The Case against Money and Happiness - Essay Example

The Case against Money and Happiness Introduction The debate as to whether money can result in happiness is nearly as old as the entire notion of money itself. Several theories and concepts have been developed each valiantly trying to argue in support of or even against the case of money and happiness. This paper seeks to show that money can result in happiness. The Case against Money and Happiness Several different economists and social scientists are keen to make the incorrect argument that money does not necessarily result in increased happiness. Perhaps the most notable of these theories is the case of the Easterlin paradox. The Easterlin Paradox was first published by Richard Easterlin way back in 1974. The paradox was mainly used to support the argument that a general increase in economical growth by a country, would not necessarily result in increased satisfaction levels by its citizenry (Leonhardt 2008). The argument supported by this paradox, was further supported by research that happened to prove that during the resultant aftermath that followed soon after World War II ended, the economy of Japan underwent a rather significant boom with the general economy’s output growing by an average of about sevenfold between the years ranging between 1950 an 1970. This staggering economical growth caused Japan to eventually become one of the world’s richest nations (Leonhardt 2008). Despite the massive economic growth witnessed in the country, polls conducted in Japan showed that the country’s citizenry appeared to become increasingly dissatisfied with their own lives. According to the results of one poll, the overall percentage of persons who happened to provide the most positive of the given possible answers pertaining to the level of satisfaction they were experiencing in their lives actually fell from the averages obtained during the late 1950s through to the early 1970s. It was evidently clear that although the people were richer, they were deemed to apparently not be happier. (Lee & Dwight 2006). The results of this Japanese anomaly are inherently somewhat flawed and money can result in happiness. The truth of this statement was verified by efforts of research conducted by two economists from Brookings Institution in Washington, Mr. Wolfers and Ms. Stevenson who discovered that the original research questions had changed and the most positive answer option that was given by the pollsters was one suggesting that although the respondents weren’t completely happy they were satisfied with their life as it were at the moment. Mr. Easterlin is quoted as writing that “it can generally be observed that persons residing in poor countries displayed a tendency towards becoming generally happier once their economic conditions became more favorable and they were subsequently able to afford their basic necessities. Any further gains on their part did not necessarily increase their income but simply just seemed to actually be resetting the bar”. Easterlin argued that one’s relative income which is basically a reflection of how much an individual happens to earn in comparison to how much other persons around the individual happened to be earning – mattered far way more than a person’s absolute income (Leonhardt 2008). The Easterlin Paradox was quickly adopted by the society and grew to become one of the major social sciences classics that were frequently cited in various academic journals as well as in the popular media (Leonhardt 2008). The Case in Support of Money Causing an Increase in Happiness It can be argued that an increase in a person’s purchasing power can have the effect of causing a resultant increase in the happiness levels of the person. One of the most common arguments in support of this is that such happiness is generally a resultant feeling of one having more as compared to other persons in the same reference group. Another common argument is that the increased happiness that is brought about by increased income can be deemed as being a temporary state that is as a result of one’s sensory adaption to the prevailing changing circumstances. It has been observed that although people are at first intensely aware of new things, over time the awareness tends to decrease and the things eventually blend into the background and end up going largely unnoticed(Lee & Dwight 2006). It is important to ensure that the pursuit of money is not belittled by the misconstrued notion that its overall effect on a person’s happiness can be deemed as being only temporal in nature. Nothing can be able increase a person’s level of happiness permanently. It is common for persons to seek more of the things that they value in the belief that those things will be able to generally increase their happiness levels. Such things such as netter looks, good friends, professional success, good friends, sexual satisfaction and having a loving family can be viewed as not being all that different from money, since like money, they are able to generally increase our happiness but only on a temporary basis. It is only natural for a person to soon adapt to them and result to taking them for granted; this is despite the fact that they are evidently crucial components in ensuring on experiences a satisfied life. Arguably, the much touted misconception that money can never be able to purchase happiness is evidently being used to make some rather bizarre arguments advocating for increased taxes as well as government spending. The argument can be perceived as not only wrongly exaggerating the potential resultant costs of attempts by one to acquire any form of wealth, but also can be seen to be completely ignoring the potential social and personal benefits of one acquiring additional wealth(Lee & Dwight 2006). The Age Factor in Money and Happiness Studies conducted trying to show the relationship between age and money strongly indicated that increased income levels tend to result in significant levels of generally positive association with happiness in regards to the middle-age and young adult population segments. This is in contrast to the association in the older population whose results showed that the population did not necessarily display increased happiness levels as a result of increased income levels (Hsieh & Chang-Ming 2011). Possible Monetary Measures that can be taken to Increase Happiness Levels According to Dunn et al, the relationship that currently exists between happiness and money can be perceived as being surprisingly rather weak in nature. This can be attributed to most people not knowing how to effectively spend their money so as to increase their incomes. There are several possible redemptive measures that a person can undertake if the person is seen not to be enjoying increased happiness as a result of increased levels of income. Some of these measures include: Purchasing Experience as Opposed to Things: Experiential purchases can be termed as those purchases that are made primarily with the sole objective of being able to use them to acquire a life experience. People generally tend to get more happiness from experiences in comparison to the happiness that they get from things. They also tend to remember experiences more than they remember things (Dunn et al. 2011). Aiding Others Rather than One’s Self: Human beings are commonly classified as being one of the most social animals. In light of our high level of sociability, the quality of one’s social relationships tends to strongly influence the levels of happiness that the person experiences. Activities involving the improvement of these social connections tend to increase one’s happiness levels. Such activities also involve spending money (Dunn et al. 2011). Purchasing several pleasures as oppose just a few big ones: Because of the innate human nature to quickly adapt to and eventually loose the pleasure they experience in items, it is a better practice for one to invest in indulging in a wide variety of numerous small pleasures as opposed to pouring large amounts of money into large purchases (Dunn et al. 2011). Pay now and proceed to consume the item later: When consumers are provided the opportunity to consume and satisfy their desires faster at an ever increasing rate in todays “enjoy now pay later” system, they tend to display signs of less anticipation although anticipation can be viewed as being a “free source of happiness”. When a person purchases an item and consumes it immediately, the person will potentially derive less pleasure from its consumption as opposed to storing it for future consumption. Waiting to consume tends to create some level of excitement in persons even if the item or event is eventually not entirely enjoyable (Dunn et al. 2011). Conclusion From the various arguments that have been put forth in this paper, it is evidently clear that the various theories that happen to support the notion that having money cannot necessarily result in happiness are not essentially true. There are arguments put forth in this paper can be seen to strongly indicate that money can result in happiness. References: HSIEH, CHANG-MING Money and happiness: does age make a difference? Ageing and Society, 31. 8 (Nov 2011): 1289-1306. Lee, Dwight R Who Says Money Cannot Buy Happiness? The Independent Review, 10. 3 (Winter 2006): 385-400. Dunn W. E., Gilbert T. D. & Wilson D. T. If money doesn't make you happy, then you probably aren’t spending it right, Journal of Consumer Psychology 21 (2011) 115–125 Leonhardt D. Maybe Money Does Buy Happiness After All. New York Times April 16, 2008. Accessed on December 7, 2012, from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/business/16leonhardt.html?_r=0 Read More