Talk:Easterlin paradox

Business Mid‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Policy implications

I'm confused by the bit in the article about policy implications of the Easterlin paradox. How could an economist draw a policy implication from self-reported cardinal utility levels? Jerkmonster (talk) 12:32, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Currently the 1-para summary says this is a key result which implies we should switch well-being for GNP as government policy

I argue that either the summary should stick to the so-called paradox: the claim that income doesn't raise well-being, note that it is contested, and steer clear of supposed implications.

Alternatively, we could add a cite to the claim, add a cite to the evidence for logarithmic increase in happiness with wealth and then not that, with additional assumptions about the value of well-being, the role of government, etc. we should either maintain per capita income or increase it strongly.

Misc

I am amazed by how unsettled this important question seems to be! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.67.197.191 (talk) 07:47, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Easterlin paradox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029212109/http://ibe.eller.arizona.edu/docs/2010/martinsson/happiness_jel_2008.pdf to http://ibe.eller.arizona.edu/docs/2010/martinsson/happiness_jel_2008.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:45, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Angus Deaton

There must be a section added to this article on the work of Angus Deaton - a nobel prize winning economist - and the implications of his work on the Easterlin paradox. From what I can tell, he has essentially provided a definitive resolution to the problem, but other editors should investigate the scope and nuances of his work to ensure any extension made is of high quality. Tyrone Jahir (talk) 08:10, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]