Hacker News Reader

Comment by tensor | Hacker News Reader

Actually it's extremely well documented in science studies that money absolutely makes you happy up to a certain point. Basically if you don't have a home and food due to not enough funds, then yes money absolutely equals happiness.

Inequality has grown to the point where the majority of younger people now have no hope of ever owning a home, and even large parts of the country are struggling with something as basic as food.

The HN crowd lives in a top 5% bubble and often forgets how bad it is for most people. All this talk of "money doesn't make happiness" is terrible. Money for basic necessities is the problem here.

View on HN

It goes a little further than “money for basic necessities”.

It’s about being able to provide the necessities AND having income security. I remember reading about a study that said poor people who have to scramble to deal with all of the extra steps that accompany being poor (no credit cards, maybe no bank account, dealing with getting utilities turned back on, etc) is the equivalent of losing about 15 IQ points from your optimal.

It’s the difference between being able to work “in the zone” / flow state frequently and being always stuck in “fight or flight” mode. One makes you successful while the other actively sabotages you.

No, happiness increases linearly with log(money), well beyond basic necessities https://happiness-science.org/price-of-happiness/

> Inequality has grown to the point where the majority of younger people now have no hope of ever owning a home

Please stop repeating this myth. Look further up the thread for gen Z homeowner statistics.

> in science studies that money absolutely makes you happy up to a certain point

Perceived happines. It's hard to talk about happines with a person with an empty stomach. But I was much more happy when I was young and poor than I became a not poor but no longer a young one.

> Perceived hapiness

Is there any other kind?

You can buy any bicycle[0] you want when you are rich but if you didn't had a bicycle in your childhood then you didn't had a bicycle in your childhood.

[0] or LEGO, Transformers action figure, whatever

That's not because you were poor then and not now but because you had few responsibilities then and many now. When you were young your needs were small and solely affected you, now your needs encompass those of family (I'm guessing that you have children). Even without family you have responsibilities to society and employer that you either did not have when young or that were simply less urgent.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com