The Hindu Business Line : Does money buy happiness?

AT the enchanted pool, Yudhistira faced many questions from the yaksha. Such as: "What makes the sun shine every day? What is that, by giving up which, man becomes rich? What is fleeter than the wind?" For each, our hero had the answers. Thus, it was learning that befriended a traveller; the biggest vessel was the earth, which contains all within itself. And so on.

"What is happiness?" asked the yaksha at one point. While Yudhistira's answer is part of the Mahabharata, you may find a similar question in the latest issue of Region Focus, from the Research Department of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. It has a catchy piece, titled `The Economics of Happiness,' throwing `research spotlight' on Robert H. Frank's article "How Not To Buy Happiness" in Daedalus, Spring 2004.

In search of happiness, therefore, I look at what Frank, an economics professor at the Cornell University, says in Daedalus. He begins with "an enduring paradox" — that even as the rich are happier than the poor, "average happiness levels change very little as people's incomes rise in tandem over time." A common answer has been that happiness depends not so much on absolute income as on the relative one. But Frank is of the view that there is a problem in the way that people in affluent societies generally spend their incomes.

A tough question of Frank that looks quite yaksha-ish is, "Does money buy happiness?" Depends on what you buy, he would answer. If you, as most people with extra money do, buy "bigger houses and more expensive cars," don't expect happiness to go up, he advises, because these are "conspicuous consumption goods."

Instead, go for the "inconspicuous" ones. Such as? "Freedom from a long commute or a stressful job." Effect of this would be reduced congestion, and more time available for devoting to "family and friends, exercise, sleep, travel, and other restorative activities."

Sounds like moral science, doesn't it? But how do you explain not getting happiness from the very things we chase and get, be they bungalows or BMWs? "The human capacity to adapt to dramatic changes in life circumstances is impressive," writes Frank. This helps many quadriplegics to report "roughly the same mix of moods and emotions as able-bodied people do" within a year's time of devastating accidents. Also, this accounts for why follow-up studies of lottery winners have shown that they are "often no happier — and indeed, are in some ways less happy — than before."

How so? Because "the power to adapt is a two-edged sword," is frankly Frank wisdom. You move from a big house to a bigger one, without realising that "once house size achieves a given threshold, the human capacity to adapt to further across-the-board changes in house size" doesn't just stretch. A related worry is that as houses grow in size, the average length of commuting time to work too grows.

A statistic that Frank cites is from the Federal Highway Administration of the US: that the extra time spent driving because of delays will rise from "2.7 billion vehicle hours in 1985 to 11.9 billion in 2005." Studies have shown, writes the author, that the demands of commuting through heavy traffic "often result in emotional and behavioural deficits upon arrival at home or work."

He'd ask: "Why do we not use our resources more wisely?" Answer: "Interdependencies among us are considerably more pervasive," so we constantly keep up with Joneses. Not too different from arms race among countries, observes Frank.

A sobering tip on "reallocating" time and money, that is, just when spending binge would crescendo during the festive season.

SayCheek@TheHindu.co.in