On Happiness

It is interesting to follow the emerging new paradigm of behavioral economics and its work on happiness. Lots of arrogance (“the future of economics”) combined with feel-good theories like “average income does not correlate with the level of happiness in the society so it is not important”. The subsequent suggestion is that governments should care less about wealth.

Hmmm…

I agree with all the research that happiness is relative; basically we tend to define our level of happiness by comparing our situation with the people around us. This explains why people in the richer countries do not feel happier than people in poor countries.
But this cannot mean that the level of wealth makes no difference. Just ask a Swiss citizen how indifferent he would be to the prospect of becoming an average citizen of Albania.

Most importantly, (and I haven’t seen this in any relevant research or paper) we all use internal happiness benchmarks from our past. That means that extreme happiness almost requires some unhappiness in the past to function as a memory benchmark. For example, coming from a very poor family and becoming rich means more happiness than coming from a rich family and remaining rich, independent of the people around us.
And that is a big argument that money actually CAN make u happier, as long as you manage to change your life.

But my biggest problem with all this new “happiness paradigm” is that I believe that happiness is overrated.

Who would you prefer to be? An unhappy Alexander the Great or a happy junkie (with guaranteed endorphins, the neurotransmitters that make us happy), Aldus Huxley style? Look at the most important people in the human history, our childhood heroes: Napoleon, Pericles, Socrates, Jesus, Julius Caesar, Martin Luther King, Galileo, Columbus, van Gogh etc. How many of these you think would score high on a current happiness test?

The truth is that happiness as defined in all these papers doesn’t mean that much. Ask all these people that choose to suffer and can go to jail for their ideas, are willing to sacrifice their lives for their families or countries. For them the feelings of purpose, sacrifice for a moral end, making history, devotion to people or ideas, are all more important than bliss.

Even from a historical-evolutionary perspective, we see that societies that were rather relaxed and happy didn’t produce much and eventually disappeared: China, the world’s powerful nation in the 15th century entered a peaceful decadence until the sudden wakeup of the 19th century (after a handful of Europeans beat it). Ancient Greece, with its constant and bloody wars excelled; nothing comparable happened in the happier post-Alexander Hellenistic era. Contrast the peaceful Europe in Middle Ages with the turbulent Europe after Renaissance.

Men are not made to be happy. They are meant to be restless, strive for happiness, struggle for improvement, setting higher standards, expand the boundaries.
In that context, happiness is far from the ultimate end of human life.
Personally, I prefer the feeling of achievement with its many unhappy sacrifice requirements.

Reversing Braindrain

In the recent (Sep 06) Economist’s special report on global talent, there is a very interesting article on governments hunting talent (1) . The different policies are impressive. USA, UK, France, Canada, Australia, India, China, they are all more and more in the game of luring the ultimate scarce resource of modern economies. Surprise, surprise, Singapore is once more in the forefront.

I would really like to know what Greece’s policy on the issue is. But in a country that still debates whether it should allow private education, it is hard to imagine that there is any specific policy on attracting talent at all. Not only we are not proactive, but I suspect that currently we are gradually loosing abroad the precious domestic supply.

If we decide to get serious about it, there are three ways to increase our economy’s talent capacity:
1-Increase our domestic talent production by improving our educational system
2-Train our talent abroad. Send as many young Greeks as possible in the best universities and companies of the world and after a period manage to bring them back (2)
3-Import foreign talent

Concerning 2 and 3, the possible strategies would be:
-Provide direct incentives, like tax benefits, reduced military service for Greeks that manage to study in the top universities or work for specific companies.
-Provide indirect incentives, like a stimulating economy, friendly environment
-Improve the “Greece” brand, make talented people feel good to be Greek and live in Greece. It may sound weird because of its nationalist undertone, but let’s face it, in a globalized world with people mixing and living in different countries, the necessary (3) choice of a specific nationality will be similar to the choice of becoming a fan of a specific team, or to the choice of working for a specific company because of its brand (4).

In any case, the first step would be to put all the above in the agenda of public debate.


__________
(1) Non-subscribers feel free to ask me to send you the relevant piece
(2) Let’s not forget the benefits of remittance
(3) necessary for legal but mostly for psychological reasons
(4) Goldman Sachs employees famously accept a lower basic salary than the market average

Η εμπάθεια της WSJ –σχόλιο από ένα «φιλοαμερικάνο» φιλελευθέρο Ελλήνα

Διαβάζω συστηματικά την Wall Street Journal εδώ και 6-7 χρόνια και πραγματικά δεν θυμάμαι να έχει αναφερθεί ποτέ θετικά στην Ελλάδα, είτε προκείται για τους επιτυχημένους Ολυμπιακούς, είτε για οικονομικά ή αθλητικά επιτεύγματα, είτε τουλάχιστον να επικρότησει κάποιες φιλελεύθερες μεταρρυθμίσεις. Από την άλλη η ίδια εφημερίδα ήτανε πάντα πρώτη να υποστηρίξει την μη επιστροφή των μαρμάρων, το ιστορικό δικαίωμα της ΠΓΔΜ στο όνομα Μακεδονία κλπ. (1)

Μετά από πολύ καιρό, η WSJ έχει ξανά ένα op/ed για την Ελλάδα, και αυτή την φορά it pushes it too much. Αναφέρεται στην αφελή δήλωση του Κοντοπυράκη ότι το ανανεωμένο ΑΕΠ θα περιλαμβάνει και συγκεκριμένες παράνομες δραστηριότητες όπως λαθρεμπόριο, πορνεία και ξέπλυμα χρήματος. Το σχόλιο ξεκινάει με την διαπίστωση ότι οι έλληνες δεν έχουν να επιδείξουν κάποιο σημαντικό επίτευγμα εδώ και 17(sic) αιώνες, συνεχίζει με μπόλικη ειρωνεία και στο τέλος υπονοεί ή μάλλον λέει ξεκάθαρα ότι η Ελλάδα είναι γεμάτη νταβατζήδες και λαθρέμπορους. Η μοναδική ελπίδα μας σύμφωνα με την WSJ λοπόν να μειώσουμε το έλλειμμα είναι να αρχίσουν να πληρώνουν φόρους οι εγκληματίες μας.

Ίσως τα μοντέρνα επιτεύγματα των Ελλήνων να μην είναι ισάξια των παππούδων μας, αλλά σίγουρα προκαλούμε πολύ έντονα συναισθήματα στους δημοσιογράφους της WSJ. Η WSJ βέβαια έχει χάσει εδώ και καιρό κάθε αξιοπίστια με την εγκληματική αρνησή της κάθε ένδειξης global warming, την παντελώς άκριτη υποστήριξη του Ισραήλ, την αμετανόητη διάδοση των ψεμμάτων για πυρηνικά στο Ιράκ και σχέσεις του Σαντάμ με την Άλ-Καΐντα κλπ.

Αλλά με το σημερινό της editorial η WSJ πηγαίνει ένα σκαλί πιο χαμηλά.

_______________
(1) Ποιά είναι η πηγή αυτής της εμπάθειας;
Ίσως ο εξίσου γελοίος αντιαμερικανισμός στην Ελλάδα με αποκορύφωση τους αλήτες της 17 Νοέμβρη.
Ίσως οι μνήμες του τριτοκοσμικού Παπανδρεικού κράτους;
Ίσως κόμπλεξ με τα επιτευγμάτα των αρχαίων ελλήνων (χοντρό, αλλά τα υπονοούμενα στο σημερινό σχόλιο αυτό δείχνουν)
Ίσως επειδή μαζί με τους Γάλλους και τους Ιταλούς τους πέρνουμε τα καλλίτερα κορίτσια (αυτό ήταν αστείο)