dagblog - Comments for "Could an economic depression make us less depressed?"

Yeah, I was just thinking how

Bluesplashy — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:32:44 +0000

In reply to there are all types of mood

Yeah, I was just thinking how many moments of happpiness can a depressed person have before they are not depressed. But that is still slightly off topic. Now - your post about connecting wealth and happiness to GDP. I think the happiness of the people and the wealth of county may be something like the 'savings paradox' - what is good for the individual's economy is not necessarialy good for the national economy. There are many things that go into what makes people think they are happy. Here in this country we are bombarded with advertizements about products and chemicals that will make us happy. We need money to buy these products, if I don't have the money to buy them, I can't be happy. There is also finding out that what we thought was enough was not nearly enough. I think the percentage of people that were happy before will be the same percentage after this is over. How much happiness was there after the Great Depression?

Sorry D-man. Wasn't meant for

quinn esq — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:00:13 +0000

In reply to for some reason, i'm confused

Sorry D-man. Wasn't meant for you.

It's just that I swam for 10 years in this pond, and mainstream economics (and business) used to trot out a stream of (pathetically self-serving) arguments against alternative measures and debates around "happiness." THAT, for me, is the major voice I still hear on these debates - not the voices of those who favour more "happiness" or alternative measures. They're the ones "shooting at the line on the chart." I mean, 80% of the population "gets" that there's a problem here, the theoretical case is garbage, and yet... which measure is still on the front page? Theirs. And there's no objective or theoretical basis which would say theirs SHOULD be.

for some reason, i'm confused

Deadman — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:38:35 +0000

In reply to Let's turn this question

for some reason, i'm confused by your last statement. what does 'shooting at the line on the chart' mean?

as far as the rest of your comment, i totally agree. and that's kind of what I was getting at with the column. That we've seen GDP grow for much of this decade yet i don't know how much more satisified we became as a nation. maybe it's because most of the gains went to an increasingly narrow segment of society, maybe it's because the gains seemed as illusory and intangible as they turned out to be, or maybe it's because at some point, more wealth makes us less happy.

And that just maybe an economic downturn could get people to focus on other things that make them happy other than the relentless pursuit of wealth.

Yes. Yes. I am very much in

DF — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:33:21 +0000

In reply to Let's turn this question

Yes. Yes. I am very much in love with your comment.

Let's turn this question

quinn esq — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:13:18 +0000

In reply to Could an economic depression make us less depressed?

Let's turn this question around a bit. GDP. We track it as THE magical indicator of how well our societies are doing. We spend billions (sorry, trillions) working to increase it. Why? The economic texts ultimately have to tie consumption (and the value of having all those choices) with human "satisfaction." But GDP is a shite measurement system. Even Kuznets thought we were nuts for pumping it up to such great heights - "the welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measure of national income." It has its virtues, and I take it for what it is, but it does NOT have any clear connection to satisfaction, other than an extremely weak theory.

As for it being a poor measurement, just on its OWN terms, it doesn't get at non-market activities very well, or quality, or capture externalities, or income distribution or the production of bads or positional goods and on and on.... And for decades they've proposed alternatives, and though I'm not in love with any of them as the be all and end all, you woulda thunk we'd at least offer up periodic comment on how these other metrics moved. But we don't. It's all GDP.

So why are we shooting at the line on the chart which tracks the "happiness" measurement, when the OTHER one functions as a proxy for the same set of human feelings/conditions?

there are all types of mood

Deadman — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 15:31:51 +0000

In reply to Do depressed people have

there are all types of mood disorders and degrees of depression, but i think that people who suffer from major depressive disorder probably experience very few moments of joy. i probably am more referring to a general malaise than depression in this post but the word just fit nicely because it has double meaning!

Do depressed people have

Bluesplashy — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 02:29:19 +0000

In reply to Could an economic depression make us less depressed?

Do depressed people have moments of happiness?

But what are you measuring?

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 21:13:00 +0000

In reply to my brain is exploding.im

But what are you measuring? My point is that there are many ways to define happiness--a feeling, a neurological state, a behavioral response, or an external condition. And it can be absolute or relative. All the definitions have flaws b/c in my opinion, the concept of happiness is inherently vague and ambiguous.

But anyone who tries to measure happiness must choose from among these candidates, and which one they choose will dramatically change the results. Thus, the studies disputing the Easterlin paradox are not necessarily better studies; they're just using a different definition of happiness.

So an economic depression may make you happier in some ways, by constraining your freedom of choice as you suggest, and unhappier in some ways, by stressing you out and undermining your finanical security. Any attempt to come up with some comparable happiness quotient that somehow weighs all of these factors reliably is a fool's quest.

my key point is that once a

Deadman — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 20:42:00 +0000

In reply to I really like how

my key point is that once a society is wealthy enough to offer its citizens the ability to afford basic necessities of life and maybe a few nice luxuries like running water and IPods, there is a limit to the additional happiness that additional wealth provides and at some level, the relationship begins to reverse.

I may want some of the options that wealth provides, but i dont want to be overwhelmed with options. I may feel confused or regretful.

I may want some of the free time that wealth provides, but if i have too much, i may feel unproductive or unfulfilled.

And I certainly think that a society whose increased wealth confers to the few versus the many - in the form of increased income inequality - is unlikely to see satsifaction levels rise. (which is what i think has happened here in the States during the past decade)

i'm not sure a depression would make us happier as a nation. But it could level the playing field a bit. And it would certainly force us to consider other things that make us happy aside from wealth. Families, friends, leisure, culture, a fulfilling career, etc.

i certainly think the affects of a prolonged downturn would be a bit mixed.

Just take a look at how a city like New York could change in such a scenario - certainly crime would likely increase, so people who value security would find it less pleasant of a place, and some nice stores and restaurants would go out of business so people who value fine goods may not like the city as much, but it would also become more affordable again, allowing more artists to return to the city and entertainment prices would come down, so people who value culture may like the city more, it would also probably make it easier for more diverse people to live here so people who value diversity would probably appreciate that. maybe other industries aside from advertising and finance would begin to flourish, making the city overall a more vibrant, exciting place.

however, just as I think there is a limit to increased satisfaction with increased wealth on the upside, i think the same is true on the downside. obviously, if nyc became a rat-infested, crime-ridden trash dump where it wasn't safe to walk around at night again, then i think it's quite clear that satisfaction levels would decrease dramatically.

my brain is exploding.im

Deadman — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 20:27:17 +0000

In reply to Do you? I have sometimes

my brain is exploding.im going to try a paragraph-by-paragraph reply cuz there are some interesting thoughts in there.

1-2) i agree, certainly one's views on how happy they were (or how in love they were) can change when looking at past moments in hindsight because i believe both concepts are relative. also like love, there isn't a simple 'yes-no' answer when it comes to happiness. there are degrees, and gradations, and even moments in timewhere you may feel more or less happy or more and less in love.

There certainly is no good measuring stick for judging someone else's happiness. I know psychologists have a lot of ways to try and diagnose depression, but they're far from precise.

3) That's true - as I've said, happiness is relative. my definition or baseline level may be way different than yours, but i'm going to somewhat agree with DF here in that i don't think happiness' relativity totally invalidates it as a concept that can be self-reported and have some value as a guide in determining how satsified a nation's citizens are. certainly, trends moving higher or lower should have real value (ie it still means something if the danes satisfaction level falls to 9.7 from 9.9, even if the saddest danes are still happier than the happiest rwandans).

4) again, is happiness an emotion or just a complex chemical reaction. same with love. my guess is if its the latter and you feel like crying, you'll see that and be able to measure it on your brainscan.

the latter question gets to the philosophical idea of do we need to feel sadness to feel happiness... do we need to feel pain to feel joy ... i say yes, because you need a baseline upon which to judge variations, and you can only feel the extreme of any emotion if you know what the other extreme feels like.

5-6) the idea i assume with the satisfaction surveys is that when you aggregate data from a wide spectrum of people, you are somehow incorporating ALL the different ways people perceive they get satisfaction. Individually, what makes me happy may be far different than what makes my neighbor happy, but with enough datapoints, you can probably make a conclusion that a society with high self-reported satisfaction levels offers its citizens a bunch of goodies - wealth, leisure time, good food, freedoms, etc. etc. (damn, there i go agreeing with DF again).

7) bobby mcferrin had it wrong. lower your expectations, fear the worst, and then you'll be happy.