Alles ofzo Flashcards
- So, how did Adam Smith understand happiness?
- The conflict between the wish to improve our life (as an engine of economic development!) and ‘tranquility and enjoyment’ as happiness
‘Commercial society’
Dat je geluk afhangt van de maatschappij en de mening van anderen. Als je veel verdient maar de buren verdienen meer, word je ongelukkiger.
Mandeville’s Fable of the Bees
Kapitalisme werkt niet, want moralisme loont niet.
Happiness paradox
We moeten ons ongelukkig voelen om gelukkig te worden. Want vanuit daar ontstaat innovatie
Hoe deze paradox op te lossen?
- For Smith, liberty and security promoted by commercial society are more important than wealth!- Conversion factors
- Perfect happiness in unattainable (we depend on the others!)
- Preventing misery is more important than improving happiness
- So a crucial factor to look at is how the government promotes happiness
- Less misery means more safety and freedom from the direct dependence on others
Hoe kom je bij die goede maatschappij?
- In a commercial society envisioned by Smith (but not before!), both rich and the poor enjoy liberty and security
- And hence can be equally happy!
- This happened after the lords lost the power in exchange for luxuries
- Competition matters! It reduces the dependency on the others
- The desire for luxuries is a salvation, ending the oppressions of the lords
o Increases the happiness as an unintended consequence! - A social explanation!
- What matters is that ‘commercial society’ is able to deliver higher levels of liberty and security
- So, with the progress it is not the case that we get happier because we are becoming richer
- And we do not necessarily get unhappier because of our pursuit of material welfare!
from 1930:
preference satisfaction
as the best guide to well-being (what is good for the person)
- Preference satisfaction bears no necessary connection to any mental state
o Satisfying preferences does not always make me happier
o I may even prefer something that is bad for me
Probleem:
- Preferences might change (also after policies)
o Should we educate people to have easily satisfiable preferences? - Preferences can be based on false beliefs
- They can contradict each other
- Preference can by antisocial, expensive etc.
- Where do preferences come from?
When the preferences of oppressed people derive from their oppression, one cannot measure their welfare by considering how well their preferences are satisfied. - One solution: rational/well-informed preferences
- But this makes the whole issue even more complicated: it is difficult to gather infos on utility
- Non welfarism
o Fairness, freedom, civil rights, equity, solidarity, distributional concerns
o Primary goods, resources, capabilities, advantages, rights, freedom of choice , so infos about societies beyond individual information
o Multidimensional idea of individual welfare
- So, GDP became so prominent and durable because
(3 redenen)
o It has become part of the intellectual infrastructure of growth and development, a technical thing supporting economists’ and policymakers work on epistemic things
o It had political support from the nation states and international organizations
o It reinforced the idea of universal (capitalist) order and made the developing countries willing to get included there
Easterlin Paradox
- Result: we are not becoming happier with the growth of income
Want mensen vergelijken. Als iedereens inkomen groeit, verandert de hele standaard, waardoor het vermogen wel groeit, maar jet geluk niet. Mensen willen dan ook meer gaan verdienen omdat ze denken dat de nieuwe standaard normaal is.
Subjective well-being (SWB): key aspects
- Its important component is attributable to genetic variation (up to 40%)
- The major conceptual distinction:
o Cognitive aspect: what people think of their life, life evaluation/satisfaction
o Emotional/affective aspect: how do people feel about their life, emotional well-being/happiness
Problemen SWB
- The link between things we care about (education, health..) and happiness/SWB is not always clear
- How to handle ‘happy peasants and miserable millionaires’?
- Assume we believe that happiness is the ultimate goal in life?
- What to do with
o Expensive/ambitious preferences?
Adapt the individual goals by seeking psychological support (questionable from the policy perspective!)
o Incommensurability of individual life goals?
But we have a happiness index!
o Adaptation
Then focus on what people do not adapt to! (pain, noise) - Affective scores of the SWB are shown to be less dependent on the objective conditions and more prone to adaptation
- Cognitive scores appear to be more difficult to measure, more dependent on current mood, framing of the question etc.
- Cross-cultural differences (at odds with genetic theory!)
o Different meanings of happiness (the result of luck or achievement/harmony or success) - Framing biases
- Mood (overemphasized)
o We focus on something and forget the rest, or discount the rest
Ook: claimen dat geluk het enige is waar mensen naar streven is fout. Mensen zoeken naar meer dan alleen geluk.
What do (LISS) data say?
- If someone want to enjoy life, he/she must be prepared to work hard for it
o Majority of people agree to it - I feel happiest after working hard
o Most of the people agree
Werkeloos zijn is vrijwillig want…
o People do not work because they enjoy leisure more than working
o Involuntary unemployment does not exist
There are plenty jobs available for those who really want to work
De opportuniteitskosten van niet werken zijn dus hoger dan van wel werken
Supply perspective
o How many people are willing to do a particular kind of job for a particular level of remuneration
Many people willing to work for international NGOs even without pay
Jobs in meat-processing industry are less popular
o Supply goes up remuneration goes down (and vice versa)
