Tuesday 25 March 2008

Happy of Himalayas

Doesn't quite have the ring of Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells, but news at the weekend that the good people of Bhutan are about to enjoy democracy for the first time. The ruler of Bhutan is famous and revered in many quarters for attempting to measure Gross National Happiness as opposed to simply relying on GDP. So is his imposition of democracy (itself a rather unusual development) going to make his people happier?

Not according to Professor Robert Lane if you read his book "Loss of happiness in market democracies". According to Professor Lane democratic rights are a bit of a bore and a chore and do nothing special for our happiness (though the good news for the Bhutanese is that happy people tend to have better democracies). Indeed Professor Lane's thesis is that people in advanced economies don't know what is good for them, so an effective democratic system has failure built-in. The problem is that people are seduced by the economistic fallacy (more money is what you want) when, in a developed economy, what people really really want is more companionship and to value their children more (and not just by buying them bigger and better computers for their bedroom). Or at least that is what he thinks Americans should want and what would reverse the massive rise in depression.

The Good news for economics is that he thinks economics does get it right for most of the world's population and for most of humanity's time on earth -- when people are poor the equation of being better off and happiness works. Its just when you get to that pesky bend in the curve and diminishing returns set in -- but people don't realise it.

Not that Professor Lane thinks there is much governments can do - promote job security and make it easier for people to have time for companionship - and perhaps pay more attention to moves that break up communities. And not watch TV or play on the computer.

But for a book that purports to be about happiness, Prof L has managed to produce one of the most turgid and pompous tomes I have read. A danger of thinking that something on Amazon looks interestingf..Just when I thought all American professors could be relied on to convey knowledge and insights in the style of Paul Merton or Stephen Fry comes along someone with the stylistic flair of an HMRC press release (actually they are usually livelier). So don;t bother with the book and do something companionable - with person or pet - instead.

2 comments:

Clive Bates said...

Didn't the Beatles lead on this?

Can't buy me love, love
Can't buy me love

I'll buy you a diamond ring my friend if it makes you feel alright
I'll get you anything my friend if it makes you feel alright
'Cause I don't care too much for money, money can't buy me love

I'll give you all I got to give if you say you love me too
I may not have a lot to give but what I got I'll give to you
I don't care too much for money, money can't buy me love

Can't buy me love, everybody tells me so
Can't buy me love, no no no, no

Say you don't need no diamond ring and I'll be satisfied

Tell me that you want the kind of thing that money just can't buy
I don't care too much for money, money can't buy me love


Does this guy really add anything to this?

Jill Rutter said...

Good to have you back ... I thought you would comment on the one before...

No - nothing... and rather than three minutes to sing took ages to read as kept on thinking it might get interesting. But Paul McCartney may just be getting used to the view that money can't buy love, but breaking up doesn't come cheap. Not that he will notice. Still for Sudan they can happily focus on GDP without bothering to employ New Economics Foundation.