Looks like No Impact Man and I, were both wrong. This whole business of declining happiness past a certain level of consumption, may be a fallacy after all. Chrystia Freeland, from the Financial Times just featured a forthcoming research paper by two bright and up-coming economists from the Wharton School. According to Justin Wolfers and Betsey Stevenson, the Easterlin Paradox does not exist. It is not true that there is a limit to how much happiness money can buy.:
They conclude that we do, in fact, become happier overall as our country becomes richer. This is true over time – as generations get richer they get happier; and over space – people living in rich countries are happier than people in poor countries. They also refute the concept of a “satiation point” or the belief that, beyond a certain income threshold, further increases in national wealth cease to increase national happiness.
Controversy is brewing on the happiness front . . . So I need to ask you a personal question. Is there a point at which you have felt- or think you will feel – satiated with material things? I know I have ceased to get pleasure from buying and owning more stuff. But that’s a recent phenomenon. Will it stand the test of time?