Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Plan to measure happiness.

Let's save them money and they can read this thread here.


Me? I am worried that I am eating in to my savings just to stand still. (Both me and MrPR are suffering this)

But my life is pretty uncomplicated and I take life easy, being a motorcyclist gives me a good feeling, and I am grateful for what little I have. And I try to be happy. But I worry about life in my old age.


Edited to change title and add link

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/14489-govt-plan-to-measure-happiness/
Share on other sites

Health and Wellbeing - been around for a while. Given the number of people made ill by stress it wouldnt seem to be a waste of time to me.


I dont think that cynicism about the importance of "happiness" in the work place and home is justified.


Cynicism concerning the motivation of politician's interest in the subject and indeed how they implement measures is entirely justified.

I second that....if politicians really were interested in mental health and well being they'd radically change the things that keep us all stressed, over worked and trapped in an economy with such high living costs.....oh and then not providing adequate mental health provision when some people have mental health breakdowns as a result.

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm deliriously happy at the moment, especially

> after beating Arsenal away on Saturday and

> qualifying for the Champions League last 16 last

> night. COYS!



Some people are easily pleased or have their priorities wrong. ;-)

Because it's nonsense. There is no objective or scientific way to measure something as abstract as happiness. Better?



As Santerme said


I thought we were getting rid of all the dumb reporting systems and measurements introduced by the last Govt....

I'm with Mike P on this.


I think any attempt to measure happiness and a determination to improve happiness, wellbeing and general mental health should be welcomed.


Incidentally, those countries with low inequality score highest on mental health indexes.


And Emerson, it's actually quite easy to measure if you're a qualitative researcher.

Not sure you're right DC, qualitative research measures reactions and feelings and is not represntative or undertaken to produce 'numbers' or index...it's not sampled, quotad etc it's more nuanced and observational than a benchmark.


Gawd, that old equality graph again, lefties hang on to it like a holy grail - now I'll post that one on suicides or the one that shows increased rates of tax actually results in less tax take at higher thresholds

The findings of those indexes doesn't suprise me. I wonder as well if there are lower mental health problems in countries where there is a culture of family/ community support rather than fragmentation (and over reliance on the state). Isolation is as much a factor in sustaining depression (whether self enforced or environmentally enforced) as are issues around employment, finance and other things that can add stress to an alreay breaking person.
Of course critics of that index have also pointed out for instance that these countries (and the Scandies are often in these "oooh look equality works" simplifications) also have less immigration and a more homogenous culture etc., not sure the left would like the BNP to grab hold of that from their simple analysis that IT's EQUALITY. It's a load of poop there's far too many complicated variables to simplify this. A meaningful and more importantly ACTIONABLE happiness index is pie in the sky...it will tell us Doncaster is the best place to live in the UK or something equally stupid and irrelevant.

You are missing DC's point thought Quids. Mental health issues are serious. Depression, whilst not discerning between the inequallity is something that can be triggered by poverty and some of the aspects of inequality. If we are talking about the quality of life then we are definitely talking about where the minimum threshold lies on unemployemnt or pay, hours vs leisure time, community vs state and so on. No one thing or the other is the sole trigger...but put them altogether and some people don't cope as well as others.


As a society we should explore how we can make the quality of life better and how we can better take care of those who become vulnerable. If someone has a breakdown it can take years for them to fully recover but if we can prevent someone from breaking down in the first place then that is something to work for. And we definitely could do better in all areas od mental health provision.

david_carnell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm with Mike P on this.

>

> And Emerson, it's actually quite easy to measure

> if you're a qualitative researcher.



So you can accurately measure something as abstarct as happiness. All Can say to that is I still think its nonsense and a complete waste of resources and money.

david_carnell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I can reckon I can accurately measure how grumpy

> you are!


What does that have to do with the fact that I believe this whole thing to be a waste and of no use. The two aren't linked, despite your statement to the contrary. Or are you one the qualitative researchers you make reference to. I fail to see how such a futile exercise can raise levels of happiness, well being etc. Maybe its just stunt by the goverment to divert our attention away from the mess they make of trying to run the country.

I was being flippant whilst drawing attention to the fact that it's not that difficult to measure abstract concepts like happiness (or grumpiness).


I disagree that it's a waste of money. Happiness is very important especially during a period of little economic growth. You can devise policies that whilst it may not put more money in people's pockets might make them happier. In fact I'd rather society in general was more happiness driven that money orientated - but then as Quids will point out I'm a bleeding heart liberal do-gooder so what do I know?!


I'm not a qualitative researcher though I've studied it and used it in the past. I agree with you that in this instance it's probably not much more than a stunt by this govt but I don't think the principle should be dismissed with a hand wave and a dose of cynicism. It's too important for that.

Quite.... so surely an attempt to measure it would be the first stage. Otherwise you cannot know whether any measures you take to improve it have been successful.


A BBC article from a few years ago highlights some (admittedly simplistic) methods.


I'm willing to at least give the govt the benefit of the doubt for the moment.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • It's permitted because the council grants an events licence. But if you were to blast music from your back garden for 10 hours a day accross four days, they'd shut you down on day one. There will be a noise plan in place, but it is probably the same as the one for the GALA festival, which dismisses any breach of the agreed noise levels as long as they are brought back within limits witihn 15 minutes. In other words, a breach is never really a breach according to the council. This is why local residents feel exasperated.
    • Congratulations on your win Lady Gooner and thanks again for organising Red Devil.
    • It’s horrendous. I feel so anxious from the constant bass. 
    • Other local constituents are likely to be less keen on having an increase in noise pollution. Must be a change in wind direction but Brockwell sounds even louder today on the village side of Lordship Lane.     
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...