← The Hacking of the American Mind The Science Behind the Corporate Takeover of Our Bodies and Brains
The Hacking of the American Mind Chapter 12. Gross National Unhappiness
Author: Robert H. Lustig Publisher: New York, NY: Penguin Random House. Publish Date: 2017 Review Date: Status:⌛️
Annotations
Highlight(pink) - Location 2308
Americans invented the saying “Money can’t buy happiness” (and the Beatles knew you Can’t Buy Me Love, either). Yet Western culture has consistently chosen money over happiness. And we haven’t gotten any happier.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2311
no matter your personal wealth, there’s always the impetus for more—or for your personal weight, there’s always the impetus for less. However much you have (or don’t), it’s just not enough. And therein lies the problem. Because there is no amount of monetary increase or body weight decrease that can activate the serotonin system to provide contentment, especially if you are food restricting. Why? Because money and food trigger our dopamine systems, not serotonin. So we will always want more (or less).
Highlight(pink) - Location 2317
We argue that happiness (i.e., contentment) is the goal; everything else, including health and material well-being (money), is the means to get to that goal. So we go to Manolo Blahnik and Tesla and Lululemon and buy the next shiny thing.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2319
Even if we don’t do yoga, at least we look the part. There’s no doubt that material wealth improves subjective assessment of well-being by individuals in the short term. But not in the long term. Is that pleasure or happiness? Is that dopamine or serotonin?
Highlight(pink) - Location 2321
Our close personal relationship with money can be summed up like this: “It’s not that I want to make more money, I just want to make more money than YOU.” We consciously or subconsciously compare ourselves with our peers, keeping up with and wanting to best the Joneses with a pricier house, car, living room furniture, and now drones. The premise is bolstered with a simple experiment.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2324
Two decades ago a group of Harvard students were asked a not-so-simple question. Which world would you prefer: a world where you get 25,000, or a world where you get 250,000? The students overwhelmingly chose the former.3 They would rather be poorer but better positioned.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2327
British economist Sir Richard Layard4 gleans two findings from this and similar experiments:
Highlight(pink) - Location 2328
(1) Your income is judged relative to others. It’s not how well you are doing, it’s how well you are doing relative to everyone else. But someone is always doing better than you: there are a lot of Warren Buffets out there. If income is a driver of well-being at all, it is short term, and is not consistent with contentment.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2330
(2) Your current income is judged relative to your previous income. Let’s say your salary is X. If you double your salary, 2X is your new income. Next year, even if you make 2X, your well-being next year is the same as you’re making X this year. The thrill diminishes. And heaven forbid your 2X salary decreases by Y (where Y is less than X); even though you will make more next year than you did last year, you will be utterly despondent.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2333
This is not how happiness works. Comparing salaries is like taking locker room measurements. Money in the form of income has not translated into individual happiness. We’ve been programmed to earn more, but then everything in our bracket costs more, and we keep climbing to an unattainable peak. Because income is pleasure, visceral, short-lived, dopamine driven, and subject to all the excesses of tolerance and dependence, and in some cases withdrawal. The cars get bigger, but so does the credit card bill.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2337
Americans spend; it’s what we do. But it’s what you do with the money that determines happiness. Money can often be the means to the end but is rarely the end in itself.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2339
Does this apply to countries as well? Does material wealth make countries happy? Are countries with higher gross domestic product (GDP) or bigger bank accounts happier than those without? Does GDP translate into happiness? Just as contentment is different from elation, the relation between income and happiness depends on your definition of happiness.
Note - Location 2341
I find it interesting also how the happiest countries measure happiness by a happiness scale rather than gdp
Highlight(pink) - Location 2341
Compared to even fifty years ago, most countries have demonstrated colossal improvements in material conditions, such as clean water, electricity, plumbing, hospitals, and antibiotics to prevent acute infectious diseases.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2343
The question is whether these social and medical improvements have improved the happiness of these countries in a significant way. If happiness increases with development, then the enhancement of material well-being should have made human beings and societies happier today than they were at the time of Aristotle.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2345
Furthermore, if material wealth were a primary determinant of societal happiness, then those countries with a higher standard of living should manifest more happiness than those with lower standards.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2347
However, the percentage of people who identify themselves as “happy” in terms of per capita income exhibit a tenuous correlation at best, and within the thirty-seven developed countries of the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), not at all. Thus, just like for people, societies are not happier with higher GDP.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2349
Known as the Easterlin paradox,5 this suggests that, just as people view their income relative to others, countries do the same.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2350
Nonetheless, GDP has caught on as a measure of social advancement, to the extent that most countries today are preoccupied with the number, and more than one government has factitiously increased its estimation of GDP to make themselves appear more prosperous.6
Highlight(pink) - Location 2353
GDP is defined by the following equation: GDP = Production + Government + Investment + (Exports –Imports)
Highlight(pink) - Location 2354
A high GDP infers governmental stability, but GDP is subject to manipulation by those same governments. When officials stoke the flames (as in the 2008 economic bailout), GDP can be artificially inflated, but that doesn’t mean people are happy.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2356
Conversely, if the Fed lowers interest rates, it can spur investment through borrowing, which also artificially raises GDP only by creating a more precarious economic situation.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2357
Furthermore, GDP doesn’t take into account advances in environmental pollution, or illegal drugs and prostitution, or technology (for good or bad; see Chapter 14).
Highlight(pink) - Location 2358
How do you assess GDP in light of the fact that an iPhone is cheaper than its three components (a phone, a camera, and an MP3 player)? It’s hard to assess sustainability when car sales are offset by car accidents and car exhaust, yet GDP doesn’t account for both sides of the ledger. And it’s even harder to assess sustainability and environmental damage when the food industry and the drug industry (which treats the illnesses the food caused) are lumped into one number, thus inflating GDP, while people get sicker and unhappier.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2362
Even economist Simon Kuznets, the originator of the term, in 1929 stated, “The welfare of a nation can scarcely by inferred from a measurement of national income.”
Highlight(pink) - Location 2363
Indeed, business and government hide behind GDP precisely because it measures productivity exclusive of sustainability.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2364
Princeton economist Dirk Philipsen7 argues that GDP is exactly what is wrong with happiness. Because happiness is long-term, it infers stability and sustainability. GDP is anything but long-term, and it doesn’t necessarily improve the happiness of any country’s populace.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2367
Recognizing the disconnect between GDP and happiness, and in order to monitor societal advancement or stagnation, social scientists have developed three separate international scales of well-being.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2368
The Prosperity Index8 is a compendium of numerous measures (both in terms of the national economy and personal well-being) that reflect the contentment of populations with their current status. America, for all of its purchasing power, and military and social clout around the world, ranks number eleven out of 142 countries on the Prosperity Index. Given our number one economic standing and quality of life, this is a pretty poor showing.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2371
Note that countries with monetary resources don’t necessarily score high. Saudi Arabia has oil, Nigeria has diamonds, and they score 45 and 125, respectively.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2372
A second scale, the World Happiness Report,9 takes into account indices that measure the following: real (inflation-corrected) GDP per capita; life expectancy; having someone to count on; perceived freedom to make life choices; freedom from corruption; and individual generosity. Here the U.S. scored number seventeen out of eighty-five countries, and also demonstrated the eleventh-largest drop in the last seven years.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2376
A third scale, known as the Happy Planet Index,10 takes into account only issues of well-being (life satisfaction, longevity, ecological footprint). There, America does even worse, scoring 105 out of 111 countries.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2378
So, the data say we’re prosperous, but not happy.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2378
The country of Bhutan has embraced the concept that the role of government is to provide a fertile ground for happiness to flourish. They have eschewed GDP as a measure of societal advancement and now utilize the Gross Happiness Index to determine how it is faring as a society.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2380
Bhutan may be a backwater in terms of economic power, but it puts its stock in its people. Perhaps it is because it has a lower standard of living that it is able to focus on the happiness of its citizens.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2382
Or perhaps, because Bhutan is a Buddhist nation, it doesn’t focus its efforts on the dopamine-driven pathways of its citizens but rather on those that are mediated through serotonin.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2383
Alternatively, you might think that happiness would correlate with economic indicators. You’d be wrong. Take a look at the Prosperity.com website or the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) . Right now the five happiest countries are Norway, Switzerland, Iceland, Finland, and Denmark, which was number one. The U.S. was number thirteen.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2386
What do they have that we don’t? As socialist countries, Norway and Denmark pay very high taxes, and their GDP is one-half of ours. And it’s very expensive to live in Oslo and Copenhagen. Food costs in Denmark are almost double that of the U.S. I’ve been there several times. The restaurants are twice as expensive as those found in America. You go out to the bars on the Strøget, and everyone sits outside and nurses one Carlsberg all evening. Yet, by all these alternative measures, as countries they score much happier.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2389
The populace may not have bulging pocketbooks to purchase the extras of life, but they have just what they need to live. And don’t really want much more, in part, because each person has similar needs and supports.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2391
Also, there is much less economic dichotomy between rich and poor, so internal strife of relative salary disparities is more manageable.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2391
Lastly, the costs of basic necessities don’t increase faster than their salaries. Norway and Denmark have increased life expectancy, freedom to make life choices, reduced perceptions of corruption, and social support; both countries provide free elementary school, free university, free medical care, and free burial.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2394
How can that make them happier? Columbia University economist and head of the SDSN Jeffrey Sachs stated: “There is a very strong message for my country, the United States, which is very rich, has gotten a lot richer over the last 50 years, but has gotten no happier … For a society that just chases money, we are chasing the wrong things. Our social fabric is deteriorating, social trust is deteriorating, faith in government is deteriorating.”
Highlight(pink) - Location 2401
Switzerland rates close to the top of the Prosperity Index.11 Considering the U.S. contributes 25 percent of the global GDP, eleventh isn’t a very good showing.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2403
These data argue that material wealth is really a reward-driven parameter, not one indicative of level of contentment. Most of the books that have been written on the relation between money and happiness conflate the two phenomena of reward and contentment together, into one that is commonly referred to as “subjective well-being.”
Highlight(pink) - Location 2405
But is that true? University of Michigan economists Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers have attempted to discredit the Easterlin paradox on the basis of finding a logarithmic (i.e., curved) rather than a linear relationship between income and subjective well-being;12 in other words, each extra dollar is worth slightly less in happiness than the dollar that came before, but there is no obvious ceiling.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2409
However, I think that these studies suffer from the same misconception: that, as currently defined, subjective well-being is a meaningful indicator of happiness. How is this question asked of people? There are two ways. The World Values Survey asks, “All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days?” Really? That’s supposed to give you an indicator of happiness? The Gallup World Poll asks people to imagine the ladder of life, and which rung they are on. Sounds more like the relative income problem to me.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2413
There is one paper that I think got it right. Instead of lumping, Nobel Prize winners Daniel Kahneman and Angus Deaton examined single individuals rather than in aggregate and, based upon their responses, split happiness into two separate experiences.13
Highlight(pink) - Location 2415
One phenomenon is equivalent to “life satisfaction,” which they describe as “the thoughts that people have about their life when they think about it,” such as prosperity and influence (likely mediated through actions that drive dopamine). Using this definition (i.e., at peace with your status in life), one can see a very clear correlation with income, as more money means increased access to services and technology that make life easier (dishwashers, dry cleaners, Amazon Prime). Money can be spent on what matters to the individual, from gadgets to Gucci.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2419
However, they also quantified the second phenomenon of contentment, “the frequency and intensity of experiences of joy, stress, sadness, anger, and affection that make one’s life pleasant or unpleasant” (equivalent to our definition of eudemonia, or our biochemical definition of serotonin effect). Using this definition, contentment demonstrated a logarithmic relationship with income until a maximum of $75,000. After that, the relationship disappeared. Once needs were met, more income did not generate more contentment. It would appear that the acquisition of stuff and property beyond the basics doesn’t up your Zen quotient.14 The pursuit of property is not the pursuit of happiness. In fact, it can just leave you wanting more.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2424
Kahneman and Deaton provide us with evidence of how the biochemistry plays out in real life: that reward is not contentment, and that increasing reward does not translate into happiness.
Note - Location 2426
Ignorance!
Highlight(pink) - Location 2426
By pursuing the dollar, Americans have certainly not become content; and by pursuing GDP, America has become derelict in one of its three primary aspirations—the pursuit of happiness.