A "Happiness Index?" WTF? WTF?

[LongTomH]

Hey, did you hear the one about the politician, whose policies were based on how much pain he could inflict on his people, who then asked them: "Are you happy?" A sadistic joke? Yeah, but it's real, sort of. At least as real as anything in these Orwellian times.

It seems that David Cameron, the Conservative Prime Minister who has been at the forefront on those telling the majority of the British public that they must accept 'sacrifices' for the good of the country, now wants to measure how "Happy" those same citizens feel. He wants the Office of National Statistics (ONS) to add questions on happiness and well being to its regular surveys of citizens.

Bloody Hell!, as our British cousins would say!

Following quotes are from a segment by David Brancaccio on the Marketplace portion of the National Public Radio website:

David Brancaccio: First, let's address a prejudice. Isn't measuring happiness all a bit mushy? British Prime Minister David Cameron was questioned about this when he called for the new British happiness assessment last November.

David Cameron: If I thought this was woolly and insubstantial, I would not be bothering on a Thursday morning when I have got lots of other things to do -- I have got the Swedish prime minister turning up for lunch -- I wouldn't be bothering with it!

Cameron, a conservative, says measuring progress is not just about how the economy is growing: it's how lives are improving to create a "more family-friendly country." As for happiness equals fluffiness, some academics now prefer "subjective well-being," or SWB, to confer gravitas.

The Express.co.uk article has similar rhetoric (Doublespeak, spin-doctoring, etc):

At its launch last November Prime Minister David Cameron argued that the Gross Domestic Product (GDP, the standard measure of economic activity used around the world) was an incomplete way of measuring the nation’s progress.

He quoted US Senator Robert Kennedy who once said GDP measured everything “except that which makes life worthwhile"

Bloody Hell, Indeed! However, not everyone is feeling pink and fluffy (back to the Marketplace.org segment):

Gail Cartmail: It almost feels like a cruel joke.

Gail Cartmail, the number two person at UNITE, Britain's largest labor union, says her government's track record is more about the pain of budget-cutting.

Cartmail: How can we talk about measuring happiness when over a million jobs are going to be knocked out of our economy due to the financial decisions made by this government? That's 600,000 public sector jobs, 700,000 private sector jobs.

Ironic isn't it? It's almost like those cartoons with prisoners chained to the wall and a torturer walks in asking: "And how are we today?"

[bhikkhu]

1. Rating a country's livability and effectiveness of government by GDP is a failure

hence the push to look rather at the quality of people's lives and the contribution of government to people's happiness, rather than their yearly financial output.

I believe the idea began in Bhutan many years ago - "Gross National Happiness" - as the royals there looked for ways to modernize without all the alienation and miseries of the west.

I think its a wonderful approach, and a much better way of looking at things.

[Populist_Prole]

2. You're right, it's BS. GDP is just total money spent, regardless of the situation why

For example, money spent on cancer treatment counts toward the GDP. Does that mean the sicker we are the happier we are?

What about money spent building prisons, defending against criminal accusations, even military ops abroad? Doesn't seem to really increase happiness here.

[Lorien]

3. It's been used in Bhutan since 1972:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_national_happiness