Finland’s story shows equality is the best route to happiness

No. Which is why I didn't say 'hard' left.

Sorry, still laughing.

 

I guess they forgot that nationalised public education is necessarily 'equal'. In that everyone has the same access to it.

 

That is a good point, albeit off topic!

There is some suspicion (in anthropological circles) that we might be 'Out of Asia'.

 

I hope you're able to stop and consider the implicit hubris and arrogance of such a position.

It's all very well and good for ivory tower dwelling westerners, who've not known starvation or danger for generations, to declare such 'lofty' ideals, but to everyone else such ideals are deeply insulting. You're like the King telling the peasants to stop growing cabbages because a) you have plenty of cabbages, and b) you doesn't like the view of cabbage fields from your castle.

 

HAHAHA! You stated "it's horribly biased to anyone who stands a centimetre to the right of the far left". That is a ludicrous statement of the highest order.

 

East Enders of London ?

 

Stop winding up the crank please.

 

Measuring happiness? How? Nobody yet invented happinesmeter, so the only way to measure the happiness is to ask people if they are happy. Are people telling the truth or just repeating what sociaty expects from them? I remember reading a book of Daniel Everett about Piraha Indians from the Amazon (from the Jungle, not from the Jeff Bezos sweatshop) who suppously are the happiest people on the world, here is some info:
https://indiancountrymedianetwork.c...o-happiness-never-talk-of-the-past-or-future/

 

Yes, know why they are so happy ?

They make a sort of drink from a vine, tastes sort of like cream soda, and if you drink a glass, the World seems a cheerful enough place, two glasses and you want to pet Lions, three glasses and you need a lie down.

 

yes good point. Lots of socialist countries are miserable so economic system may not ever be related to happiness.

 

Yet the people are so afraid of admitting they are not happy.

 

ah could be that countries are very different in their willingness to admit to unhappyness. Brits for example are know for a stiff upper lip

 

I did not like Istantbull at all.

The Brits are more afraid now than ever before.
Cameras everywhere, they are afraid of guns, afraid of acid, afraid to live.

 

Two aspects here. First, you don't understand what socialism means (and undoubtedly will be making false 'that country is socialist' claims). Second, happiness is likely to be more problematic in countries which exhibit losses in living standards (as its a shift from a superior equilibrium that generates dissonance). So you'd need to focus on countries with, say, inferior coverage of health care...

 

if true you would not be so afraid to say what you I think socialism is and then tell us what it really is. What does your fear teach you?

 

that's pure genius: losses in living standards make you less rather than more happy!! British genius!!!

 

You haven't understood the point. I was referring to neuroeconomics and the importance of equilibrium. Shall we add that to the list of topics that you don't know?

 

it doesn't matter what you were referring to our subject was whether socialism causes happiness. Notice how you always must change the subject because you lack the ability to debate the subject

 

Change the subject? I merely indicated two truths. You don't understand socialism. You don't understand how income support, and public good delivery, necessarily also supports happiness.

 

Just to prove that “happiness” is very difficult to define:

Some people will be very happy if they have a border wall, right to bear the arms and no health insurance. Other people will be very happy if they have health insurance only. So which one are the happiest?

 

Happiness Research is a hoax.

 

I don't think happiness is particularly difficult to define. There's a large literature on it, spawned by the work by Oswald. It also can be very useful for generating research question (e.g. what's behind the Easterlin Paradox)?). However, while we can use large data sets to get around outlier issues, I'd never be comfortable with international analysis. Cultural issues are just too difficult to disentangle.

 

It could be that in 2016 Finland told the EU to go to hell and deported 77% of the Muslim immigrants the EU was forcing on them like all other EU countries. Unthinkable in the USA, Finland considers Muslims who claimed to have converted to Christianity as a positive factor in deciding who is allowed to stay - claiming the extreme oppression against Christians means they are no longer economic refuges but refuges against potential abuse in their original Muslim country.

If President Trump said 1/10th of that as an agenda, the MSM and leftwing would go absolutely hysterical! They'd run to an Hawaiian or San Francisco federal judge who would order whatever the Democratic Party said it wanted the judge to order. Yet they will praise Finland.

 

If so why are you so afraid to tell us why you feel I don't understand socialism? What do you learn from your fear?

 

so happiness is easy to define but we cant compare countries to see if socialism makes people happy? Do you know if the 120 million in USSR and Red China were happy while slowly starving to death?