The Happiness Thread

[luiz]

This seems to be yet another ranking on human development, not so much on the abstract concept of happiness. I'm very suspicious of a ranking that says Scandinavians arw happier than Latin Americans. I get that they are richer, more egalitarian, less corrupt, less violent, etc. But happier? I don't think so. Maybe they whine less, which is why they rank higher in self reported happiness rankings.

 

[Hehehe]

In general I agree that the working class people have been hit relatively harder by globalization, unemployment, immigration and welfare cuts (cuts which come at a time when people need them the most).
But if I take the UN investigation as a good base to go into specifics of the Netherlands:
And I keep in mind that in the Dutch analysis the bulk of the classic political parties is averaging at 81% happiness and the PVV at 58%, a gap of 23%.

From my post #3 in this thread, the UN experts build up the average happiness of 75% in Netherlands with the following specific factors:

• 13% from GDP per capita (income)
• 13% from social support
• 10% from healthy life expextancy
• 7% from freedom to make life choices (I understand that as immaterial life choices)
• 3% from generosity
• 3% from perception of corruption
• 26% from "other" factors

The only real hard factor is GDP per capita, which on a domestic scale converts to 13% income effect.

Social support is very good in NL and the minimum wage pretty high, unemployment low. Healthy life expextancy: the poorer people do indeed live shorter and are less fit on average, but sorry to say, this is mostly from less exercise/fitness, from bad eating habits, watching TV etc much more, etc. So most factors again not directly related to income, but to character willpower and culture.
The other three factors, 3% from corruption perception, 7% from immaterial freedom, 3% from generosity are imo for all the same, although a Geert Wilders is ofc hammering on corruption in his message.
So... even if that 13% of income would fully apply for the poorer working class as difference in happiness, there is still 23% gap to explain !

I can agree that the perception of the poorer class is differing from a rational opinion for all factors.
And that's exactly the message of the PVV and related newsmedia, although they normally hammer by lack of facts on criminality and the excess luxuries and scandals of celebrities, which are not at all representative for the dutch reality and culture. And ofc on the fear to lose "it all" because of refugees (and by that repeated message increasing the fear to lose it all, decreasing actively the happiness of the citizens who believe in that fear !!!).

I guess what I would contest here is how would you go about disentangling all of those potential factors? From your earlier post, it seemed like income and happiness formed a fairly linear relationship, and PPV was at the bottom of both of those metrics. And even if income only explains 13% of the happiness for all of Netherlands on average, can it explain more for PPV voters? And there may be other things beyond income that explain the differences. I imagine that PPV voters haven't been treated kindly by the media or the public at large? Could that have an effect?

I think that the PVV cs are exactly messaging a cultural change in their (potential) voter base that is amplifying and even creating part of a deeper societal change.
Facebook their prime communication medium.

Completely in line with the Breitbart doctrine that you get your political change when you control the cultural change
and in line with the thoughts of that evil/awfull succes of that Facebook wizkid Christoper Wylei of Cambridge Analytica advicing political parties of all colors (including GreenLeft of NL ).

Here, too, I wonder about the cause and effect. Is PPV creating empty fears? Or is PPV responding to existing fears? We have the Putnam studies, which suggest that diversity lowers cohesion, social capital, trust and happiness. At least in Finland, we also have data that suggests that people living in diverse parts of the city are more likely to vote for populists. I agree with you that there definitely is a correlation here, I'm just not as sure about the causality.

 

[Hrothbern]

I guess what I would contest here is how would you go about disentangling all of those potential factors? From your earlier post, it seemed like income and happiness formed a fairly linear relationship, and PPV was at the bottom of both of those metrics. And even if income only explains 13% of the happiness for all of Netherlands on average, can it explain more for PPV voters? And there may be other things beyond income that explain the differences. I imagine that PPV voters haven't been treated kindly by the media or the public at large? Could that have an effect?

That can very well be the case to a unknown size. And for certain, based on (many) anekdotical interviews with PVV voters: they feel not respected for their concerns by the mainstream authorities (government, civil society, higher level media)
There is BTW one commercial TV-company (SBS6) in practice fully dedicated to the popular base of the PVV (Geert Wilders) and the Forum voor Vrijheid en Democratie (Thierry Baudet)

Is PPV creating empty fears? Or is PPV responding to existing fears?

That's why I used both the words "amplifying" as "creating".
Which is strategy since time immemorial: you acknowledge, reword, the existing peoples gut sentiments (true or not ) amplify them, bend/direct/redefine them to your convenience. As if you are simply the spokesman only. But you have the steering wheel.
Whereby I am of the opinion that it belongs to good leadership, belongs to good statemanship to play down the sharp edges of citizens fears and to focus in your message on the positive perspective and way forward. Because you are in a responsible position and people look up to you. And that includes opposition parties.

Regarding Putnam: yes. Whereby noting some specifics in NL:
We have a history of handling big diversity with our tolerance.
The Netherlands was until WW2 a highly diverse society organised as separate "pillars" having each their own religion (or atheist liberal/socialistic), schools, press, political parties, sport clubs, jobs preferences for vacancies, BUT at a high practical tolerance level. The cultural segregation between those pillars was higher than the income differences within those pillars
Those pillar were crumbles in the wake of the secularisation and a new diversity has arisen from the remains of the old pillars, the generation differences and mostly from the the globalisation. The old tolerance culture under real pressure since the refugee issue, mostly because of public/social housing issues in my impression ("my kids cannot pay for a decent home because those are going to those @#$% refugees"). My guess is that if the NL would not have stopped building large volumes of public housing (for rent) for the poorer incomes in the 90ies, the PVV would have been much and much smaller (jobs were and are not really the issue)

All in all
Happiness seems as elusive to catch in a quantitative, manageable way as unhappiness.
So many factors involved.
And yet... I think it should be the ultimate purpose of a good democracy: govern in such a way that you maximise your people's happiness
Good enough reason to want to understand it better

 

[warpus]

Those countries always show up high on these lists. What I don’t understand about northern countries though is the extreme changes in winter summer light cycles. My sister just moved back from Denmark mostly because of this and she hated the weather. Sad it was always drab. People love sunshine, makes you happy, yet these dreary places always rank high.

The nordic countries have really good social safety nets and a really high quality of life. Dark and cold winters don't really make it crappy enough for people to overlook that. They've been living there for generations after all, they're used to it anyway. Plus I think in a place like Norway people still remember when things weren't quite so amazing.

When I was in Norway it seemed to me that the lifestyle there was a lot more relaxed than here in North America. Maybe that was just my own perception, but that was my own personal interpretation of the culture. People get a lot more time off from work, there is a lot more job safety, there is a crazy social safety net that looks after you if anything goes wrong, and when you retire you get an incredible pension. All of this combined allows you to put your attention on things like personal pursuits, family pursuits, etc. One thing that I thought was crazy was that in July (or August?) everybody just leaves. Businesses shut down and people leave their places of employment for up to a month. It's normal to do that there, you just go somewhere warm and you relax. Every year, like clockwork. Since incomes are so high and employee protections are so good, this puts little strain on people's finances, and they don't have to worry about their job not being there when they get back.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Plus I think in a place like Norway people still remember when things weren't quite so amazing.

There may be something to this. A while ago I read an article about China's growing middle class, and that some Chinese wonder what Americans are complaining about. The article pointed out that many Chinese still remember the Cultural Revolution and famine. It was their Great Depression, in a way. Here in the United States, the people who still remember the Great Depression and the Second World War - those dubbed "The Greatest Generation" and enshrined in our mythology for their perserverence - are very elderly, if they're even still alive. Most Americans don't remember seriously dark days.