most, if not, opportunity costs. Statistically, college and university graduates earn $14,000 a year more compared with their non-educated counterparts (Anonymous, 2003). The social value of higher education is difficult to underestimate (Porter, 2002). Education enhances workplace productivity and stimulates professional growth. Therefore, the marginal utility of a university degree increases.
Almost all economists treat opportunity cost as the main economic concept (Frank, 2005). Every single decision is inevitably associated with one or more opportunity costs. These involve explicit and implicit costs of other opportunities (Arnold, 2008; Baumol & Blinder, 2008). Opportunity costs reflect the significance of the cost-benefit principle that governs most individual decisions (Frank, 2005). Introductory economics courses must place particular emphasis on teaching students how to weigh benefits and costs of various decisions (Frank, 2005). This knowledge of economics and economic principles will subsequently reduce the opportunity costs of education.
Conclusion
Whether or not money can buy happiness is a continued debate. Billions of people in all parts of the world sacrifice their ambitions and subconscious tensions on the altar of profitability and higher incomes. The current state of research claims that, despite the rapid increase in personal incomes, the percentage of people who consider themselves happy has not changed.
However, these results do not reflect the real order of things in the world. Money buys happiness, but this happiness is never constant. The more money individuals earn the happier they become; however, with time, money turns into boredom and no longer brings happiness.
Moreover, a common increase in individual wealth is always a positive externality, as richer countries experience lower childbirth mortality, fewer traffic deaths, better health, and longer life expectancy. Yet, the opportunity costs of pursuing more money can be extremely high. Every single decision is inevitably associated with one or more opportunity costs. Knowledge of economics and economic principles will subsequently reduce the opportunity costs of education.
References
Anonymous. (2003). Report puts dollar value on education. Georgia College & State University. Web.
The purpose of this task is to explore Bhutanese views on happiness as a form of positive psychology that depicts national progress. Bhutan’s views on national progress are not based on the gross domestic product (GDP) but rather on gross national happiness (GNH). This is the most effective way to assess progress. In addition, spiritual, social, physical, and environmental elements of health are evaluated among the public. This view posits that subjective wellbeing is more important than material progress.
Bhutanese views on happiness
Based on these views, Bhutan has discarded the normal measure of national growth based on the GDP (Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness, n.d). Instead, the country focuses on GNH as a measure of national progress. This measure encompasses other factors such as physical, spiritual, social, and environmental wellbeing among the public (Bhutan- The Happiest Place on Earth- One Life, n.d).
Bhutan notes that happiness should be the priority rather than material achievements (Tobgay, Dophu, Torres, & Na-Bangchang, 2011). Is Bhutan a nation of only happy individuals? Of course, it is not; the GNH is a national aspiration and a guiding principle to ensure equitable, fair, and sustainable growth. Hence, happiness, as a national goal, can only emanate from equitable social development, environmental and cultural preservation, and ensuring a just governance structure.
Specific examples from the video were found interesting or meaningful
The concept of GNH is unique. It does not find any in the world, except in Bhutan. The country aims to advance good governance, equitable social development, environmental and cultural preservation through GNH. The happiness and prosperity of every citizen are considered as worth more than any economic achievement (Vorster, 2012).
Environment preservation is imperative in Bhutan. The country is currently carbon negative, with over 70% of forest cover. People understand the role of the natural environment in their lives. Conservation efforts are vital, but these efforts occur at the expense of economic prosperity, which is not important in this country.
Bhutanese believe in good governance to achieve happiness. Good governance is guided by the happiness of the people. In addition, people are encouraged to take part in ongoing changes.
The country believes in sustainable development. It provides free education and healthcare for increased standards of living. Only sustainable development can promote the effective use of current resources and guarantee availability for the future generation. Equality drives sustainable development in this tiny country, and it ensures that every member of the nation benefits from natural resources.
The contrast of “Good life” as reflected in Bhutanese and American culture
The so-called ‘good life’ in Bhutan is derived from the philosophy of the GNH index. Material gains and money are not considered important. In fact, 95% of Bhutanese claims to be ‘very happy’ with their lives. They consider money as a means and not the end. This reflects oddity in a capitalist world like America, in which amassing material wealth is the goal of most citizens.
The country has developed a national policy as a methodical tool for pursuing happiness at all costs. Happiness in the US is not a matter of national concern but simply considered as a sub-factor of subjective wellbeing.
About 80% of Bhutanese people work on the land, but they still manage to be happy. Perhaps deep belief systems in spiritual, social, physical, and environmental health among Bhutanese contribute to a unique lifestyle and good life in the country.
Individuality alongside the materialistic life of Americans cannot be compared with the collective responsibility of Bhutan, where systems are designed to complement each other with the purpose of promoting physical and mental well-being and, by extension to achieve the overall goal of happiness.
Conclusion
This task-focused on evaluating the concept of happiness from a Bhutanese point of view. It is unique and perhaps one of its kind in the world. GDP is rather not important than GNH. As a result, GNH is the measure of national progress and not material gains.
Happiness, as a core part of positive psychology, remains the ultimate goal for Bhutanese. The systems are therefore designed to ensure equality, good governance, environmental and cultural preservation, and spiritual wellbeing.
References
Bhutan- The Happiest Place on Earth- One Life. (n.d) Web.
Vorster, S. (2012). GNH, EI and the well-being of Nations: Lessons for public policymakers, with specific reference to the happiness dividend of tourism. Journal of Bhutan Studies, 27, 15-33.