There is a well-known corollary here with happiness. People think that if they are million- or billionaires, or have a super-fit girlfriend, or drive a ridiculous car or live in a massive house or whatever they'll be happy, or at least happier. However all studies have shown that rich people are not happier than poor(er) people. And more interesting is people that have suffered catastrophic accidents or contracted disabling diseases: on average these people are no less happy than anyone else.

Living with no money is sure to impede happiness. When lack of money puts you living in a place that has higher crime / lower life expectancy, I would imagine happiness suffers.

I am curious on the studies on how they measured. People on different places on the survival pyramid must have been a consideration.

Your statement is just wrong. Angus Deaton at Princeton found "Each doubling of national income is associated with a near one unit increase in average life-satisfaction measured on an eleven point scale from 0 ('the worst possible life') to 10 ('the best possible life')". I'm all for deluding yourself with baseless platitudes to rationalize your lack of success, and then getting a Yeah! Yeah! rally of upvotes from people similarly situated, but please don't advance such falsity here.

I don't think the rude dismissal is warranted.

I think the point retube was trying to reference is that studies have shown that people vastly overestimate the magnitude and duration of changes in happiness due to a windfall or catastrophe (the most recent source I have for this is Dan Ariely's Upside of Irrationality). While there is a shift of overall life satisfaction, major changes are much less impactful to your long-term happiness than you would predict (presumably due to growing familiarity, adaptation, and the general "the grass is greener" bias we all have).

At any rate, I, specifically, would be happier without reading personally-attacking rebuttals on HN. Is that really needed to make your point?

thanks

Well this assumes that life-satisfaction is the same thing as happiness, and I'm not sure it necessarily is:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100701072652.ht...

"A worldwide survey of more than 136,000 people in 132 countries included questions about happiness and income, and the results reveal that while life satisfaction usually rises with income, positive feelings don't necessarily follow, researchers report."

And some further recent research on the matter reviewed here:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-money-b...

Basically - increasing wealth makes you immune to the smaller/simpler joys in life.

From the paper you quoted, this was also in the abstract:

"HIV prevalence in Africa has little effect on Africans’ life or health satisfaction"

which actually supports my other assertion that those with disabling diseases or conditions are no less happy than those more fortunate (assuming you equate life-satisfaction with happiness).

Are you saying that if I approach life in a happier and more satisfied mindset, odds are I will make more money? Sweet!

I am not saying that and the study is not saying that. Hijacking a statement through abandonment of context is a poor way to make a point amongst intelligent people.

Phrasing all of your comments in a negative and hostile manner is also a poor way to make a point amongst any kind of people.

I think that ending every night out at the bar with ice cream would probably make it less exciting.

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