As for Question A: Singapore is a well developed city state with modern facilities. People have a general materialistic mindset that the more they can consume, they happier they will be, thanks to the better living standard and satisfaction. As the industries are mainly related to international trade, economic growth of Singapore depends on trade. NI=C+I+G+X-M.
However, to sustain economic growth, Singapore must export more and/or import less. This means Singaporeans will have less goods to consume, and less variety, leading to dissatisfaction or unhappiness.
Nevertheless, in reality, pursuit of happiness doesnot always block the economic growth. As people become happy, they will be less stressed out when doing work and thus have higher working efficiency, or productivity, which strengthens growth.
On the other hand, pursuit of happiness also involves greater consumption-more people will go to sentosa, cinema or restaurants, thus lifting AD and leads to actual growth.
But this also means that they will spend more leisure time, becoming complacent and thus work less-weaker growth
A) I don't think that you necessarily have to sacrifice economic growth to pursue happiness. I found this article (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1919162,00.html) about Utah implementing a four-day work-week (with longer hours each day) very interesting because it shows how we can better spread out our time to increase productivity and leisure. Their working hours remain the same (8 hours x 5 days versus 10 hours x 4 days) yet they have much more leisure time to spend because their time is segregated better. There are also unexpected benefits (like for non-state employees). This really does show us how smarter policy can help us achieve both economic growth and happiness.
I also agree with Wan Hao in that Singaporeans will probably be able to work more productively when they are more happy -this again shows how growth and happiness are not in conflict.
I again agree with Wan Hao that you could increase a nation's happiness by increasing consumption (giving rise to actual growth) in certain cases. For example, by creating more parks and park connectors, we increase G (thus AD - actual growth), and raise the level of well-being in Singapore.
In addition, we could actually have potential growth as well. To expand on Wan Hao's example, when we shift our economy's focus towards the services sector, through our integrated resorts, we both increase our productive capacity in this area (AS) and increase C (AD), resulting in sustained growth as well as greater leisure opportunities for Singaporeans.
B) I think that this is because most countries are, by now, very caught up in the international market system, and would find it very hard to adjust from GDP to GNH. Many moves to increase GNH (like banning MTV) would prove politically unpopular as well, and be seen negatively as 'paternalistic'. It would be easier for governments to improve upon GDP, and have complementary measurement systems and implement policies that would account for the 'happiness' aspect of economics.
Since my classmates above have illustrated the positive relationship between economic growth and happiness in Singapore, I will just suggest one point oon why the pursuit of happiness might hinder economic growth.
The pursuit of happiness means that people will generally spend more of their income on consumption. This leads to a dip in savings and thus a rise in interest rate. In turn, this might lead to a drop in FDI flowing into Singapore as foreign companies might be wary of the high interest rate. Applying the formuala: AD = C+I+G+(X-M), when I falls, AD will also fall ceteris paribus. This might hinder economic growth to some extent.
Of course, the benefits of pursuing happiness on stimulating economic growth is very significant, as postulated by the two comments above. Therefore, it might still be favourable for Singapore to focus on the pursuit of happiness despite the possible obstacle it might impose on economic growth.
Singaporeans' pace of life is quite fast and we live a more stressful lifestyle compare to other developed countries especially the European ones. Given our high level of economic development, maybe Singapore can afford to pursue happiness.
However, i agree with hongtao that this move is to be accompanied by economic growth. Singapore, being small and open, is different from many other developed countries in the sense that we are highly dependent on FDI. Despite the rise in interest rate, measures to increase the degree of happiness of Singaporeans such as reducing working hours may further discourage foreign investors. We have already been pressurized by other Asian developing countries which provide cheaper labor, resources and more attractive policies for investment. Even their level of technology is catching up with us. At this crucial junction of competition, if we decide to shift our focus away from economic development, i m afraid we will lose many more opportunities to the competitors as investors may switch to other countries to maximize production and profit. This will affect our longterm economic growth. Good economic well-being is a vary important factor contributing to people's sense of happiness, if we can't ensure a bright future, we can't really be much happy as well.
As for question b, many countries are still in the process of improving the SOL of its people by increasing economic growth. Using GNH, which a relatively new concept maybe too risky for these countries. Moreover, happiness can't be seriously considered without a proper economic standard. I guess that's why most countries are still speculating. If in the long term more countries are to try and prove its effectiveness, the rest can be convinced to follow.
Thanks to the abovementioned ideas, I get an idea that pursuit of happiness will surely stimulate consumption in the short run; in the long run, more entertaining resorts like the casino will be built, creating more jobs and boosting GDP. AD will increase significantly, while As will shift right a little due to the already bustling tourist industry. However, more consumption also means less saving, high interest rate, thus less investment, be it foreign or local. Thus, potential growth will be limited. What will happen then? Maybe inflation.
B> for the second question， ｗｈｙ GDP, but not GNH? happiness is an abstract psychological term. Who know what real happiness is? being Overly happy, or complacent, may even ruin one's prospect; but as for consumption or national income, it is a tangible benchmark to measure a solid figure. If nations are uncertain of a measure, leaders dare not to try them and put national stablity at stake.
I d like to liken GDP to math, which is more general and practical in daily life, and GNH to philosophy, which is not approachable by everyone but does have its beauty.
(b) I feel that no country uses the GNH because countries have different standards of happiness, especially between developed and developing countries. It is difficult for countries to read an agreement as to "What is Happiness" One simple example: With the high quality of life in Singapore, it is normal for us to have eat for our meals every day. But if given chicken meat for 1 week straight, i am sure that all of us will get sick of eating it and feel very unhappy. However if chicken were to be given to the people in Africa, they will be happy because most of them have no money for food. Even though the people in Africa feel happier than Singaporeans in this case, in reality the quality of life in Singapore is better than that in Africa. And so, using the GNH to measure the quality of life may be inaccurate.
Another reason is that the measurement of the quality of life using the GDP has been used by the countries for many years and they are used to this way of calculation. Furthemore, some countries are afraid that the pursuit of happiness might mean a sacrifice of economic growth as mentioned by my classmates above. Like what Siji said, it is also very risky for developing countries as they have not set a strong foundation of their economy.
According to the dictionary, "Happiness results from the possession of attainment of something that one considers good" Normally, it is when we have the ability and freedom to obtain the things that we want that we feel happy, which then again also means that we enjoy a high quality of life because we have the money to buy those things. Thus i feel that no country chooses the GNH as GDP is still the better measurement of the quality of life.
A)Do you expect that the pursuit of happiness will mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore?
According to a report released by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the happiest countries in the world are mostly the Northern European countries. Denmark, which was ranked first, had a GDP per capita of $68 000 while the United States, which did not get into the top 10 happiest countries in the world, had a GDP per capita of $47, 335. These results were largely attributed to their high economic status which seems to go against the notion that happiness and economic growth are mutually exclusive.
However, what is interesting to note is how they went about conducting their research. Just how exactly do they gauge happiness?
They asked respondents if they experienced six different forms of negative or positive feelings within the last day. Questions include, ‘Did you enjoy something you did yesterday?’ and ‘Did you learn something yesterday?’ The questions were scored numerically from 1- 1oo and countries were ranked according to this score.
However, the findings are not a fool- proof method as they are not a clear representation of happiness. For example, I may have learnt something new yesterday (like learning how to post an update on GoogleDocs) but that does not necessarily imply that I was happy about it. This is somewhat similar to Clarice’s example about the different happiness levels experienced by Singaporeans and Africans after eating chicken rice. The point we are driving at is that happiness is ambiguous. The things that may make you happy may not make me happy and as such, using GNP to measure standard of livings among different countries will be inaccurate and difficult.
Hence, we cannot use this report by OECD to completely reject the idea that happiness does not come with a price, with that price being economic growth.
Perhaps we can look into various aspects that would make a person happy and standardise this internationally. Possible aspects we can explore would be national identity, family, social, community networks, work- life balance, health, education and transport systems and level of wealth. Of course, it would take alot of time and effort to come up with a comprehensive and complete assessment of happiness.
To say that the pursuit of happiness sacrifices economic growth, we will have to look at the things that we do to achieve this happiness. Should watching movies make me happy, I would be watching more movies to make me happier and this would drive economic growth since National Income = C + I + G + X – M and by watching movies, I would be raising C. This way, I would be well along my way in my pursuit of happiness while aiding economic growth. (Of course, this increase in AD has to be accompanied by the rightward shift of the LRAS to make it an actual growth)
Although Bhutan may be ranked as the 8th happiest country in the world, the fact that the more well- to- do Western Countries are still able to fare better than Bhutan prove to show that happiness does not necessarily imply hindered economic growth.
a) Do you expect that the pursuit of happiness will mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore? Some of the posts above mentioned that the degree of happiness is directly related to consumption (quantity of goods and services consumed), but it may not hold true forever especially for a more economically developed country like Singapore where people generally have a higher standard of living. There is demand for luxury goods such as brandy clothes and sports cars. Consumers have a great variety of goods and services to choose from. This may contribute to higher degree of happiness. However, problems raised from excess consumption are becoming more prevalent in developed countries. For example, obesity and eating disorders due to too much consumption of fast food has caught attention of health organisations in various countries and the Health Promotion Board is trying to promote healthier food choices for Singaporeans. Another typical example in Singapore is the usage of air conditioners which is harmful for people’s health due to great difference in temperature between indoor and outdoor environment (i.e. catching cold more easily). These health problems due to consumption will definitely compromise the happiness of the consumers. If consumption on such goods and services is reduced, economic growth will be hindered to some extent (C is reduced). Problems such as structural unemployment may even arise (i.e. fewer jobs for fast food restaurant operators and air conditioner retailers or producers) if the situation becomes serious enough. HOWEVER, this may boost the demand for healthier choices of goods and services, resources can be rechanneled to these industries to solve unemployment though it may take quite some time to achieve.
On the other hand, I think the pursuit of happiness without a sacrifice of economic growth can be done by increasing government expenditure on improving infrastructure and public environment. For example, construction of parks can allow stressed Singaporeans to relax after a whole day’s work to relax and better public transport system (more convenient and pleasant MRT stations). In this way, the G component of the AD will increase which leads to economic growth. b) Why is it that no other country chooses the GNH for their policies on economic growth and resource allocation but continue to study its wider good and spiritual benefits?
Firstly, the state of happiness is highly subjective. It is very hard to set a standard to measure how happy people can be. As Caijia mentioned above, the questions asked in the questionnaire may not be a good indicator of the degree of happiness for everyone. The understanding of happiness differs a lot between different groups of people (i.e. age, income level, gender, etc). GNH faces an even greater difficulty in measurement than GDP which is formulated by concrete figures and no other country has such a standardised system to measure it yet.
Secondly, the majority of the countries around the world are still working on improving the standard of living, even the economically developed countries such as the US still needs to do so because it still faces problems such as income inequality and inadequate healthcare system which are also essential to the standard of living of its people.
a) Do you expect that the pursuit of happiness will mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore? I think that the pursuit of happiness does not necessarily mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore. According to the KOF Index of Globalisation 2008 provided by the Swiss Economic Institute, Singapore shows the highest score in economic globalisation. This is in view with policies by the government (ie. Five Day Work Week) to improve our work-life balance, yet, this has not compromised our economic growth over the last few years. Thus i agree with Wan Hao that economic growth and pursuit of happiness are not in conflict. However, as Singapore is a small and open economy, we are vulnerable to foreign competition. This intense competition has more or less caused policies by the government to backfire over time, because in an attempt to not compromise our economic growth, people are actually working longer hours on weekdays to make up for the shortened working week, this would lead to unhappiness. Also, according to one of the four pillars of Bhutan’s measure of GNH which is the affluence of natural environment, fulfilling this in Singapore would indeed hinder economic growth as Singapore is a landlocked country and our natural environment is rapidly cleared to make space for industries which would drive economic growth by encouraging more investors or creating more employment. Despite this, Singapore has also done is part to ensure sustainable development such as Singapore’s opening of City Square Mall which is an eco-friendly mall which cares for our environment. For developing countries, perhaps economic growth should be the main focus to reduce poverty, but for Singapore, I agree with wan hao that “happier people” would have a higher productivity, thus more likely to attract foreign talents or perhaps foreign investments which would mean an increase in AD due to an increase in the I component of the equation AD=C+I+G+(X-M). Singapore would experience actual growth and increase in GDP. Singapore is mainly dependent on FDI to drive economic growth, thus the pursuit for happiness can actually help to propel economic growth instead. However, in the pursuit of happiness, the government must choose its policies properly so that the economy can progress together with our level of happiness. b) Why is it that no other country chooses the GNH for their policies on economic growth and resource allocation but continue to study its wider good and spiritual benefits? The measure of GNH is ambiguous as discussed by Clarice and Caijia, and the definition of happiness caries from country to country with different standards of living. Thus, a more practical and accurate approach to measure the economic growth of a country is to measure the GDP, which includes all the material aspects and economic activity of a country. However, as GNH assess the material, emotional, psychological and needs of a country and focuses on individual welfare, it is useful to consider the happiness level of the country to actually look at the citizen’s welfare. I found this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ep4DWx1--sY&feature=player_embedded) which talks about measuring a country’s development beyond GDP which is quite interesting as it actually shows that there is a need to consider happiness as an alternative to measure a country’s progress
a) Do you expect that the pursuit of happiness will mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore? I agree with Xinyu and Lucas that the pursuit of happiness will not interfere with economic growth in Singapore. If we assume (by common sense) that more leisure time and less stress means happier lives for Singaporeans, it could be achieved by increasing productivity of workers. with increased productivity, workers will be able to complete the same task with less time, thus leaving more time for recreational activities. Being more skillful also means they will face less stress in losing their jobs. Actually, the Singapore government has already realized the importance of boosting productivity of workers and firms. In Singapore Budget 2010, the government has placed great emphasis on boosting the productivity of the workers by allocating 5.5 billion dollars over the next 5 years on it. The measures to increase productivity includes:
a) one billion dollars for new national productivity fund b) 480million annually in new incentives to spur innovation c) 2.5 billion over 5 years for training and skill upgrade
If the money is able to fulfill its role in boosting productivity, there will be an increase in happiness level as well as an economic growth.
But I disagree with some of the comments posted above that more consumptions gives rise to higher level of happiness especially in the case of developed countries such as Singapore. ( I am not sure whether the argument I am going to say can stand)Since there is always the BIG problem of scarcity, no matter how much more we are able to consume(C) now because of economic growth, there will always be new and unlimited desires to have more. Material will not bring sustainable happiness. On an other note, happiness differs for each person and are dependent on too many factors, so how are we going to define happiness in the first place?
I would think that measuring SOL(standard of living) should be better than measuring happiness level directly simply because SOL is a more concrete concept. For instant: by televisions per capita or the average education level of the citizens. A better standard of living should give rise to a happier life and it would not conflict with the economic growth either. In fact, economic growth(GDP)is an integral part of the SOL.
This also explains the reasons for countries not having GNH but GDP. Standard of Living is the basis of happiness while GDP is the basis of SOL. Can they even consider happiness when some of the third world countries are still struggling with the basic human needs? I am not saying that people from poorer countries cannot feel happy but people are more likely to be happy with enough money to buy basic necessities. yeah and that's all I want to say....
But CAN SOMEONE PLS EXPLAIN HOW DOES DECREASED SAVING RESULTS IN DECREASED INTEREST RATE? as mentioned by quite a lot of you.......
Cheers~~~~:)BTW, i feel happy when I have excess money to by chicken wings to eat~~~~
a) Do you expect that the pursuit of happiness will mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore?
There's a famous theory in psychology, known as the Maslow's heirachy of needs. in it, describes the most basic needs of human beings. (Google it for more info)
At the bottom of the pyramid would be neccesities for survival (eg, food, water etc) next would be the need for the feeling of safety (employment, health etc), at the next level would be the need for love (friendship, family) followed by esteem (power, feeling of respect etc) and at the highest level- self actualisation- the need to become what one seeks to be in life.
Before we can even answer the question,perhaps we need to get a rough(but not definite) idea of what exactly happiness is. Of course, the pyramid of needs may not be entirely true, as mentioned by Clarice and Cai Jia earlier; but it can still aid us in discovering more about the meaning of happiness.
we have to ask ourselves how-economic growth can help fulfill our needs? Economic growth can definitely satisfy the very basics of our needs of the pyramid- bare neccesities and security.
However, it might come into conflict with other aspects of human desires. For example, the increased working hours might clash with the need for intimacy with friends and family. There are also other factors as mentioned by Fan Xing such as excessive fast food and air conditioners that comes with economical growth as well.
However, there are also other benefits that economic growth brings- eg, the expansion and development of new industry. (eg, engineering, music, arts) The expansion of these industries can help people fulfil their needs of self-actualisation, one of the requirements of the pyramid (eg, to become a chef, musician, scientist etc) which might otherwise been impossible to acheive had it not been for economic growth.
It is also possible that policies implemented for growth can also help us acheive happiness, As seen by policies such as the 4-day work week as mentioned by Lucas earlier.
I believe that economic growth does not always come into conflict with happiness. More economic growth does not always mean less happiness, as shown by the many examples mentioned by my classmates. Perhaps, what we really need to know is how we can truly ultilise economic growth to acheive happiness.
a)I feel that many Singaporeans are overworked and stretched out to their limits. In our society where we are constantly upgrading and improving our small city, we have begun to overlook the important things, and set wrong priorities. Families spend less time interacting, we sleep less, become grumpier and everyone is constantly tired. However, this is just the case in Singapore. In Sweden, which consistently comes up with new innovations and interesting designs like IKEA, and is still prospering, their labor market is extremely well taken care of, and they enjoy many benefits and work security. You can read more about their labor market at this website http://www.sweden.se/eng/Home/Work/Labor-market/. Their economy is still flourishing, even with free education and tax subsidized health care. This shows that it is possible to have economic growth without having to sacrifice happiness and the peoples welfare. On the other hand, it might be the way for Singapore because the government is introducing foreign talents into our country, and the competition is pushing us all to strive harder, work harder and to constantly be on our toes. Additionally, Singapore is such a small city. Unlike Sweden that is well established, with good weather, beautiful natural scenery and a relatively safe country. We have to work harder to keep our standards of living high, and keep up our world standings as a happening city to be in. Hence, I feel it is a high possibility that we would have to sacrifice a sizeable portion of happiness for economic growth in Singapore. b)Perhaps countries believe that economy and resource allocation cannot be mixed with the citizens well being and spiritual values. Since these 2 things might clash with a disastrous outcome, they decide not create the possibility of that happening. Most countries are gearing toward a multi-racial, multi-religious society, which is inevitable with the onslaught of globalization. Hence, countries might feel that they should not create a political system based on the well-being of religion and race, and instead use something more impartial and will not incur complications in the long run.
A. A lot of my classmates have commented on this issue, While some agree and the majority disagree.In my view, i think that people can gain happiness without sacrificing the country's economic growth.Firstly, we need to define economic growth.Generally speaking, economic growth is the increase of real national output or real national income.People who think that the increase in national income is due to harder work and longer working hours, as a result, people are getting more stressed and they have no time for leisure. Happiness is sacrificed in the process of economic growth.Like what siji said, singaporeans' living pace is faster in comparison with that of Europeans.When taking a train or bus, you can always obverse that more than half of the people who are sitting are napping.This is abnormal for such a developed country. people commonly believe that people's lives suppose to be more pleased. Therefor,for current sigapore, the puesuit of happiness would mean a sacrifice of the economic growth. However, this may not be the truth foe other countries, especially for the developing countries. As a country's increase in national income may due to the result of innovation and improvement of technology.Workers increase their productivity and thus they do not need to work longer hours to increase their output.And i think what matters more is efficiency. If a country's economy is efficient, workers are more efficient, they can work less hours to maintain the same level of output, and the extra consumption from their leisure will also generate some economic growth. B. As i said,singapore is a country where the pace og living is fast.although the GDP may be high, if measured in GNH, it will be low, thus underestimate our true economic growth.
As for Question A: Singapore is a well developed city state with modern facilities. People have a general materialistic mindset that the more they can consume, they happier they will be, thanks to the better living standard and satisfaction.
ReplyDeleteAs the industries are mainly related to international trade, economic growth of Singapore depends on trade. NI=C+I+G+X-M.
However, to sustain economic growth, Singapore must export more and/or import less. This means Singaporeans will have less goods to consume, and less variety, leading to dissatisfaction or unhappiness.
Nevertheless, in reality, pursuit of happiness doesnot always block the economic growth. As people become happy, they will be less stressed out when doing work and thus have higher working efficiency, or productivity, which strengthens growth.
On the other hand, pursuit of happiness also involves greater consumption-more people will go to sentosa, cinema or restaurants, thus lifting AD and leads to actual growth.
But this also means that they will spend more leisure time, becoming complacent and thus work less-weaker growth
February 17, 2010 5:21 AM
Lucas:
ReplyDeleteA) I don't think that you necessarily have to sacrifice economic growth to pursue happiness. I found this article (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1919162,00.html) about Utah implementing a four-day work-week (with longer hours each day) very interesting because it shows how we can better spread out our time to increase productivity and leisure. Their working hours remain the same (8 hours x 5 days versus 10 hours x 4 days) yet they have much more leisure time to spend because their time is segregated better. There are also unexpected benefits (like for non-state employees). This really does show us how smarter policy can help us achieve both economic growth and happiness.
I also agree with Wan Hao in that Singaporeans will probably be able to work more productively when they are more happy -this again shows how growth and happiness are not in conflict.
I again agree with Wan Hao that you could increase a nation's happiness by increasing consumption (giving rise to actual growth) in certain cases. For example, by creating more parks and park connectors, we increase G (thus AD - actual growth), and raise the level of well-being in Singapore.
In addition, we could actually have potential growth as well. To expand on Wan Hao's example, when we shift our economy's focus towards the services sector, through our integrated resorts, we both increase our productive capacity in this area (AS) and increase C (AD), resulting in sustained growth as well as greater leisure opportunities for Singaporeans.
B) I think that this is because most countries are, by now, very caught up in the international market system, and would find it very hard to adjust from GDP to GNH. Many moves to increase GNH (like banning MTV) would prove politically unpopular as well, and be seen negatively as 'paternalistic'. It would be easier for governments to improve upon GDP, and have complementary measurement systems and implement policies that would account for the 'happiness' aspect of economics.
Since my classmates above have illustrated the positive relationship between economic growth and happiness in Singapore, I will just suggest one point oon why the pursuit of happiness might hinder economic growth.
ReplyDeleteThe pursuit of happiness means that people will generally spend more of their income on consumption. This leads to a dip in savings and thus a rise in interest rate. In turn, this might lead to a drop in FDI flowing into Singapore as foreign companies might be wary of the high interest rate. Applying the formuala: AD = C+I+G+(X-M), when I falls, AD will also fall ceteris paribus. This might hinder economic growth to some extent.
Of course, the benefits of pursuing happiness on stimulating economic growth is very significant, as postulated by the two comments above. Therefore, it might still be favourable for Singapore to focus on the pursuit of happiness despite the possible obstacle it might impose on economic growth.
Singaporeans' pace of life is quite fast and we live a more stressful lifestyle compare to other developed countries especially the European ones. Given our high level of economic development, maybe Singapore can afford to pursue happiness.
ReplyDeleteHowever, i agree with hongtao that this move is to be accompanied by economic growth. Singapore, being small and open, is different from many other developed countries in the sense that we are highly dependent on FDI. Despite the rise in interest rate, measures to increase the degree of happiness of Singaporeans such as reducing working hours may further discourage foreign investors. We have already been pressurized by other Asian developing countries which provide cheaper labor, resources and more attractive policies for investment. Even their level of technology is catching up with us. At this crucial junction of competition, if we decide to shift our focus away from economic development, i m afraid we will lose many more opportunities to the competitors as investors may switch to other countries to maximize production and profit. This will affect our longterm economic growth. Good economic well-being is a vary important factor contributing to people's sense of happiness, if we can't ensure a bright future, we can't really be much happy as well.
As for question b, many countries are still in the process of improving the SOL of its people by increasing economic growth. Using GNH, which a relatively new concept maybe too risky for these countries. Moreover, happiness can't be seriously considered without a proper economic standard. I guess that's why most countries are still speculating. If in the long term more countries are to try and prove its effectiveness, the rest can be convinced to follow.
Thanks to the abovementioned ideas, I get an idea that pursuit of happiness will surely stimulate consumption in the short run; in the long run, more entertaining resorts like the casino will be built, creating more jobs and boosting GDP. AD will increase significantly, while As will shift right a little due to the already bustling tourist industry.
ReplyDeleteHowever, more consumption also means less saving, high interest rate, thus less investment, be it foreign or local. Thus, potential growth will be limited.
What will happen then? Maybe inflation.
B> for the second question， ｗｈｙ GDP, but
not GNH? happiness is an abstract psychological term. Who know what real happiness is? being Overly happy, or complacent, may even ruin one's prospect; but as for consumption or national income, it is a tangible benchmark to measure a solid figure. If nations are uncertain of a measure, leaders dare not to try them and put national stablity at stake.
I d like to liken GDP to math, which is more general and practical in daily life, and GNH to philosophy, which is not approachable by everyone but does have its beauty.
(b) I feel that no country uses the GNH because countries have different standards of happiness, especially between developed and developing countries. It is difficult for countries to read an agreement as to "What is Happiness" One simple example: With the high quality of life in Singapore, it is normal for us to have eat for our meals every day. But if given chicken meat for 1 week straight, i am sure that all of us will get sick of eating it and feel very unhappy. However if chicken were to be given to the people in Africa, they will be happy because most of them have no money for food. Even though the people in Africa feel happier than Singaporeans in this case, in reality the quality of life in Singapore is better than that in Africa. And so, using the GNH to measure the quality of life may be inaccurate.
ReplyDeleteAnother reason is that the measurement of the quality of life using the GDP has been used by the countries for many years and they are used to this way of calculation. Furthemore, some countries are afraid that the pursuit of happiness might mean a sacrifice of economic growth as mentioned by my classmates above. Like what Siji said, it is also very risky for developing countries as they have not set a strong foundation of their economy.
According to the dictionary, "Happiness results from the possession of attainment of something that one considers good" Normally, it is when we have the ability and freedom to obtain the things that we want that we feel happy, which then again also means that we enjoy a high quality of life because we have the money to buy those things. Thus i feel that no country chooses the GNH as GDP is still the better measurement of the quality of life.
A)Do you expect that the pursuit of happiness will mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore?
ReplyDeleteAccording to a report released by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the happiest countries in the world are mostly the Northern European countries. Denmark, which was ranked first, had a GDP per capita of $68 000 while the United States, which did not get into the top 10 happiest countries in the world, had a GDP per capita of $47, 335. These results were largely attributed to their high economic status which seems to go against the notion that happiness and economic growth are mutually exclusive.
However, what is interesting to note is how they went about conducting their research. Just how exactly do they gauge happiness?
They asked respondents if they experienced six different forms of negative or positive feelings within the last day. Questions include, ‘Did you enjoy something you did yesterday?’ and ‘Did you learn something yesterday?’ The questions were scored numerically from 1- 1oo and countries were ranked according to this score.
However, the findings are not a fool- proof method as they are not a clear representation of happiness. For example, I may have learnt something new yesterday (like learning how to post an update on GoogleDocs) but that does not necessarily imply that I was happy about it. This is somewhat similar to Clarice’s example about the different happiness levels experienced by Singaporeans and Africans after eating chicken rice. The point we are driving at is that happiness is ambiguous. The things that may make you happy may not make me happy and as such, using GNP to measure standard of livings among different countries will be inaccurate and difficult.
Hence, we cannot use this report by OECD to completely reject the idea that happiness does not come with a price, with that price being economic growth.
Perhaps we can look into various aspects that would make a person happy and standardise this internationally. Possible aspects we can explore would be national identity, family, social, community networks, work- life balance, health, education and transport systems and level of wealth. Of course, it would take alot of time and effort to come up with a comprehensive and complete assessment of happiness.
To say that the pursuit of happiness sacrifices economic growth, we will have to look at the things that we do to achieve this happiness. Should watching movies make me happy, I would be watching more movies to make me happier and this would drive economic growth since National Income = C + I + G + X – M and by watching movies, I would be raising C. This way, I would be well along my way in my pursuit of happiness while aiding economic growth. (Of course, this increase in AD has to be accompanied by the rightward shift of the LRAS to make it an actual growth)
Although Bhutan may be ranked as the 8th happiest country in the world, the fact that the more well- to- do Western Countries are still able to fare better than Bhutan prove to show that happiness does not necessarily imply hindered economic growth.
a) Do you expect that the pursuit of happiness will mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore?
ReplyDeleteSome of the posts above mentioned that the degree of happiness is directly related to consumption (quantity of goods and services consumed), but it may not hold true forever especially for a more economically developed country like Singapore where people generally have a higher standard of living. There is demand for luxury goods such as brandy clothes and sports cars. Consumers have a great variety of goods and services to choose from. This may contribute to higher degree of happiness. However, problems raised from excess consumption are becoming more prevalent in developed countries. For example, obesity and eating disorders due to too much consumption of fast food has caught attention of health organisations in various countries and the Health Promotion Board is trying to promote healthier food choices for Singaporeans. Another typical example in Singapore is the usage of air conditioners which is harmful for people’s health due to great difference in temperature between indoor and outdoor environment (i.e. catching cold more easily). These health problems due to consumption will definitely compromise the happiness of the consumers. If consumption on such goods and services is reduced, economic growth will be hindered to some extent (C is reduced). Problems such as structural unemployment may even arise (i.e. fewer jobs for fast food restaurant operators and air conditioner retailers or producers) if the situation becomes serious enough. HOWEVER, this may boost the demand for healthier choices of goods and services, resources can be rechanneled to these industries to solve unemployment though it may take quite some time to achieve.
On the other hand, I think the pursuit of happiness without a sacrifice of economic growth can be done by increasing government expenditure on improving infrastructure and public environment. For example, construction of parks can allow stressed Singaporeans to relax after a whole day’s work to relax and better public transport system (more convenient and pleasant MRT stations). In this way, the G component of the AD will increase which leads to economic growth.
b) Why is it that no other country chooses the GNH for their policies on economic growth and resource allocation but continue to study its wider good and spiritual benefits?
Firstly, the state of happiness is highly subjective. It is very hard to set a standard to measure how happy people can be. As Caijia mentioned above, the questions asked in the questionnaire may not be a good indicator of the degree of happiness for everyone. The understanding of happiness differs a lot between different groups of people (i.e. age, income level, gender, etc). GNH faces an even greater difficulty in measurement than GDP which is formulated by concrete figures and no other country has such a standardised system to measure it yet.
Secondly, the majority of the countries around the world are still working on improving the standard of living, even the economically developed countries such as the US still needs to do so because it still faces problems such as income inequality and inadequate healthcare system which are also essential to the standard of living of its people.
a) Do you expect that the pursuit of happiness will mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore?
ReplyDeleteI think that the pursuit of happiness does not necessarily mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore. According to the KOF Index of Globalisation 2008 provided by the Swiss Economic Institute, Singapore shows the highest score in economic globalisation. This is in view with policies by the government (ie. Five Day Work Week) to improve our work-life balance, yet, this has not compromised our economic growth over the last few years. Thus i agree with Wan Hao that economic growth and pursuit of happiness are not in conflict.
However, as Singapore is a small and open economy, we are vulnerable to foreign competition. This intense competition has more or less caused policies by the government to backfire over time, because in an attempt to not compromise our economic growth, people are actually working longer hours on weekdays to make up for the shortened working week, this would lead to unhappiness.
Also, according to one of the four pillars of Bhutan’s measure of GNH which is the affluence of natural environment, fulfilling this in Singapore would indeed hinder economic growth as Singapore is a landlocked country and our natural environment is rapidly cleared to make space for industries which would drive economic growth by encouraging more investors or creating more employment. Despite this, Singapore has also done is part to ensure sustainable development such as Singapore’s opening of City Square Mall which is an eco-friendly mall which cares for our environment.
For developing countries, perhaps economic growth should be the main focus to reduce poverty, but for Singapore, I agree with wan hao that “happier people” would have a higher productivity, thus more likely to attract foreign talents or perhaps foreign investments which would mean an increase in AD due to an increase in the I component of the equation AD=C+I+G+(X-M). Singapore would experience actual growth and increase in GDP. Singapore is mainly dependent on FDI to drive economic growth, thus the pursuit for happiness can actually help to propel economic growth instead. However, in the pursuit of happiness, the government must choose its policies properly so that the economy can progress together with our level of happiness.
b) Why is it that no other country chooses the GNH for their policies on economic growth and resource allocation but continue to study its wider good and spiritual benefits?
The measure of GNH is ambiguous as discussed by Clarice and Caijia, and the definition of happiness caries from country to country with different standards of living. Thus, a more practical and accurate approach to measure the economic growth of a country is to measure the GDP, which includes all the material aspects and economic activity of a country. However, as GNH assess the material, emotional, psychological and needs of a country and focuses on individual welfare, it is useful to consider the happiness level of the country to actually look at the citizen’s welfare. I found this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ep4DWx1--sY&feature=player_embedded) which talks about measuring a country’s development beyond GDP which is quite interesting as it actually shows that there is a need to consider happiness as an alternative to measure a country’s progress
a) Do you expect that the pursuit of happiness will mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Xinyu and Lucas that the pursuit of happiness will not interfere with economic growth in Singapore. If we assume (by common sense) that more leisure time and less stress means happier lives for Singaporeans, it could be achieved by increasing productivity of workers. with increased productivity, workers will be able to complete the same task with less time, thus leaving more time for recreational activities. Being more skillful also means they will face less stress in losing their jobs. Actually, the Singapore government has already realized the importance of boosting productivity of workers and firms. In Singapore Budget 2010, the government has placed great emphasis on boosting the productivity of the workers by allocating 5.5 billion dollars over the next 5 years on it. The measures to increase productivity includes:
a) one billion dollars for new national productivity fund
b) 480million annually in new incentives to spur innovation
c) 2.5 billion over 5 years for training and skill upgrade
If the money is able to fulfill its role in boosting productivity, there will be an increase in happiness level as well as an economic growth.
But I disagree with some of the comments posted above that more consumptions gives rise to higher level of happiness especially in the case of developed countries such as Singapore. ( I am not sure whether the argument I am going to say can stand)Since there is always the BIG problem of scarcity, no matter how much more we are able to consume(C) now because of economic growth, there will always be new and unlimited desires to have more. Material will not bring sustainable happiness. On an other note, happiness differs for each person and are dependent on too many factors, so how are we going to define happiness in the first place?
I would think that measuring SOL(standard of living) should be better than measuring happiness level directly simply because SOL is a more concrete concept. For instant: by televisions per capita or the average education level of the citizens. A better standard of living should give rise to a happier life and it would not conflict with the economic growth either. In fact, economic growth(GDP)is an integral part of the SOL.
This also explains the reasons for countries not having GNH but GDP. Standard of Living is the basis of happiness while GDP is the basis of SOL. Can they even consider happiness when some of the third world countries are still struggling with the basic human needs? I am not saying that people from poorer countries cannot feel happy but people are more likely to be happy with enough money to buy basic necessities. yeah and that's all I want to say....
But CAN SOMEONE PLS EXPLAIN HOW DOES DECREASED SAVING RESULTS IN DECREASED INTEREST RATE? as mentioned by quite a lot of you.......
Cheers~~~~:)BTW, i feel happy when I have excess money to by chicken wings to eat~~~~
a) Do you expect that the pursuit of happiness will mean a sacrifice of economic growth in Singapore?
ReplyDeleteThere's a famous theory in psychology, known as the Maslow's heirachy of needs. in it, describes the most basic needs of human beings. (Google it for more info)
At the bottom of the pyramid would be neccesities for survival (eg, food, water etc) next would be the need for the feeling of safety (employment, health etc), at the next level would be the need for love (friendship, family) followed by esteem (power, feeling of respect etc) and at the highest level- self actualisation- the need to become what one seeks to be in life.
Before we can even answer the question,perhaps we need to get a rough(but not definite) idea of what exactly happiness is. Of course, the pyramid of needs may not be entirely true, as mentioned by Clarice and Cai Jia earlier; but it can still aid us in discovering more about the meaning of happiness.
we have to ask ourselves how-economic growth can help fulfill our needs? Economic growth can definitely satisfy the very basics of our needs of the pyramid- bare neccesities and security.
However, it might come into conflict with other aspects of human desires. For example, the increased working hours might clash with the need for intimacy with friends and family. There are also other factors as mentioned by Fan Xing such as excessive fast food and air conditioners that comes with economical growth as well.
However, there are also other benefits that economic growth brings- eg, the expansion and development of new industry. (eg, engineering, music, arts) The expansion of these industries can help people fulfil their needs of self-actualisation, one of the requirements of the pyramid (eg, to become a chef, musician, scientist etc) which might otherwise been impossible to acheive had it not been for economic growth.
It is also possible that policies implemented for growth can also help us acheive happiness, As seen by policies such as the 4-day work week as mentioned by Lucas earlier.
I believe that economic growth does not always come into conflict with happiness. More economic growth does not always mean less happiness, as shown by the many examples mentioned by my classmates. Perhaps, what we really need to know is how we can truly ultilise economic growth to acheive happiness.
a)I feel that many Singaporeans are overworked and stretched out to their limits. In our society where we are constantly upgrading and improving our small city, we have begun to overlook the important things, and set wrong priorities. Families spend less time interacting, we sleep less, become grumpier and everyone is constantly tired.
ReplyDeleteHowever, this is just the case in Singapore. In Sweden, which consistently comes up with new innovations and interesting designs like IKEA, and is still prospering, their labor market is extremely well taken care of, and they enjoy many benefits and work security. You can read more about their labor market at this website http://www.sweden.se/eng/Home/Work/Labor-market/. Their economy is still flourishing, even with free education and tax subsidized health care. This shows that it is possible to have economic growth without having to sacrifice happiness and the peoples welfare.
On the other hand, it might be the way for Singapore because the government is introducing foreign talents into our country, and the competition is pushing us all to strive harder, work harder and to constantly be on our toes. Additionally, Singapore is such a small city. Unlike Sweden that is well established, with good weather, beautiful natural scenery and a relatively safe country. We have to work harder to keep our standards of living high, and keep up our world standings as a happening city to be in.
Hence, I feel it is a high possibility that we would have to sacrifice a sizeable portion of happiness for economic growth in Singapore.
b)Perhaps countries believe that economy and resource allocation cannot be mixed with the citizens well being and spiritual values. Since these 2 things might clash with a disastrous outcome, they decide not create the possibility of that happening. Most countries are gearing toward a multi-racial, multi-religious society, which is inevitable with the onslaught of globalization. Hence, countries might feel that they should not create a political system based on the well-being of religion and race, and instead use something more impartial and will not incur complications in the long run.
A. A lot of my classmates have commented on this issue, While some agree and the majority disagree.In my view, i think that people can gain happiness without sacrificing the country's economic growth.Firstly, we need to define economic growth.Generally speaking, economic growth is the increase of real national output or real national income.People who think that the increase in national income is due to harder work and longer working hours, as a result, people are getting more stressed and they have no time for leisure. Happiness is sacrificed in the process of economic growth.Like what siji said, singaporeans' living pace is faster in comparison with that of Europeans.When taking a train or bus, you can always obverse that more than half of the people who are sitting are napping.This is abnormal for such a developed country. people commonly believe that people's lives suppose to be more pleased. Therefor,for current sigapore, the puesuit of happiness would mean a sacrifice of the economic growth. However, this may not be the truth foe other countries, especially for the developing countries. As a country's increase in national income may due to the result of innovation and improvement of technology.Workers increase their productivity and thus they do not need to work longer hours to increase their output.And i think what matters more is efficiency. If a country's economy is efficient, workers are more efficient, they can work less hours to maintain the same level of output, and the extra consumption from their leisure will also generate some economic growth.
ReplyDeleteB. As i said,singapore is a country where the pace og living is fast.although the GDP may be high, if measured in GNH, it will be low, thus underestimate our true economic growth.