空喊口號解決不了問題 幸福離不開財富大綱

Can we buy happiness? This perennial question is back at the top of the agenda.

我們能買到幸福嗎？這一永恆的問題正再度回到首要議程上來。

Pharrell Williams, whose gloriously catchy song “Happy” is the biggest international hit in years, declares that you are happy “if you feel like a room without a roof”. Carlos Slim, the Mexican telecoms magnate who was the world’s richest man for many years, suggests that it is time, rather than money, that we should value. He has proposed a three-day working week. People could work three 11-hour days and then enjoy their family.

法瑞爾•威廉姆斯(Pharrell Williams)唱過一首極其動人的歌曲《幸福》(Happy)，多年來一直位列全球最熱門歌曲。他在歌裏唱到，“如果你感覺自己是一個沒有屋頂的房間”，那麼你就是幸福的。曾多年位居全球富豪榜首位的墨西哥電信業大亨卡洛斯•斯利姆(Carlos Slim)認爲，我們應該重視的是時間，而非金錢。他提出每週工作3天。人們可以每週工作3天，每天工作11小時，接下來就享受與家人一起的時光。

The idea stirred up much reaction, but it made sense. Latin countries have a working day with a siesta for lunches, or mixing with family. Even though they are poorer in economic terms, many visiting Americans and northern Europeans have the sense that they are happier.

這個建議激起了很大反響，但它是合理的。拉美國家在工作日有午睡時間，或者去吃午餐或者與家人團聚。儘管從經濟上來說，他們較爲貧窮，但很多來到拉美的美國人和北歐人感覺他們更幸福。

Economists want to measure this. Happiness is of course subjective, and hard to measure. But pollsters have asked questions about it for decades now, while economists interpret the data.

經濟學家希望衡量幸福。當然，幸福是主觀的，很難衡量。但幾十年來，調查者一直詢問關於幸福的問題，而經濟學家們一直在解讀這些數據。

Research in the 1970s suggested that within one country, richer people were happier than poor ones. This tended to confirm the belief that as humans we are programmed to compete. But it also found that countries grew no happier as they grew wealthier, while rich countries were no happier than poor countries.

上世紀70年代的研究顯示，在一國內部，富人比窮人更幸福。這往往證實了一種看法：作爲人類，我們生來就是要競爭。但當時的研究還發現，國家不會隨着變富而變得更幸福，而富國也並不比窮國更幸福。

As many assume that life is about “the pursuit of happiness,” and the implicit goal of economic policy is to maximise GDP, this created a problem. Taken to its logical extreme, it implied that there was no need to prioritise economic growth.

很多人認爲，生活的目的就是“追求幸福”，而經濟政策的隱含目標是最大限度地提高國內生產總值(GDP)，因此這就產生了一個問題。如果從極端邏輯來看，這意味着沒有必要將經濟增長排在首位。

In recent years, Justin Wolfers, an economist now working at the Brookings Institution, armed with new polling data, has tried to show that there is no paradox. He summarised his findings in a speech to the CFA Institute in Chicago last week.

最近幾年，現供職於布魯金斯學會(Brookings Institution)的經濟學家賈斯汀•沃爾弗斯(Justin Wolfers)手中有了新的調查數據，他試圖證明，這裏面不存在悖論。他最近在芝加哥特許金融分析師協會(CFA Institute)的一次演講中總結了他的發現。

His data include international polls carried out by the World Values Survey, which has been in operation since 1981, the Gallup World Poll, which started work in 2005, and the Pew Global Attitudes Survey, which has conducted surveys since 2002. These surveys reveal that the link between wealth and happiness is not only strong, but stronger than most would think. Within countries, people get happier as they rise up the income scale, with surveys showing that 100 per cent of those on more than $500,000 a year are happy.

他的數據包括“世界價值觀調查”（World Values Survey，始於1981年）、“蓋洛普世界調查”（Gallup World Poll，始於2005年）以及“皮尤全球態度調查”（Pew Global Attitudes Survey，始於2002年）等全球調查。這些調查顯示，財富與幸福不僅關係緊密，而且緊密程度超出多數人的想象。在國家內部，人們會隨着收入水平的提高而感覺更幸福，調查顯示，年收入超過50萬美元的人100%都感覺幸福。

Their sample size is too small: plainly some very rich people are unhappy, but they eluded these surveys. The finding seems so robust that at any given level of income, the best single way to make you happier is to give you more money.

他們的樣本規模太小：一些非常富有的人顯然並不幸福，但他們沒有被納入調查。在任何既定收入水平上，讓人們變得更爲幸福的最佳方法就是給他們更多的錢，這個發現看上去如此有力。

There are also signs, from what is still very limited data, that growing wealth tends to make nations happier – and the reverse. Americans grew far less happy once their economy slipped into a severe recession in 2008. And people in rich countries are happier than in poor.

還有一些來自仍然非常有限的數據的跡象表明，一國財富的日益增加往往會讓這個國家更幸福，反之亦然。2008年，當美國經濟陷入嚴重衰退時，美國人似乎變得遠沒有原來幸福。而且富國的人們要比窮國的人們更幸福。

If there is anything surprising here, it is that wealth is more important to happiness than many would expect, not less. The simpler and less complicated lives in poorer countries do not compensate for the money that can be made for people living more complicated and stressful lives in more successful economies. And Mr Wolfers even points to surveys suggesting that we do not, collectively, feel a need to compete against the Joneses. People do not measure themselves against others.

如果說研究中有什麼意外發現的話，那就是，財富對於幸福的重要性超出、而不是低於很多人的預期。在較爲貧窮的國家，生活更爲簡單而不那麼複雜，但這敵不過生活在更爲成功的經濟體、過着更爲複雜且壓力更大的生活的人所賺取的收入。沃爾弗斯甚至指出，一些調查顯示，我們總體而言認爲沒有必要與別人攀比。人們不會拿自己與其他人做比較來衡量自己的幸福。

Surveys have even tried to break down the components of happiness. And indeed, Mr Wolfers shows that people in wealthier countries are more likely to complain of stress, and of feeling worried.

調查甚至試圖分解幸福的構成。實際上，沃爾弗斯指出，較爲富有國家的人們更有可能抱怨壓力以及憂慮感。

But these correlations are not strong. Meanwhile, on a battery of measures, people in rich countries have a better chance of happiness: they are less likely to have experienced physical pain recently (presumably because they are less likely to do manual work); less likely (surprisingly) to have suffered depression; more likely to have had good tasting food to eat; more likely to smile and laugh a lot; and more likely to be treated with respect. They are less likely to be angry or bored, and somewhat more likely to feel well rested.

然而，這些關聯性並不強。與此同時，從很多標準來看，富國的人們更有機會感到幸福：近年遭受身體痛苦的可能性較低（這大概是因爲他們從事體力工作的可能性較小）；感到抑鬱的可能性較小（這令人感到意外）；更有可能吃到美味的食品；更有可能多多地笑；更有可能被尊重。他們感到憤怒或枯燥的可能性較小，更有可能感覺精力充沛。

What are the implications of this? First, economic growth should be an imperative after all. Perhaps we really should be working flat-out in the western style after all, despite Mr Slim’s suggestions.

這些研究有什麼啓示？首先，不管怎樣經濟增長應是一項必要任務。儘管斯利姆建議每週工作3天，但我們或許確實應按照西方的風格賣力工作。

And some paradoxical implications of earlier research now vanish. Letting some people be richer than others is not a problem – the key is to raise income for all, and not to worry if some do far better.

早先研究給出的一些自相矛盾的啓示現在都消失了。讓一些人比其他人更富有不是問題，關鍵是要提高所有人的收入，不要擔心一些人是否遠比其他人富有。

For employers, Carlos Slim’s suggestion of flexible working may be worth a try, but the inconvenient truth is that the best way to a happy workforce is to pay them.

對於員工而言，卡洛斯•斯利姆提出的彈性工作建議可能值得一試，但一個令人尷尬的事實是，讓員工變得幸福的最佳方式是付給他們工資。

If this evidence and its implications do not convince, we could always follow Pharrell Williams. Economists could ask everyone to “clap along if you know what happiness can do for you”.

如果本文所述的證據及其啓示不能說服人的話，我們總是可以按照法瑞爾•威廉姆斯歌裏唱的那麼做。經濟學家可以邀請所有人“一起拍手，如果你知道幸福能爲你做什麼”。

John Authers is the FT’s Senior Investment Columnist

本文作者是英國《金融時報》高級投資專欄作家