What price happiness?
Poll: What price happiness?
Total Members Polled: 317
Discussion
ApexJimi said:
I'm viewing it as a question of what is the realistic minimum figure that would significantly change your life for the better, so I voted £100k.
This is also how I perceived the question put to us. My first home is in negative equity and my current rent/living expense is high for what I get in return, so £100k deposited in my bank overnight would enable me to start afresh with a new place and leave me with a reasonable mortgage to deal with and no other debt. I'd then be able to spend more of my salary on activities I enjoy doing which, in turn, would make me happier.ApexJimi said:
I'm viewing it as a question of what is the realistic minimum figure that would significantly change your life for the better, so I voted £100k.
Same for me really. Obviously more would be better, but £100K might not be enough to buy a really nice house, but you can get some pretty nice ones for not much more, and it would be one hell of a deposit, ensuring a tiny mortgage.As far as I'm concerned, just not having to pay rent (or at least, not much of it) would make a huge difference to my standard of living.
£500K and I'd be pretty sorted, I think. Nice house, nice car, all paid for. Nothing flash, just very comfortable.
SystemParanoia said:
so if you were given a blank cheque, told to write down any figure and it will be gaurentee'd to clear...
you would honestly only scribble down a 6 figure number?
Read my post again.you would honestly only scribble down a 6 figure number?
In fact, read the OP again - being given a blank cheque isn't what this thread is about.
i cant put a price on happiness as it is so valuable to me.
but to be truly happy in every aspect of your life, you need enough to never have to worry about money again to allow you to soothe every whim, whilst also never having to waste your live working when you could be spending it somewhere sunny/fun with friends and family.. whilst also having the financial power to give them the financial freedom that you yourself are enjoying.
so yeah.. billions please
but to be truly happy in every aspect of your life, you need enough to never have to worry about money again to allow you to soothe every whim, whilst also never having to waste your live working when you could be spending it somewhere sunny/fun with friends and family.. whilst also having the financial power to give them the financial freedom that you yourself are enjoying.
so yeah.. billions please
1point7bar said:
How can anyone be happy, if this means never sad.
People are attaching a graduation to a binary emotion in £s.
That's not what the question in the OP asks, implies or is about. The commentary acknowledges the limitations of surveys but people answer the questions in them as best they can, and so can we.People are attaching a graduation to a binary emotion in £s.
OP said:
The thread title would benefit from a bit more detail so here goes...
Assuming no other change will hit the spot, how much cash at bank would it take to boost that elusive happy feeling? Not annual income, cash...
As the suggested assumption implies, the aim isn't to debate what else makes us happy, we all know about health and friends and so on. This 2012 PH survey is intended to be a free and complementary follow-on from CMD's expensive research.
Assuming no other change will hit the spot, how much cash at bank would it take to boost that elusive happy feeling? Not annual income, cash...
As the suggested assumption implies, the aim isn't to debate what else makes us happy, we all know about health and friends and so on. This 2012 PH survey is intended to be a free and complementary follow-on from CMD's expensive research.
ApexJimi said:
In fact, read the OP again - being given a blank cheque isn't what this thread is about.
WojaWabbit managed OK too.
It's not a profound examination of the human condition. Just ATQ, decide not to, have a look in all the other threads instead, etc.
I count what's in my pension pot as part of cash in the bank, as basically all it is is tax efficient savings that you can't touch(yet)
So I'd be happy with £500 K. Which given that I'm going to "take up" smoking just before retirement, and paint my fingers yellow to look like tar, should be enough for a medicore and safe retirement.
So I'd be happy with £500 K. Which given that I'm going to "take up" smoking just before retirement, and paint my fingers yellow to look like tar, should be enough for a medicore and safe retirement.
turbobloke said:
WojaWabbit managed OK too.
It's not a profound examination of the human condition. Just ATQ, decide not to, have a look in all the other threads instead, etc.
And, can I have my fiver back?
Edited by 1point7bar on Tuesday 30th October 23:57
ApexJimi said:
I'm viewing it as a question of what is the realistic minimum figure that would significantly change your life for the better, so I voted £100k.
Significantly for the better - £12K for a really decent new powerchair would be a MASSIVE change. But being freed from depending on the state for the rest of my expected lifespan would be, er, rather a lot more than that. And that'd be the biggie really, having the safety of knowing no cut, budget 'reorganisation', 'initiative' or anything else could threaten my safety or my good-but-fragile quality of life... that'd be a very large sum of money indeed, but crikey it'd make a hell of a difference.
1point7bar said:
turbobloke said:
WojaWabbit managed OK too.
It's not a profound examination of the human condition. Just ATQ, decide not to, have a look in all the other threads instead, etc.
And, can I have my fiver back?
just commenting as you do on a forum BTW that fiver was claimed by another PHer some time ago.
A new piece of research concerning absolute income not a lump sum but the discussion widened some time ago anyway so time for a bump.
New Stylized Facts about Income and Subjective Well-being
Sacks DW, Stevenson B, Wolfers J.
Department of Business Economics and Public Policy, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.
Abstract
Economists in recent decades have turned their attention to data that asks people how happy or satisfied they are with their lives. Much of the early research concluded that the role of income in determining well-being was limited, and that only income relative to others was related to well-being. In this paper, we review the evidence to assess the importance of absolute and relative income in determining well-being. Our research suggests that absolute income plays a major role in determining well-being and that national comparisons offer little evidence to support theories of relative income. We find that well-being rises with income, whether we compare people in a single country and year, whether we look across countries, or whether we look at economic growth for a given country. Through these comparisons we show that richer people report higher well-being than poorer people; that people in richer countries, on average, experience greater well-being than people in poorer countries; and that economic growth and growth in well-being are clearly related. Moreover, the data show no evidence for a satiation point above which income and well-being are no longer related.
No evidence for a satiation point, that differs from previous research findings. Non-materialists may disagree.
New Stylized Facts about Income and Subjective Well-being
Sacks DW, Stevenson B, Wolfers J.
Department of Business Economics and Public Policy, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.
Abstract
Economists in recent decades have turned their attention to data that asks people how happy or satisfied they are with their lives. Much of the early research concluded that the role of income in determining well-being was limited, and that only income relative to others was related to well-being. In this paper, we review the evidence to assess the importance of absolute and relative income in determining well-being. Our research suggests that absolute income plays a major role in determining well-being and that national comparisons offer little evidence to support theories of relative income. We find that well-being rises with income, whether we compare people in a single country and year, whether we look across countries, or whether we look at economic growth for a given country. Through these comparisons we show that richer people report higher well-being than poorer people; that people in richer countries, on average, experience greater well-being than people in poorer countries; and that economic growth and growth in well-being are clearly related. Moreover, the data show no evidence for a satiation point above which income and well-being are no longer related.
No evidence for a satiation point, that differs from previous research findings. Non-materialists may disagree.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff