Happiness and Inequality

Wall Street Journal ^ | 22 October 2007 | ARTHUR C. BROOKS

[shrinkermd]

Nothing in the Democrats' current domestic platform is more prominent than redressing income inequality. All of the major Democratic candidates believe that conservatives have purposively rolled back income equality....Liberal columnists routinely express this conspiratorial point of view, suggesting that conservatives want to dismantle all of the institutions of the New Deal and Great Society.

...The Democrats are correct that income inequality in America has increased over the decades. The U.S. Census Bureau, for example, measures this by using a "Gini coefficient," in which zero indicates no inequality (all incomes are the same) and one is perfect inequality (one person has all the income). Over the past 40 years, the Gini coefficient in this country has increased by a quarter, to .47 today from .39 in 1970. In European countries, Gini coefficients generally sit below .30, indicating substantially less income inequality.

Yet income is just one item of importance in the lives of Americans. There are many others -- from love to faith to happiness -- that we care about, some of them far more. Egalitarians never ask if we suffer from inequality in these areas. If they did, they might be pleasantly surprised.

...For example, the 2004 General Social Survey's measure of happiness generates a coefficient for the inequality of American happiness of .18, while the 2002 International Social Survey Programme produces a coefficient of .20. These are lower than are found anywhere else in the world. Moreover, while the average happiness level in America has not changed much since the early 1970s (and remains above that of most of our European allies), the inequality in our happiness has fallen by about a point since then.

[ConservativeMind]

Must read ping for later.

[gridlock]

This Democrat obsession with income inequality is the same class warfare BS warmed over, yet again. If everybody is doing better, that is a good thing, right? The fact that some might be doing better than others is not really material.

If I have a Lamborgini, it doesn’t take anything away from your shiny new Chevrolet. Taking away my Lamborgini might make you feel better, but if you have to trade in your new Chevy for a used Hyundai to do it, you are not really coming out ahead.

[neodad]

Liberal columnists routinely express this conspiratorial point of view, suggesting that conservatives want to dismantle all of the institutions of the New Deal and Great Society.

Works for me.

[LowCountryJoe]

No one ever talks about the inequality in those countries that have a socialist/communist economies? Those with seats at the table of power have everything.

[gridlock]

I linked a New York Times thumb-sucker last week, that reported that cancer deaths were declining across-the-board, for all sectors of society.

Of course, good news is bad news for the Times, so they then spent half the article saying that the declining rates were bad news because although everybody was healthier, the rates were not declining as fast for Arctic Eskimos as they were on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. I kid you not.

[gridlock]

No one ever talks about the inequality in those countries that have a socialist/communist economies? Those with seats at the table of power have everything.

North Korea must be getting pretty close to a GINI number of 1.0.

Ain't Socialism Grand!

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

All of the major Democratic candidates believe that conservatives have purposively rolled back income equality

There are two things that contribute to income inequality. Hard work (for some), and laziness (for the rest).

[squarebarb]

I suspect a great deal of the decline in equality, whatever that means, is the influx of very poor illegal immigrants.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Its the envy button, plain and simple. Libs believe we have a limited number of cars, dollars, food, etc.

[Lucky Dog]

The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries --- Winston Chruchill

[yldstrk]

Sloth, ignorance and immorality have done their share of rolling back income equality, too. That is not to discount legitimate bad fortune or heroism of our veterans or crime victims all of which should be addressed.

[Calvin Locke]

I heard some professor of something on a science show theorize that everybody’s happiness could be increased with more income redistribution. “Rich people are unhappy because they have too many choices to make, and poor people are unhappy because they don’t have enough choices to make. So, my idea is to decrease the choices open to the rich by taking away their means to have more choices, and to give ..., and if I am right, [actually, whether I’m right or wrong, it doesn’t matter because I’ll get the Nobel Peace Prize with its big payout, suckers]”.

[gridlock]

Any time an argument so closely fits what somebody has wanted to do all along, I am suspicious. Like with Global Warming...

[gridlock]

Liberal columnists routinely express this conspiratorial point of view, suggesting that conservatives want to dismantle all of the institutions of the New Deal and Great Society.

SHHHHH! It's supposed to be a SECRET!!!.