The Relationship between Money and Peoples Happiness and How Social Inequality Determine Personal Success - Literature review Example

Money and Social Inequalities Name Institution Name Course Name and Code Date Introduction The paper discusses the financial aspects in influencing the societal requirements and individual thinking on happiness. The first section discusses whether an increase in disposable income translates into an increase in individual happiness. The second part discusses the influence of social inequality in the future of different members of the society. For example, does social class struggle influences the failures or success of individuals in the future. The third part discusses whether the children from richer family have a better opportunity towards success compared with children from the poor families including their children. The last section discusses whether the fundamentals of capitalism in which the richer individuals may continue becoming richer while the poor remains in the current position for the long run. Hence, the paper addresses different angles in understanding social class and the role of money/finance in addressing socioeconomic requirements. Does Increase in Disposable Income Increase Individual Happiness Boyce, Brown and Moore (2010) state that money buys happiness since the money can be utilized in increasing an individual’s utility. Based on this conventional economics, it means that an increase in disposable income translates into an increase in individual happiness. Boyce, Brown and Moore (2010, p. 471) calls it “absolute income hypothesis” and argues that richer people are happier compared with the poor people. Measurement of happiness is a different issue because a rich person may have a lot of money but financial or business issues may reduce the quantity or quality of happiness. The underlying fundamental is that money buys happiness because the more the money, the more the material things that can be bought. However, the argument of more income translates to more happiness is not absolute because Diener and Biswas-Diener (2002) presents the aspect of winning the lottery. Most winners will relocate and change residence to new neighborhoods resulting in losing of friends while interpersonal friction will occur when it comes to sharing the winnings. Hence, the source of the income and the societal settings influences the happiness of an individual or the lack of happiness. Gardner and Oswald (2001) discuss the impact of windfalls in contributing to happiness. The authors present examples of persons who won windfalls of 75,000 US dollars in which their psychological testing in wellbeing rose to between 0.1 and 0.3 standard deviations. Gardner and Oswald (2001) estimates that if an individual wins $1.5 million, the happiness frequency would be close to the top of the happiness frequency scale. Diener and Biswas-Diener (2002) takes a different perspective when it comes to income and happiness. The authors state that the well-being of an individual based on income keeps fluctuating. For example, the authors criticize numerous studies that indicate an increase in income will result in an increase in happiness; however, the opposite is true. Diener and Biswas-Diener (2002) reason that the increase in taxes and other institutional regulations affects the satisfaction of the individuals. However, if the income is analyzed based on the taxes and other variables that consume income, the authors’ state that the increase in income translates into an increase in stress because more of the incomes will the taxed, and would not benefit the earner directly. Lucas and Schimmack (2009) support the sentiments through stating that a level reaches in which the people with small income and people with more income balances because of the environmental and economic situations. Money creates pleasurable experiences, but the well-being does not change (Easterlin, 1995). The argument is based on wellbeing is the internal auditing of an individual without including the material aspects, which sometimes contribute to happiness. Pchelin and Howell (2014) researched on value seeking in forecasting economic benefits and larger impact on the wellbeing of an individual and life experiences. The authors found out that money played an important role in determining the happiness of an individual and also based on the use of the money. It is premised on the use of money to acquire material items or purchase life experiences (Boyce, Brown and Moore, 2010). Hence, the argument suffices when the happiness is compared with the amount of material wealth amassed. Headey, Muffels, and Wooden (2008) state that economic circumstances have an impact on happiness. The authors discuss “Easterlin Paradox” in trying to understand the association between economic growth and happiness. The authors’ presents that the level of income affects the happiness of an individual in that the increase in income may translate to happiness and the loss of the income creates psychological problems including depression. Hence, income influences the happiness of an individual. The underlying assumption is that more money results in an increase in happiness. However, the problem is the use of the money and source of the money and utilization of the money to generate happiness and life experiences. If a certain amount of money is given to a poor individual and a rich individual, the level of happiness of these individuals is different. Hence, money should be measured based on wellbeing rather than happiness. Does Social Inequality Define Our Future? Robert (2008) analyzes components of social inequality in that there are socially imposed inequalities such as gender and ethnicity, and real inequality such as healthcare access. Social inequality affects the future of an individual because it affects means of fulfilling social requirements. For example, Robert (2008) presents Nike shoes marketing in which Michael Jordan received $20 million in 1992, which was more than the payroll for six Indonesian factories manufacturing the shoes. This is an example of income inequality and occupational inequality in which one individual benefits more compared with other individuals. The workers in the scenario of Nike shoes will remain poor and will continue affecting their future. Bourdieu (1987) discusses social inequality and introduces aspects of political choices, and the author thinks the social inequality is (man) made. The political situation and choices are directly linked to social capital, cultural capital and economic capital. Kenway (2008) discusses the proposals of the UK government to eradicate child poverty by 2020. The aim is to address the inequalities and impact to the wider society. Some of the strategies proposed include reviewing taxing system for low income, improvement in healthcare, and a paradigm shift in addressing general child poverty problems. Without addressing these requirements, the low-income families will continue to suffer, and the children will be affected. Lareau (2002) states that social class struggle may contribute to failure to the society. For example, the middle-class families have access to different resources and continuously create an enabling environment for the success of their children. However, the poor family continuously works to provide basic needs. The lack of motivation on the children and the minimal access to resources affects the future of the child and the family as a whole. Wilkinson and Pickett (2009) states that inequality in income creates numerous social problems, which include poor educational performance, drug abuse, obesity, teenage births, lack of trust, imprisonment, violence and mental illness. The challenges that the rich and poor face are different Richer Family and Poor Family Children’s Future Expectations Boyce, Brown and Moore (2010) discusses that the amounts of income influence the life satisfaction. It means that the higher income a family access, the children will benefit because of aspects of satisfaction and positives of the family. A richer family is associated with well-being, and the children will have numerous opportunities and advantages for succeeding. The children from richer families have access to numerous opportunities and utilities, which creates chances that these families will succeed in future. In addressing child poverty, Kenway (2008) state that the solution is reviewing the taxation and healthcare system. The richer people have more income and alternative resources in accessing basic things such as healthcare and quality education. The children of the poor people have to do home chores compared with the rich children who have house help/assistances (DiMaggio et al. 2004). Therefore, the children from the rich family will continue succeeding because of the benefits and opportunities associated with financial incomes. Lareau (2002) states that family life influences child’s life chances. The social class interactions define the mechanistic engagement with their respective children, which reflects the future of the children. The middle-class parents employ extensive reasoning and engage the children in leisure activities while the poor parents allow the children to grow naturally and utilizes directives instead of reasoning. These two children grow differently, and cognitive developments may influence the future of the children, which also reflects the successes of the family and children. Hence, the middle-class family is positioned to benefit compared with the poor family because of family interactions. Moreover, Lucas and Schimmack (2009) state that richer people have more money, which translates in increased safety and security, better health and other pleasurable experiences. Therefore, the future of the rich kids is better off compared with children from the poor families because of the numerous threats and challenges visited on the poor families’ children. Capitalism on Richness and Poorness in Social Class Generational Development Boyce, Brown and Moore (2010) present that “reference income hypothesis” compares the income based on reference income group, which is directly associated with an individual social class. Ingham (1996) utilizes money as a social relations measurement. The author states that without the money, it becomes difficult to determine the richness of an individual and seen an individual is seen as rich, the capitalism situation retains people within their current levels. However, hardworking individuals can get out of poverty through the provision of basic needs (Cohen, Kluegel, and Land, 1981). For example, access to education may influence the social class of an individual in the future. Kenway (2008) addresses the impact of taxation and employment opportunities in reducing child poverty. The poor people lack access to appropriate resource and opportunities which are available to the richer population. For example, the rich have better healthcare access, quality good, and live in conducive neighborhoods. It is different from the situation of the poor who struggle to access healthcare or even access quality food. The life experiences of the poor are low; meaning chances of getting out of poverty also decreases. Conclusion In conclusion, financial analysis and economic situations including political and social settings influences the position of individuals in the society and the satisfaction with life. Depending on the amount of the money, money influences happiness through acquiring of material things but also creates interpersonal friction. The aspect of money is extended to the social fabric in which social inequality occurs because of political and societal frameworks. The children of the rich have a brighter future because of the numerous opportunities and also the encouragement from the parents: directly or indirectly. The children from the poor families are disadvantaged because they are unable to access basic requirements and also lack the motivation to advance in their respective expectations. Capitalism also plays a crucial role in determining the future of an individual. For example, the rich have capital resources that they can use to increase wealth but of the disadvantaged in the society are provided with resources, chances exist in which these individuals will benefit. Thus, money plays a crucial role in defining the society and community levels of satisfaction. References Bourdieu, P., 1987. What makes a social class? On the theoretical and practical existence of groups. Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 32, pp.1-17. Boyce, C.J., Brown, G.D. and Moore, S.C., 2010. Money and happiness rank of income, not income, affects life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 21(4), pp.471-475. Cohen, L.E., Kluegel, J.R. and Land, K.C., 1981. Social inequality and predatory criminal victimization: An exposition and test of a formal theory. American Sociological Review, pp.505-524. Diener, E. and Biswas-Diener, R., 2002. Will money increase subjective well-being? Social Indicators Research, 57(2), pp.119-169. DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Celeste, C. and Shafer, S., 2004. From unequal access to differentiated use: A literature review and agenda for research on digital inequality. Social Inequality, pp.355-400. Easterlin, R.A., 1995. Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all?. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 27(1), pp.35-47. Gardner, J. and Oswald, A., 2001. Does money buy happiness? A longitudinal study using data on windfalls. Manuscript Submitted For Publication. Headey, B., Muffels, R. and Wooden, M., 2008. Money does not buy happiness: Or does it? A reassessment based on the combined effects of wealth, income and consumption. Social Indicators Research, 87(1), pp.65-82. Ingham, G., 1996. Money is a social relation. Review of Social Economy, 54(4), pp.507-529. Kenway, P., 2008. Social Justice and Inequality in the UK: eradicating child poverty? The Political Quarterly, 79(s1), pp.41-56. Lareau, A., 2002. Invisible inequality: Social class and childrearing in black families and white families. American Sociological Review, pp.747-776. Lucas, R.E. and Schimmack, U., 2009. Income and well-being: How big is the gap between the rich and the poor?. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(1), pp.75-78. Pchelin, P. and Howell, R.T., 2014. The hidden cost of value-seeking: People do not accurately forecast the economic benefits of experiential purchases. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 9(4), pp.322-334. Robert M. B., 2008. What is social inequality? International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 28(7/8), pp. 250 - 259 Wilkinson, R.G. and Pickett, K.E., 2009. Income inequality and social dysfunction. Annual Review of Sociology, pp.493-511. Read More