Forum Post: Gross National Happiness
Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 22, 2011, 7:25 p.m. EST by yarichin
(269)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_National_Happiness
Bhutan is the only nation that attempts to measure the happiness of it's people.
We care about only Gross National PRODUCT.
What if our leaders measured how successful they are by how happy the people that live here are?
5 Excellent Alternatives to the Archaic GDP Measuring Stick
Genuine Progress Indicator
Quality of Life Index
The Legatum Prosperity Index
The Happy Planet Index 2.0
Human Development Index
http://newsjunkiepost.com/2011/05/04/the-top-5-prosperity-measuring-sticks-more-accurate-than-gpd/
Interesting post for discussion, in the meantime just posting a quote I once read about GNP: "A Critique On GNP - Used To Measure National Well-Being Too much and too long, we seem to have surrendered community excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our gross national product ... if we should judge America by that - counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for those who break them. It counts the destruction of our redwoods and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and the cost of a nuclear warhead, and armored cars for police who fight riots in our streets. It counts Whitman's rifle and Speck's knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children.
Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages; the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage; neither our wisdom nor our learning; neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country; it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it tells us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans." (Robert Kennedy Politician, Civil Rights Activist) note: My use of source for quote gives no indication to any personal political views,
Though it only touches a fraction of your reply, I will say that car accidents kill more Americans than war, disease, drugs, and guns combined. Where is the push to outlaw cars? The GOV does not care about our health or safety. If our cars ran on cocaine, there is no force in America that would be able to make coke illegal. Our government is focused on controlling the transportation of goods and people. You need a license to drive yourself from point A to point B. You need a passport to travel between countries. The earth is a finite place and you are restricted in where you can travel on it without permission. Global Third World.
Hi Yarichin thanks for your reply, I believe I can relate to your concern I was just using this as a very slight example in regards to GNP, " we seem to have surrendered community excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things", of course the govt (&those behind the scenes running the govt. only care for profit at the cost of human emotions and bodies) In regards to determination of what is regarded as happiness Im assuming thats something very personal to each individual according to the place they are at in their present state of life. So according to my tools of observation when I read "What if our leaders measured how successful they are by how happy the people that live here are?" I can perhaps understand that point of view and of course it must be taken greatly into consideration as a govt must work for the good and wholesomeness of society, and then I could take that question a step further and say how about a society or lets start with a group of people whos goal was to join together against all odds to begin to build an environment where the success was determined on each contributing to the common happiness factor of the whole, I guess we would have to begin by discussing how does each of us determine what is happiness and most likely at least a couple hundred answers will come up and then we take it from there. Heres hoping for a more successful year! all the best ruth
[Removed]
sounds good.
That's all I ask for in life, a broad too perhaps.
It's a noble topic. But when you have a population of 634,982, the sample is much easier to read.
So it is okay to try to make 1 person happy but not 10?
No, but it's like saying Unalakleet, Alaska has a higher happiness index than Los Angeles.
I see what you are getting at happiness is abstract and hard to measure. A survey asking things like; Are you satisfied with the amount of food, entertainment, housing, emergency services you receive relative to the amount that you need to pay for them? If you asked the same 100 questions to people in both locations you will get different answers.
Exactly. Anytime there is a higher concentration of people, there will be more problems. There are up and downsides to any community.
Well having more people is not always a problem. I have lived on dirt roads in the middle of nowhere, and in some of the largest cities on Earth. I like public transportation. I like being able to visit 30 nite clubs in a weekend. On the other hand I like seeing all the stars and the piece and quiet where I grew up. The place I came from still has drinkable spring water right from the ground.
Oh I also agree. There are many benefits of living in a larger community.
This is why we are here this is why you are needed.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/inside-job-documentary/
Share, circulate, educate, inspire.
US doesn't make cut for happiest nations list
"Old, stable nations of northern Europe took five of the top 10 spots on our list. These include Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Norway, and Denmark. Switzerland is also on the list and has many characteristics in common with the Scandinavian countries. The resource-rich, English-speaking countries of Australia and Canada made the cut as well. Noticeably absent from the list are any OECD nations in Latin America, southern and eastern Europe and Asia. "
"The happiest countries seem to be places where there is a good balance of work and leisure time. Not all nations can afford to keep unemployment low through government subsidies. Not all countries can afford to provide universal medical coverage. Not all countries can afford to educate almost all of their children, which in turn supports extremely high literacy rates and builds a population of skilled workers."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43287918/ns/business-world_business/t/us-doesnt-make-cut-happiest-nations-list/
We are a wealthy nation in terms of natural resources and in money though most of it is not distributed fairly. We can afford to have a nation in the top 5 but we have to topple the economic giants that have taken our land and hoarded our money first.
I like this idea, but it's abstract and would require us to be more evolved.
Human hands, not money, produce all the material things and harvest all the food. Remove the money, all the things, food, and hands are still there.
Okay. I guess what I'm saying is Americans don't measure success by happiness, they measure it by material goods. I agree with you that success should be measured in a much more meaningful way (this is where I think humans need to be more evolved - not involved). And, I do agree that happiness is a good place to start. What is the point of being alive if we are not happy?
We started out using money as a tool to make trade easier, then some people made money the goal of their existence. Rather than a human tool to improve on the barter system, it became our master. It as they say has become an ends not a means. I know we need to find another way, but we have been doing this so long, we have no experience or ideas about any other way.
All true. We can find another way, though. We don't have to live in a society that values the economic system over everything else, including humans. Even freakin' Suze Orman says "People First."
an individual measures happiness by his own standard. why would would i care about how another measures happiness? the idea that all people should measure happiness by the same quantifiable metric is corrosive.
i will use a real life example: a fly fishing guide i know loves taking clients out and teaching them the biology and mystery of the stream. thats his job, its how he feeds his family. on his off days, what does he do? he goes fishing for himself. thatsvwhat akes him happy.
i kmow very rich men that work very hard and have accumulated great wealth. thats what makes them happy. who are we to judge either's happiness?
Good point. It's sad, though. I'm sure you don't agree, but I think money as a way to happiness is void of anything meaningful.
and thats your judgement. i think a happy balance of both material wealth and spiritual wealth is ideal. i also "judge" that people who are unsuccessful in acquiring material wealth (they tried and failed) lash out at the trappings of wealth, even though they still secretly harbor that earthly desire. balance, always balance. never be satisfied with your station in life, alwats strive to move ahead.
i understand the anger OWS has against unequal accumulation of wealth, but i see little introspection. "have i done my best?" if you havent done your best, you arent in a position to critique others.
I've heard your argument over and over in these threads. I have a pretty good grasp of economics and how capitalism works and it's inherently based on exploitation. No one can get rich without exploiting capital and labor. It just doesn't happen. Everyone can't be rich. No matter how hard and great and smart everyone is, 300 million Americans cannot start businesses and have them be successful. The economy could not possibly handle that because this is a capitalist system that requires a labor force.
In fact, really great, wonderful, hard-working people never get rich, they help other people get rich. So, they should work full-time and qualify for food stamps? They should live on less than $26,000/year as half of Americans do? Our nation has forgotten to revere the worker. Greed harms us all. I'm not against wealth. People should have no limits on how much wealth they acquire - go for it - but pay a living wage - share the profits in a humane way. Then we wouldn't have to worry about the tax rates so much or "entitlement" programs.
There are so many people who don't even have the skills worth minimum wage. To increase the minimum wage to a "living" wage would simply lead to a combination of higher unemployment and more expensive goods, thus making the new "living" wage much less livable.
I agree that capitalism is based on exploitation. But people are always going to exploit others. It has happened since the dawn of civilization. To expect that to change is naive. At least we have a system in which that exploitation undoubtedly leads to a higher standard of living for everyone over time.
Okay, but I really think that the greedy people running these corporations would be just as happy with a little less profit. So, pay your workers enough that they can live on the income without needing "entitlements" which we pay for anyway. Show respect for work. Revere work. Revere the labor of human beings. Take a little less profit and you might get richer anyway because the workers would have more money to create demand.
It is not just greed, it is also common sense. Why would I pay someone $15 an hour when there are other people who will do the same job for $12 an hour?
Well, that's the point. Keep the unemployment rate high so people will take any work they can get in order to survive. Employees need some rights in this country. They used to have rights. Labor used to be respected and workers had wages that could support families with benefits and pensions and commitment.
who isnt paying a living wage? this is always brought up, w/o exposition. name names, pleae.
a question needs to be answered: has capitalism risen the American standard of living and the answer is an unqualified YES, you are typing on a computer more powerful than NASA had when it landed on the moon. Cars are so fantastic its unbelieveable. It is to the advantage of the consumer and to the detriment of the auto worker that Toyota makes great cars. there is no way to stop human progress and competition. if someone can do it better and cheaper, the whole world is better off. imagine this, a friend of mine had knee replacement surgery 3 years ago and now is SKIING!! 30 years ago they would have been given a wheelchair or crutches. what is the value to the patient that people in search of profit figured a way to vastly improve a person's quality of living. the patient could have selected the crutch or wheelchair.
Minimum wage is not a living wage. People cannot live on even $10/hour. The list of employers would be too long.
Re: knee surgery: 49 million Americans have no health insurance so no knee surgery for them.
and 250 million people can have replacement knees and ski, because someone figured out how to make a titanium knee, so they could get rich. you lament that everyone cant have knee replacement ( btw a crutch is cheap) while i marvel that it is even possible.
i dont want to argue, but truly, who pays minimum wage? Maybe fast food entry level? maids at a Motel 6?
you really need to list these companies, because i dont see them. child care workers? nursing aids? i really need your help.
Come on. You just named a bunch. How about every retail company out there? Every restaurant. Millions and millions of people earn minimum wage or just slightly above. That is why half of all Americans earn less than $26,000/year!!!!
$26000 a year is $13/hr. way more than minimum wage. you think running a restaurant is a cash cow? 2 of every 3 restaurants fail as start ups, even with minimum wage. i guess you could raise minimum wage to $20/hr, then all restsurants would fail. would that be better?
Have you tried to support a family on $26,000/year. I haven't, I'm lucky enough to say. And, I'm not saying small businesses would have to necessarily abide by a living wage, but a chain restaurant would have to in my mind. How are people supposed to live? We need a country where our citizens can live and support their families. Part of the reason that start-ups can't succeed is the low wages paid to their customers.
someone making $13 an hour should not be the sole support of a family. Not now anyways. anyone who decided to have children on a very low income is making bad choices.
HJow can you mandate one wage for a start up and one for a chain?
What if I told you the government already has tested a successful system in which everyone can be cared for. A nearly perfect communism. THE MILITARY. All members and their families have health care for free. Education is free. There is a minimum standard of housing based on the size of your family. Young single people share a kitchen and bathroom, they have private bedrooms. Higher ranking single people have private apartments. Married couples have homes based on family size, not on income. The higher you rise in the system through your hard work and social skills the more you get. But EVERYONE gets a place to live, enough food, free medical care, and the chance to advance. Think about having all your basic needs covered. Your motivation to work is to make your life BETTER not just to stay alive.
I don't know. I think being able to have children is a basic human right. Should only the wealthy be able to have children? Gosh, if we look back at hunter-gatherer groups they had it more together in terms of raising children and providing for the family as a whole. Today, we are so individualistic that we are downright selfish.
And, yes, you can mandate one wage for a start-up, with little profit, and a chain, enjoying huge profits. Why not? Corporate profits have never been higher in this country.
[Removed]
[Removed]
Then they are not congress. They do not represent at least 90% of us if their approval rating is below 10% Removal by recall, impeachment, or armed revolt. Start with the least violent and work from there. it is not just our right it is our responsibility as FREE PEOPLE!
[Removed]
Prior to the American revolution, lets say 30 years prior, the government of the colonies was paid by and decided by the people of the colonies. Later about 20 years before the revolt, corporate interests dominated the British Crown specifically British East India Co. . The colonists no longer chose or paid their colonial governors. They were appointed and paid by the crown. Many goods including tea were taxed, though the same tax was not imposed on English Citizens in Briton. The idea that they were being taxed unevenly and had no representation either locally or in British Parliament caused a great deal of upset. They are not to be referred to as Pirates, Pirates have no masters and no slaves. THEY ARE OUR MASTERS. They will not free us. We must free ourselves. It took 20 years from the first protests to the Constitution. OWS is only 3 months old. It will take time. Before it is over there will be blood. The 1% do not fight they send poor people to fight for them. If we want a bloodless revolution we must wake up the other slaves so they will not fight against their own freedom.
[Removed]
USC title 28 sec 3002 rule 15 a The United States is a Federal Corporation http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/28/VI/176/A/3002. http://www.topix.com/forum/city/london-ky/TH1KSN08J9BD2NT69 The government does not exist it was replaced by a corporation using a similar name. Women are tricked into selling their children into slavery when they sign a birth certificate. Just because you have no handcuffs on your wrists does not mean you are not bound.
Good point. In fact, it might be better if they tried to measure ......anger or wrath or something like that.
[Removed]
I have said this before, they know exactly what they are doing but they just do not care.
Ill leave it with what he said. But i honestly dont think you should even start with Wikipedia. Anything an infant can make changes to, i wouldnt really put to much stock in.
Wow. Using Wikipedia as a reliable news source. What's next using Cathy comic strips for proof of arguments. In my first day as a teacher years ago I made a blanket statement, "Wikipedia is never to be used as a source in anything you ever hand in to me in this class." Sad none of your teachers ever did that. It might have kept you out of a tent in the park.
What makes one source better than another? Because a tree was killed to put the information in a book it is more accurate? Or because the person who writes a book leaves no room for anyone to come along later and add to or challenge what was written. Wikipedia allows multiple views to be applied to raw information that otherwise would only have the view of the person presenting it. Why would a teacher object to the sharing of ideas? would you prefer Fox or CNN? Because we all know they have no agenda. Right?
[Removed]
Then we wouldn't be very happy because we would be poor. We're not Buddhists, we're materialists.
Speak for yourself I am neither a Buddhist nor am I a Materialist. I need simple things. A shelter to protect me and my family. Water. Food. Air. and some land to have these things on. The things beyond that, that I use are simply WANTS. It is okay to want but not at the expense of the needs of others or even yourself.
If we were to take our eyes off of the economic ball, then you would be begging the wealthiest 0.01% of the Chinese for food and shelter. Which probably won't make people very happy.
[Removed]
um........statistics 101. You cannot measure happiness.
Happiness is an abstract, but you can measure how happy people THINK they are.
It is still subjective and there are too many variables like physical and mental illness, diet, life's pleasant and unpleasant surprises, relationships, etc. But, like I said below, one could measure quality of life by looking at things like food security, employment, and things of that nature.
I could be wrong and openly admit that but do you mean GDP?
Not necessarily. Because it does not go far enough. So, include things like health care, pollution, libraries---access and you could use GDP in addition to.
Ok I just wanted to check. Thank you.
not even indirectly?
behaviorists have become quite good at measuring things in the realm of belief using a variety of indirect means - most of which I do not approve of.
There must be a way to design a scale - which would depend on self reports which many find unreliable, but I think it is simply a question of language.
Not that I know anything about statistics. I don't.
Well, clearly you would do well. Stats and Logic are the two classes every HS grad should be forced to take. Obviously only half would pass.
Well, you can look at a city and measure unemployment, health, even biking or jogging paths, education level and try to get a picture of the quality of life. But, you cannot measure happiness or sadness.
You can measure happiness by the curve of a smile, the depth of the dimples, and the sparkle in the eyes.
If it were in the form of a poll, where respondents were measured on the basis of twenty or thirty different points leading to some mathematical co-efficient indicative of happiness -
it would only be a snapshot - subjective at best - on an individual level.
However - in the aggregate - then what would you have?
An advertisement. I kid. Feelings. Happiness, in and of itself, is subjective.
I know they are.
We can quantify anything - I've seen small demonstrations of that simple fact. We're really good at just exactly that. Lists and measurements. They are distinctly human endeavors.
they do serve a purpose I guess.
But given that, I think that if a way were designed to measure happiness, one that was:
not intrusive to the respondent
reasonably accurate
It might provide a different way of measuring progress.
Or not. I dunno.
Suddenly I see someone in a dark basement cubicle at the Pentagon, using the data and crunching the numbers to derive the meaning that we need to be more unhappy if the Armed Services are to be staffed by volunteers sufficiently motivated to carry out orders to kill the . . . umm . . . enemy . . .
Zen, let me mull this over for a minute.
take all the time you need.
I am not at home so I am going to try to do this from memory. In 88 BCE, Mithradates orchestrated the wholesale slaughter of 80,000 Romans and Italians in one day. I want to say this went down in at least 12 cities but may have been more than that. Without a cell phone and without rumors floating anywhere. One day. It has been said that in the middle of a riot or war that people could flee to a temple and be safe. People believed that. They still do. They were not spared.
That was slick. He didn't need a happiness survey from either party to get the people to rise up or to know where to strike.
Economic instability and a good scapegoat is enough. If you can get enough people to buy into a glorious afterlife to become martyrs--that is the cherry on top. If not, then dehumanizing the enemy will suffice.
No cell phones . . .
that was slick.
So ok, we ditch the happiness survey . . .
now . . . about them repelicans . . . .
; D
now . . . about them repelicans . . . .
Ya!!! I am going as fast as I can. Damn my one minute to post.
Yes indeed. That one minute does suck pond water.
In any case . . .
I'm hoping for an examination of Mithradates tactics and methods, that we might better understand exactly what is possible, even without the benefits of modern technology . . .
hehehe
yeah. :D
LoL!
I see you may be as sick and twisted as I am.
I think I like that.
I'm tempted to ask - just where do you suppose it all ends?
But the fact is that is not in our hands, is it . . .
I'm tempted to suggest that in some small way I find that fact is comforting - and this knowledge leads to a certain disquiet - yet I remain - strangely . . .
comforted
so.
how sick is that, really?
Who says we are prohibited from donning Machiavelli hats? Genghis Khan was only a barbarian if you got your ass kicked or were afraid of getting your asked kicked.
There are several roads to be taken and many uncontrollable variables that could alter any given course. That is the point of destabilization. Hedging bets. Well, here we are.
precisely because it is not in our hands
Run 'em out or die trying.