Recently OECD published its ‘Better Life Index’ which tries to understand why high incomes do not always translate into high levels of happiness. The indicators included housing, life satisfaction, governance etc. It is hope that such understanding will result in beneficiary policy outcomes.
It was found that Intangible factors such as psychological well-being, health, culture, living standards, time use and community vitality do matter to most people other than economic indicators such as income and employment. Happiness can be defined more by the softer, qualitative dimensions. Neither the ability to acquire nor the actual acquisition of material things often leads to sustainable increase in happiness. Possessions increase, so do people expectations.
If buying tangible things does not generate sustainable happiness, what will? It seems that experiences out weight material goods in generating happiness. Most material possessions do not involve other people. People tend to describe themselves by the activities they engage in, rarely do they define themselves by the houses they live in, watches they wear. Deep inside their hearts they know that these are superficial things. Attending a concert, going on holiday, going to the spa, dining at a famous restaurant are experiences that have a greater social value than acquisition of material possessions. It comes at no surprises that people are willing to pay top dollars to get such experiences which give them happiness (e.g. paying S$580 for Faye Wong’s concert). Nintendo Wii became so popular when it was first launched because it was then the only truly interactive entertainment. Even older women and those who did not normally play computer games became its fans. Intangible nature of such experiences also makes it almost impossible to compare.
What then are the implications for the policymakers here? Certainly paying $100 to go to casino is not likely that kind of experience that can bring a person happiness. It is true that most Singaporeans after their material things are satisfied, they want more intangible things in order to be happy. The recent general election was originally thought by some to be one of no ‘hot issues’ since we achieved high economic growth and full employment. The results turned out otherwise, causing serious soul-searching among the policymakers.
I once asked my youngest sister why she and her family are not keen to migrate here. She gave me a very thought-provoking answer: she did not wish her children spending leisure time mostly on shopping. In Malaysia, she can drive them far away from the city to be near to the nature. My eldest daughter still talking and sharing excitedly her living experience in Tokyo even though it was already more than half-a-year ago. I think we do need more parks, museums, arts galleries of that kind to make Singaporeans happy. Of course, one can also be happy with experiences that do not come with a price tag, e.g. watching sunset,or sharing one’s precious time with the needy.
Your blog on 'Happiness' reminds me of Maslow's Hierarchy of needs which would sum up what constitute happiness for the man in the street. Once we have achieved our needs, we want to move on to the next level and the next, for a more contented and happy life. None of these will last because we keep wanting more and so long as we're still 'of the world', our happiness will not be complete. Ultimately, our spiritual happiness can only be achieved by 'Fear God and keep His commandments'. The writer of the Eccl is certainly a wise man and I believe this is the eternal happiness that we should pursue and this has NO 'price tag' too.
ReplyDelete