Happiness
So the goverment wants to find out how happy the country is via statistics. Dry statistics will never show the state of happiness of the country. It it is too ephemeral.
Happiness is also very personal. I could feel happy because I’ve finished a jig saw puzzle. I could be happy because my child said “daddy” for the first time. It has nothing to do with the state of the nation.
But happiness can be national too.
BBC Breakfast did a survey* of the state of happinesss and the came up with a figure of 5.39 (or something very close to it). The same day by coincidence the Royal Wedding was announced. So the next day Breakfast did the same survey. This time the figure was something like 7.93.
If something as simple as announcing some good news makes people happy, and it can change so much in 24 hours, there is no way statistics can show the happiness of the nation. Not unless we are asked to use a hand held device every ten minutes to indicate how we feel.
* Survey was to text in a number between 1 and 10, with 1o being very happy. Over 10,000 texts received on both days, with the final number being taken from a representative sample.
November 21, 2010 at 19:47
-
I seem to recall that a few years back, the wife of the then French
President was asked what she wished for most, and replied that she wanted “a
penis”. Or was it “‘appiness”???
Can’t remember.
- November 21, 2010 at 20:48
-
Or both ?
- November
21, 2010 at 16:18
-
I’m back from my break – but I am delighted to see that you are back too –
even if according to your list you don’t read my blog, I shall be well pleased
to be reading your’s again!!
Illegitimii non carborundum (= Don’t let the bastards grind you down)
- November 21, 2010 at 15:15
-
And what is the Libertarian Party doing about it? Sweet FA. They are so
totalitarian they won’t even let you join if you are a member of another
party.
- November 21, 2010 at
15:29
-
Why would you want to be a member of two parties at the same time? Would
you join the Labour Party and the Conservative Party at the same time?
Surely you only ‘join’ a party when you have made up your mind which
manifesto you want to back with cash and effort? Until that time you just
remain a supporter of their aims – not a party memeber?
- November 21, 2010 at 16:43
-
Claire if you want to attack the Libertarian Party as totalitarian,
state your credentials. You are a member of the BNP a far left, racist
party that is intellectually bankrupt in blaming all of the countries woes
on non whites, or more precisely non’ indigenous’ whites. As they are not
keen on anybody who cannot prove their parentage back in three generations
do not come from south of Dover.
The BNP is also financially insolvent according to its own members who
have resigned from the BNP.
Please do not talk such arrant nonsense, because we are not keen on
dual membership of parties that we are in profound disagreement with.
- November 21, 2010 at 23:32
-
I don’t think you are in a position to be fussy about membership
though, Andrew. What you need now is bums on pews. Can’t afford to be
too fussy, can we now?
I see you expelled Matt Davies, a good man, just for supporting UKIP.
I am a member of the BNP because I am making a point of supporting
the free speech of the white working classes to complain about
immigration without being accused of being nasty evil Nazi Fascist
Racists, that’s how libertarian I am, Andrew.
How libertarian are you?
Not very libertarian at all, it seems.
The BNP didn’t have a problem with me being a member of the Labour
Party and neither did the Labour Party have a problem with me being a
member of the BNP.
Can the Libertarian Party actually be more *fascist* and totalitarian
than the BNP and Labour?
Now there’s a thought!
The proof of your libertarian credentials would be admit me into your
party, which would make quite a good story actually.
But it seems you lot at the Libertarian Party don’t understand the
media very well, do you?
- November 21, 2010 at
23:41
- November 21, 2010 at 23:49
-
I am glad you asked me that question, Anna.
You may be aware that I in fact support a one-party state so it doesn’t
really matter which party I join.
I have in my time been a member of the Conservative Party and also
UKIP. It is a good way of checking things out, you see. Each party has a
uniquely different personality.
I believe the quickest way to rationally small government is through a
narrower taxpayer-only franchise operating under a direct democracy in a
one-party state with a party constitution that protects the rights of its
members against the leader and his cronies.
The West derived its democratic traditions from Ancient Athens and
Republican Rome which did not have parties, only shifting factions.
Party democracy is therefore crucial to the quality of democracy we
have, but no one – not even MPs it seems – get this.
Peter Bone’s House of Commons Disqualification Bill (second reading 10
December 2010) will regrettably not get the support it needs.
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2010/11proposed-survey-for-mps-who-supported.html
explains why it matters so much.
- November 21, 2010 at
23:53
-
Had you considered that it might matter to the party which party you
joined?
- November 22, 2010 at 01:15
-
It shouldn’t matter, should it, when you are trying to get bums on
seats?
If you were being clever about it, you would make it a condition of
joining that a member promise to join another party to spread
libertarian ideas there.
There is everything to be said for adopting an entryist strategy
rather than preaching to the converted.
- November 21, 2010 at 14:44
-
What we need is a quango and a huge research effort. We must find a
reliable way to measure happiness!
Once that is done it beomes a simple
step to make grumpiness an offence and a system of fixed penalties can be
brought in to prevent these nasty grumpy people going out in public and
spoiling the happiness of the good citizens.
We will of course need some
other pressure groups to advise government on issues like the effects of
second and third hand grumpiness, a minimum price for grumpiness, tax levels
on grumpiness, and to investigate ways to mitigate grumpiness. It maybe that
mandated ‘enjoyment classes’ are a solution, or may be TV programming has a
role to play.
We will of course require a happiness inspectorate to
administer the fixed penalties and they will need powers of entry to your
gardens, cars, houses, your spouse’s knickers and any other pleasure sources
you may possess.
- November 26, 2010 at 07:28
-
I fully endorse your views. Social research for selecting index for the
degree of happiness of aspecific community or subculture will be helpful in
measuring the happiness from time to time: just like meauring the blood
pressure to decide the state of healthof the individual.
Social index determination based on the social health is may be the
solution. Index on crime, suicide, divorce, longivity could be the
pointer.
- November 21, 2010 at 12:59
-
They don’t mean happiness they mean “well-being”. This is an elitist,
reactionary idea founded on being content with your life – with contentment
comes stasis, with contentment comes an acceptance of authority.
At a recent debate talking about the importance (or otherwise) of economic
growth, I complains – as is my wont – about the idea that ‘steady state’
economics seemed all about government, about regulation, about telling me what
I can and cannot have, what I am permitted to aspire to.
“Who is the government to tell me whether I can have a bigger house, a
better car or a foreign holiday” Say I.
And the response from the advocates of “be content with your lot” is to
lecture me about status envy and say they are offended by me wanting these
things.
More here
http://theviewfromcullingworth.blogspot.com/2010/11/happy-days.html
-
November 21, 2010 at 12:40
-
So this happiness offensive……..
So far we have the Happiness Index, then the Royal Wedding, what is next
the Ministry of Fun ? headed up by Boris Johnson or Lord Lembit Opik ?
- November 21, 2010 at 12:16
-
Tell me this wasn’t Iain Dales idea….ooo I’m happy chase me!
The mere
thought the government think they can hide behind a few statistics based on
brain dead automatons eager to self gratify themselves by ‘taking part’ makes
me want to throw up. The obvious fact of the matter is most of us are PISSED
off , not f’n ‘happy’, those who profess to be happy in this time and place
are congenital idiots, bankers or politicians (oops sorry all in the first
group really)
- November 21, 2010 at 11:45
-
This is on a par with Gordon Brown’s idea of measuring and celebrating
“Britishness”. We all know that at one level we’re British or European or
Earthlings, but inside we’re English or Welsh etc…
Personally, I think happiness is the absence of misery.
- November 21, 2010 at 11:39
-
Analysing happiness is like blu-tacking a rainbow to a whiteboard or
dissecting a frog to understand how it lives. I have two thoughts about it
however:
Happiness is much better when shared.
It also needs a touch of
sadness to appreciate it properly.
-
November 21, 2010 at 11:19
-
How about they stick this in their happiness index…
F**K OFF!
- November 21, 2010 at 11:01
-
The government plan is quite simple. It will ask for people to participate.
When they start saying they are unhappy they will start “disappearing” these
unhappy people so that, in the end, only happy people are left.
-
November 21, 2010 at 12:20
-
A register. Ticking a ‘happy’ box ensures a compliant participant. All
others: ‘this way to the box cars and the camp’.
Much easier to count ‘happy’ people as they are in the minority, given
grants and favours (maybe some). The majority go off on ‘holiday’ – see
America’s Fusion facilities for families.
Extreme? Fantastic? Never doubt their desires.
- November 21, 2010 at 14:19
-
Time to do something, but the Libertarian Party UK is not going to do
that much, is it?
Even the Libertarian Party is totalitarian. You are not allowed to join
if you are a member of another party.
- November 21, 2010 at
16:34
-
Neither is the bankrupt BNP is it Claire ?
Not allowing members of an avowedly far left big State Party dictate
Libertarian Party policy through entryism is within the self defence
axiom not totalitarian.
Sheesh
- November 22, 2010 at
07:19
-
November 21, 2010 at 10:55
-
Happiness for me is peace of mind. I think that this has been the case for
me for as long as I have been able to consider the matter. Keeping things
simple assists in gaining peace of mind, I also find. It would certainly seem
to me that in the developed world, the more we have the less happy we are. The
faster things move the less happy we are. Progress, in other words, is not all
it is cracked up to be.
Profound happiness comes with family, a wonderful wife, and lovely dogs for
this boy. It all starts at home.
Here endeth the sermon for today.
-
November 21, 2010 at 10:49
-
This is just beyond stupid, the concept that ‘government’ can influence or
produce hapiness.
The only way they can to to back out of our lives like an overbearing aunt
who knows best.
- November 21, 2010 at 12:24
-
They are quite good at making people unhappy, though.
a) list what makes people unhappy
b) don’t do it unless you have a
darn good reason
c) consider doing the opposite, if at all possible.
- November 21, 2010 at 10:30
-
Our government could instantly increase the “Happiness Factor” of most of
the male electorate by prescribing the same course of treatment as that given
to “Service User A”:-
-
November 21, 2010 at 10:12
-
Happiness is linked to where you’re going rather than where you’re at.
This is why Brits up to their wastes in shit and guts were happier in
Victorian times than we are in our opulant but hermatically sealed lives. They
knew they were improving. We know we’re declining.
- November 21, 2010 at 11:02
-
I couldn’t have put it better!
- November 21, 2010 at 09:32
-
This illustrates the sloppy use, these days, of the word “happy.” As this
post demonstrates, happiness is an ephemeral emotion, brought about by some
gratification. Like a drug, maintaining this state of happiness requires
ever-increasing doses of gratification.
If our “leaders” had ever got used
to the idea of two-way communication with the rest of us, they might instead
have used the word “Contentment.”
Or the lack of same.
- November 21, 2010 at 11:03
-
Contentment is rather more difficult to grasp for a people so pig
ignorant they don’t know what’s good for them.
-
November 21, 2010 at 09:32
-
I find the prospect of the Happiness Index deeply depressing…
- November
21, 2010 at 09:04
-
“Not unless we are asked to use a hand held device every ten minutes to
indicate how we feel.”
Argh! Don’t give them ideas!!
Actually, this could be combined with the palm-implanted LifeClock and thereby serve a dual function…
- November 21, 2010 at 09:30
-
Completely idiotic idea. Happiness should be measured by its opposite:
unhappiness, which manifests itself in homicide, divorce, crime, suicide,
war, famine and pestilence.
{ 35 comments }