Comments on: How happy are we? Measuring Gross National Happiness

By: Maxine Tan

Maxine Tan — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 08:28:21 +0000

“Money cannot buy happiness.” This saying is used a lot and it really doesnt apply to everything. Someone can be happy with a new computer that they bought, a new house or even a pair of shoes. However, if someone tries too hard to buy happiness with money, the result could prove to be the total opposite. They would spend their life buying unnecessary goods and continuously try to bring happiness for themself. On the besic level, money can buy happiness (these days).

Personally, I have never thought of happiness as a complicated idea. Some people are happy, and some people aren’t. It doesnt matter how much money one has. Both poor people and rich people can be happy with life. Life does revolve around money and I think it is safe to say that we would not be able to live without money. If you can’t live in society today, will you be a happy person? Thus, does money really not buy happiness?

By: jenniferchoi

jenniferchoi — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 13:55:30 +0000

“Icelanders are just as happy as Swedes, yet their country spends half what Sweden does ”

This article clearly proves the belief I have believed in so far. I have always believed that “wealth” is not synonymous with “happiness”. Still in many cases, i saw poor people suffering because they didn’t have enough money to buy food/shelter/medicine, but on the contrary, people with enough money being happy becuase they could enjoy their lives with their money as much as they wanted to. I’m a hundred percent sure that GNH is a far more accurate value than GDP to measure one’s happiness.

By: David Tay

David Tay — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 01:10:36 +0000

Money cannot buy happiness and is more complex than people really think it is. To an extent this is proven true, but feel rating happiness in quantitative data is under thinking the true meaning of happiness. Yes, individual choices and government policies will be able to increase the gross national happiness quotient but it doesnâ€™t necessarily mean it the whole country is happy.
Obviously, we see happy beggars which show that money is not the foundation of happiness, and we see people opening up business not for economic gain but for pleasure. In my opinion, it all boils down to the fact from person to person. You can be happy in a country that is low on the gross national happiness quotient, and you can be sad in a country which has a high GNHQ. America serves as a perfect example: 2/3 of the population has clinical depression but it is top 15 on the scale.

By: Philip Trampe

Philip Trampe — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 01:07:39 +0000

I would just like to say woot! Denmark is number 1! woot! well that is if we go by the whole “most income per capita” and on that note i would like to agree with most of the previous comments that money does not necessarily buy happiness, even though it may seem logical that with more money comes more freedom, however it turns out that money does not necessarily determine the amount of freedom people have. I guess it all actually depends on what kind of society you live in. if you live in a poorer country that is not so materialistic, of course money wont be the determinant of happiness, the more freedom one has will be. However in a place where money is …easier attainable, materialistic ways are more easily come by, therefore probably makes money a bigger basis for happiness.

By: Andrew Chang

Andrew Chang — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:03:55 +0000

Materialistic people work really hard day and night to earn money, but as a result they’ve
lost their happiness. They then spend the money they earn to buy “materials” from the market
that they may not really need and may not really bring them much happiness. This is
unhealthy, because you’re not happy, and you’re not working to improve your mental
condition. These people can become really rich, with houses full of luxuries, but may also
be very stressed and become bad at socializing with people (because they “socialize” with
materials for too long).

However, these hard-working people are also responsible for keeping the economy running,
right? I think the people on the other end of this spectrum (with the materialistic people
on one side) are monk-ish people (and I mean REALLY good monks). They don’t need much
physical “materials” and some even give them all up. But they are very content, if not
happy, with life. Now imagine a society full of monks. There would be less trading, less
competetion, less of everything. Learning economics would be so much easier.

I think we need to find a balance in between being materialistic (therefore keeping the
economy running) and being monk-ish (therefore making us happy), so I think the GDP is just
as important as the GWB.

By: robertwang

robertwang — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 14:08:20 +0000

I would agree with Kristie. Money can’t buy you complete happiness, but it can provide a decent source of happiness. However, as the article said, people with more choices, more power over their own lives were more happy. In addition, the article also stated that the elderly tended to be happier than the younger generations, but friendships are “crucial.” Things like power over your own life and friendships, although money can have some affect of it, ultimately still are required to make one happy.

By: Kristie Chung

Kristie Chung — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 13:34:27 +0000

I wouldn’t say that money outright buys you happiness, but like Annie said, I think money can provide a source of temporary happiness. I mean with money, you can buy yourself a new cell phone or a new ipod, but you can’t be able to buy friends and love.

By: Annie Sung

Annie Sung — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:58:00 +0000

It’s all relative. I feel that while money does not define happiness, it makes us happy, but only temporarily. Sure, when you get the iPhone you’ve always wanted, you’re happy, but it wouldn’t constitute for a long period of time (not until the next big thing comes out). I agree with Kathie that the relationship between happiness and money vary with the tastes and preferences of individuals. Money seems to set what would make each person happy; to a homeless child in rural China, a white rabbit candy would probably make them light up, while to someone like us, a white rabbit candy probably wouldn’t do the trick like a box of Godiva’s would. And then there are other factors that money can’t buy, like relationships with family and friends.

By: Melanie

Melanie — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:53:54 +0000

gosh. i thought some country in africa had the highest happiness rate hahaha.
well, although some people might argue that money cannot buy happiness, as proven by this article, without money, one cannot be satisfied with their life either. While i like the notion of being rich ( :)who doesnt?), it is hard to keep your head grounded and appreciate your surroundings. Take for example, people i know who say they hate their life and their life sucks. Their life compared to orphans in lets say.. Zimbabwe is SO much better. At least we have the money to purchase temporary happiness

By: Trevor Sun

Trevor Sun — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 09:39:26 +0000

I don’t think that happiness can be put into numbers. It’s abstract and everyone has different ways of expressing it. Also I believe that money can bring happiness to a person; more money can increase a persons choices which can lead to buying that something that was unattainable before.

By: Rebecca Sung

Rebecca Sung — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 08:05:18 +0000

I agree with Cassy that although money doesn’t buy happiness, it certainly makes it easier to obtain happiness. Happiness can be indirectly bought. I think that in order to be happy, needs must be obtained first. According to Maslow, first level is food, water, etc (basic needs to keep someone alive). If you have no money, you cannot get those things and therefore, you’d be starving and probably not happy. Second level is you need safety and security; without money, you can’t really buy a home where you are protected by the walls around you. And so on and so forth with the levels of needs.

By: kevinhuang

kevinhuang — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 06:29:04 +0000

I agree with Mina that money can bring happiness and also the people without money are most likely unhappy because they do not have enough money; however, it is true that money is not a necessity for happiness, it is only a side factor.

By: mina.song

mina.song — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 05:25:36 +0000

well..I think little different. I think money gives happiness(I didn’t say it as always, and i didn’t say money don’t take away happiness). and without money people could be happy but not fully.. I think … hehe

By: Charlie.Gao

Charlie.Gao — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 11:30:14 +0000

i think we can all agree that money can’t buy happiness. but i mean, money WILL give you a lot of satisfaction up to a certain extent, and past that certain extent, other factors such as greed and selfishness kick in, and that is when we start to abuse the money and that is when we start to become less happy.

like, when we see those homeless people out on the streets of shanghai, new york, or practically anywhere, we cant POSSIBLY think that they are happy because, without money, u really cant do much in society. so when we say money cant buy happiness, it is somewhat true, but u also have to think that without money, full happiness and satisfaction cannot be achieved.

By: Soyeon Yoon

Soyeon Yoon — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 18:13:18 +0000

Well I think everyone is agreeing that “happiness cannot be bought and still money is somewhat important factor of happiness” and this idea is being repeated and repeated in differnt wordings. Yes, however, I also do agree with this and how much money is important to affect happiness would probably depend on the person.