The takeaway from this post: keep trying to simplify; get rid of stuff ; don't use the car; don't waste time, treasure each moment of each day, especially those moments spent with people you love; eat low on the food chain and eat locally grown food; donate to good causes and find ways to help others, especially those who are suffering in any way. Sweat; it's good for you. Use a fan instead of the AC. Happy summer!
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Haves and have nots and global warming
With my last post (my one and only), you could say I anticipated the Occupy Wall Street movement, with my comments about the haves and have nots whilst trying to put the economic struggles of our times into a historical perspective. Turns out that this issue is very germane to our times, more so than I'd have thought. It continues to be a big concern at least among those of a Democratic (pun intended) persuasion in this election cycle as Romney and Obama duke it out. I despair over our country's values but am optimistic about Obama's re-election chances. I kind of have to be; otherwise I would just go into a complete funk right here and now. Summer is too wonderful and brief to obsess about the crazy and uninformed (and often uneducated) populace that supports giving tax breaks to the rich and milking the poor. And on the back burner (again, pun intended), folks are ignoring the speeding up of global warming as we are experiencing the hottest year on this planet in recorded history. Every day (almost), I fret about waste and energy consumption, as I continue to drive to the store, drive to my vacation destination, and use an air conditioner to be able to sleep at night. I do sweat during the day, turn off lights as I move through the house, and occasionally do manage to walk instead of drive, but I tend to take the path of least resistance in my life and go with the flow, and in being environmentally aware, I take the slow and gentle approach to energy conservation, recycling, and so forth. I do hope there is a reasonable world left for my children and grandchildren to live in; I fear the worst, and live my life hoping that things will not be so terrible for all of our sakes. We willfully put blinders on in order to get through the next day and next week and next year, to plan for our events and celebrations, weddings and family reunions, the next day's dinner, that job we hope to get down the road, the bills that loom today. After all, there's still time tomorrow to do what we ought to be doing to save our world, And nobody else seems to care or to be concerned, so maybe we're wrong, wrong to worry. I doubt it, as I slowly try to change my life to reflect my beliefs about the world and to find a "best" way to live.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
What Does Economics Have to do with Happiness?
Money can’t buy happiness. This is a very old idea, but one to which we tend to give little more than lip service. In a recent article that appeared in"The Chronicle of Higher Education," John Quiggin argues in "The Economics of Unhappiness" (to simplify greatly; see article in full for a more nuanced reading) that before the advent of the Industrial Revolution, economics played almost no role in the happiness equation. The standard of living from 2,000 BC to the early 1700s was pretty static. With economic growth came inequalities in material well-being, and “economic unhappiness” has been one result. Another, which is a different story, is that prosperity has brought with it environmental degradation.
One can’t erase history, nor would one necessarily want to. In many, perhaps most, societies in the course of human history there have been hierarchies organized into the haves and have-nots, although the point that Quiggen is making is that the vast majority of people simply did not have much, nor did they aspire to more. Most people, today, embrace a life of increased comfort and less physical toil that has been brought about by modern technology. People can be more productive and waste less energy in backbreaking labor or tedious toil. However, for the average citizen, the change to an age of great prosperity has brought about a case, on a large scale, of citizenry jumping on the “hedonic treadmill” (adapting to what you have and wanting more). This is due largely to the perception that if you don’t keep attaining more in the way of material goods, your neighbors, the Joneses, will have more than you. The perception that you have less leads to “economic unhappiness.”
Given that Quiggins is writing for an education journal, one solution to “economic unhappiness,” for him, lies in education, and he discusses the ideas of Bartolini, an Italian economist, at length. Bartolini argues for an education based on the “intrinsic enjoyment of learning and creation rather than on the “extrinsic goals of money, jobs, and social status.” With a renewed focus on testing and “no child left behind” policies, perhaps this is seen as a new idea. As an educator and former teacher myself, I can’t conceive of any good teacher not being concerned with inspiring in children a love of learning for its own sake. In addition, education is no panacea. Naturally, it’s a good place to try to implement societal change, but education and those being educated tend to reflect the larger society. There’s only so much that can be placed on education in terms of reforming a society.
A different kind of education is promoted by Buddhism and the Dalai Llama. This is the education and training of the mind through meditation and disciplined action. In the Dalai Llama’s book, "How to Practice: The Way to a Meaningful Life," he states that to be happy, you should aspire to simplicity in food, clothing, and shelter. Much as I revere the Dalai Llama and his teachings, I know I am not ready to embrace Buddhism entirely. I am not yet ready to relinquish my preoccupation with eating well (healthy, organic, vegetarian, gourmet), trying to dress stylishly in my own very modest way, and working (together with my husband) on our very old and very comfortable house in order to maintain and improve it. What is life without the small daily pleasures? We live comfortably (something I am grateful for every day), but relatively modestly. We live in keeping with the style of the majority of our neighbors, i.e., a middle class life style. We do, in our way, I suppose, “keep up with the Joneses.” But I do worry; I worry that this style of life is unsustainable (the environment) or unfair (the poor and unfortunate). So every day, despite my grateful attitude, I have a guilty conscience, and wish I could do with less, especially if it meant that those who suffer would suffer less and that the environment could be saved. With the exception of those special people who fully live their convictions, most people live with conflicting values and lives full of contradictions. I certainly do, how about you?
To return to the idea of the economics of happiness (or unhappiness) on a larger scale, there is the idea that countries should adopt GNH (gross national happiness) as an alternative to GDP (gross domestic product) as a measure of a nation’s well-being. The tiny nation of Bhutan has done just that, and Nicolas Sarkozy (president of France) and Gordon Brown (British Prime Minister) are also interested in adopting GNH as at least part of their measures of national well-being, according to the article, Strategizing the Goals of GNH. Would you be in favor of the United States following suit? I know I would.
One can’t erase history, nor would one necessarily want to. In many, perhaps most, societies in the course of human history there have been hierarchies organized into the haves and have-nots, although the point that Quiggen is making is that the vast majority of people simply did not have much, nor did they aspire to more. Most people, today, embrace a life of increased comfort and less physical toil that has been brought about by modern technology. People can be more productive and waste less energy in backbreaking labor or tedious toil. However, for the average citizen, the change to an age of great prosperity has brought about a case, on a large scale, of citizenry jumping on the “hedonic treadmill” (adapting to what you have and wanting more). This is due largely to the perception that if you don’t keep attaining more in the way of material goods, your neighbors, the Joneses, will have more than you. The perception that you have less leads to “economic unhappiness.”
Given that Quiggins is writing for an education journal, one solution to “economic unhappiness,” for him, lies in education, and he discusses the ideas of Bartolini, an Italian economist, at length. Bartolini argues for an education based on the “intrinsic enjoyment of learning and creation rather than on the “extrinsic goals of money, jobs, and social status.” With a renewed focus on testing and “no child left behind” policies, perhaps this is seen as a new idea. As an educator and former teacher myself, I can’t conceive of any good teacher not being concerned with inspiring in children a love of learning for its own sake. In addition, education is no panacea. Naturally, it’s a good place to try to implement societal change, but education and those being educated tend to reflect the larger society. There’s only so much that can be placed on education in terms of reforming a society.
A different kind of education is promoted by Buddhism and the Dalai Llama. This is the education and training of the mind through meditation and disciplined action. In the Dalai Llama’s book, "How to Practice: The Way to a Meaningful Life," he states that to be happy, you should aspire to simplicity in food, clothing, and shelter. Much as I revere the Dalai Llama and his teachings, I know I am not ready to embrace Buddhism entirely. I am not yet ready to relinquish my preoccupation with eating well (healthy, organic, vegetarian, gourmet), trying to dress stylishly in my own very modest way, and working (together with my husband) on our very old and very comfortable house in order to maintain and improve it. What is life without the small daily pleasures? We live comfortably (something I am grateful for every day), but relatively modestly. We live in keeping with the style of the majority of our neighbors, i.e., a middle class life style. We do, in our way, I suppose, “keep up with the Joneses.” But I do worry; I worry that this style of life is unsustainable (the environment) or unfair (the poor and unfortunate). So every day, despite my grateful attitude, I have a guilty conscience, and wish I could do with less, especially if it meant that those who suffer would suffer less and that the environment could be saved. With the exception of those special people who fully live their convictions, most people live with conflicting values and lives full of contradictions. I certainly do, how about you?
To return to the idea of the economics of happiness (or unhappiness) on a larger scale, there is the idea that countries should adopt GNH (gross national happiness) as an alternative to GDP (gross domestic product) as a measure of a nation’s well-being. The tiny nation of Bhutan has done just that, and Nicolas Sarkozy (president of France) and Gordon Brown (British Prime Minister) are also interested in adopting GNH as at least part of their measures of national well-being, according to the article, Strategizing the Goals of GNH. Would you be in favor of the United States following suit? I know I would.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)