Random Nuclear Strikes

And this guy is stupid.

Lord Layard, UK Governmental Adviser and a professor at the London School of Economicssays that since moeny doesn’t buy happiness, government should make sure that Britons have less of it. Or, at least, wealthy Britons should have less of it.

The best society is that where the people are happiest, and the best policy is the one that produces the greatest happiness. So argued the great 18th century thinkers like Jeremy Bentham, and their admirable views did much to inspire the social reforms of the century that followed.

But in many cases it was difficult to apply the principle because so little was known about what makes people happy.

However, the last 30 years have seen a major scientific revolution, and we now know much more about what causes happiness – using the results of psychology and neuroscience.

The first thing we know is that in the last 50 years average happiness has not increased at all in Britain nor in the USA – despite massive increases in living standards.

This is because above an average income of about £10,000 per head, richer societies are no happier than poorer societies.

Richer people are of course on average happier than poorer people in the same society, but this is largely because people compare their incomes with other people.

If everyone gets richer, they feel no better off.

I don’t know what studies he is talking about or their methodologies, but if I’m making $10K more next year than I am right now, I could care less if Joe Blow is making $20K more.

Nonetheless, that is the theory Layard is using to try and say that western governments should stop working to keep their economies growing. Stagnation is what he is rooting for since, in his twisted mind, “money doesn’t buy happiness, so let’s give all our money away”.

Don’t believe me? The first of his four proposals is

The most important thing we can affect is the values which our children acquire. Schools should teach them systematically that the secret of a happy life is in giving to other people. Evidence-based programmes exist for doing this, and should become a part of our core curriculum.

I told you the guy was nuts. Where have I heard the “Get rid of your money and material possessions and you will find true happiness!” line before? Oh yes, that’s right; from socialists and cult leaders.

Think the ‘socialist’ tag is a bit harsh? His fourth proposal is

We should stop apologising about taxes: if people pay more tax as they work harder it will discourage us from an even more fevered way of life, sacrificing further our relationships with family and friends. We should also persist with income redistribution, since an extra £1 gives more happiness to poor people than to rich. That argument also implies redistribution to the Third World.

If Layard had his way, he would pump a whole generation of children who yearn to be peasants out of the UK public schools, all of them willing to give 75% or more of their income to the government in taxes, so that the government can give it to, as Larry the Cable Guy says “the starving pygmies down in New Guinea”, because they were taught that it will make them “Happy”.

Pol Pot was just trying to make his people “Happy” as well. He killed a few million of them trying get his message across though, if I remember correctly.

And not to overley beat up on the guy, but one of his last statements is

Our living standards are not threatened by China or India.

India? Maybe not, unless you count US jobs being sent over there for pennies on the dollar.

But my living standard is absolutely being threatened by China. Mass executions of dissidents and slave labor for the direct benefit of the government; I would consider those threats to my current standard of living, although I can see why Layard would not.

He’s a “Lord” after all, and that puts him at the top of the food chain.