So David Brooks thinks he might know something about what makes people happy.
As is standard in his "pseudo-social-pysch" columns, Brooks takes one part second hand data, one part ideological spin, one part goofy insincerity, one part cant, one part pomposity and throws them together into a barely readable word gruel.
However, as with chimps writing Hamlet, today he is on to some interesting ideas about the connection between wealth and happiness.
More on that over the fold ...
Not surprisingly Brooks pretty much draws exactly the wrong conclusions with regard to the research on happiness and social well being, while simultaneously undermining the basic assumptions and principles of NCE (Neo-Classical Economics) as divined most darkly by Milton Friedman and practiced most brutally by the Chicago Boys.
Here Brooks makes two observations based on his reading of the data ...
The United States is much richer than it was 50 years ago, but this has produced no measurable increase in overall happiness. On the other hand, it has become a much more unequal country, but this inequality doesn’t seem to have reduced national happiness.
... that very likely confuse correlation with causality.
That Brooks draws a causal linkage between the quantitatively provable increase in wealth/income inequality and a flatlining of gross nation happiness ignores all the other factors (positive and negative) that impact individual and collective happiness.
And how does this strange bit of writing (for Brooks) square with Brooks' conservative principles and political proclivities ...
If you want to find a good place to live, just ask people if they trust their neighbors. Levels of social trust vary enormously, but countries with high social trust have happier people, better health, more efficient government, more economic growth, and less fear of crime (regardless of whether actual crime rates are increasing or decreasing).
... which sounds more like a sweet socialist paradise tucked away in the back alleys of Copenhagen or Park Slope than the walled compounds or private estate ghettos of Greenwich, Boca or Belair.
If DB were to talk this way at a Tea Party rally or Sarah Palin book signing he'd be ridden out of town on rail with the word socialist branded on his forehead.
But the absolute best quote is this ...
This may be changing. There is a rash of compelling books — including "The Hidden Wealth of Nations" by David Halpern and "The Politics of Happiness" by Derek Bok — that argue that public institutions should pay attention to well-being and not just material growth narrowly conceived.
... which singularly undermines the basis for NCE and the so-called Regan Revolution, that was at its core, much ado about lower taxes and MORE MONEY!!!! MORE MONEY!!!! MORE MONEY!!!! MORE MONEY!!!! MORE MONEY!!!!
Brooks is nothing if not inconsistent or ideologically incoherent, but to follow his lead there's some really interesting work on happiness and welfare going on in the field of ecological economics. People like Herman Daly and Robert Costanza and Joshua Farley and Marta Ceroni and others are working on ideas and tools like the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) that move us away from the old NCE paradigm of GROWTH (as measured by GDP) at any cost, to one that measures human development, natural capital and social welfare.
Thanks Mr. Brooks for your upside down look at something that is actually very important to a shared progressive future.