Most active commenters
  • psunavy03(4)

←back to thread

Bhutan, after prioritizing happiness, now faces an existential crisis

(www.cbsnews.com)
271 points nradov | 24 comments | 18 Nov 24 13:53 UTC | HN request time: 1.846s | source | bottom
Show context
jaysonelliot ◴[18 Nov 24 14:52 UTC] No.42172799[source]▶
Despite the headline CBS gave the article, it seems the problem is not with happiness, but with the seductive appeal of materialism and the effects of exposing one culture to another.

Social comparison theory is the idea that our satisfaction with what we have isn't an objective measure, but is actually based on what we see other people have. Young people generally seem to have an innate desire to leave their hometowns and seek out what else might be waiting out there for them. When you add in globalization and media influence exposing them to what looks like a "better" life with more things, it's not surprising that they've seen ~9% of young people leave Bhutan.

The other question is, what will happen if Bhutan does increase their financial wealth as well as their happiness? Will they then see a net influx of people through immigration, looking for the lifestyle Bhutan promises? And will those new people be able to maintain the culture Bhutan has cultivated?

It sounds like the concept of Gross National Happiness is a successful one, on its own, but it brings new challenges that couldn't have been forseen originally. That doesn't mean they can't solve them without giving up their core values.

replies(7): >>42172887 #>>42173063 #>>42173254 #>>42173619 #>>42173660 #>>42173728 #>>42179386 #
cardanome ◴[18 Nov 24 15:15 UTC] No.42173063[source]▶
Nah, the issue is the one that many developing countries suffer from: brain drain.

The best people leave the country because the can earn orders of magnitude more money in the developed world. This is why countries like the US keep being so successful while developing countries stay poor.

It is just the rational best decision for a young people to try their luck abroad and earn more money that they could ever dream of in their home country. Why shouldn't they? Idealism? There is nothing wrong with striving for a better life, it is what moves humanity forward.

Offering great and free education will always backfire for developing nations.

The solution is to either keep the population ignorant, hamstringing their education so they are less useful abroad and implementing a strict censorship regime so they don't get "corrupted" by the West or well force them to stay.

We saw that all play out in the Soviet Block. There is a good reason there was a wall.

I think the fairest solution is to NOT make education free but instant offer a deal of having to stay in the country and work for X-years in the profession one has been trained in by the state. Once they get older and settle down they are less likely to leave anyway.

Being a developing country just sucks. There is a reason most never break the cycle of poverty.

replies(22): >>42173148 #>>42173163 #>>42173280 #>>42173286 #>>42173298 #>>42173323 #>>42173483 #>>42173712 #>>42174306 #>>42175177 #>>42175245 #>>42175256 #>>42175422 #>>42175581 #>>42176184 #>>42176296 #>>42176930 #>>42177713 #>>42177808 #>>42177921 #>>42178010 #>>42181454 #
FredPret ◴[18 Nov 24 15:32 UTC] No.42173280[source]▶
I'm part of the brain drain from my developing country-of-birth.

It's more than just money. To me, the money is a symptom of the real issue.

The real issue for me was the culture that exists in my birthplace. It just isn't welcoming to nerds or rich people. It doesn't lend itself to ever becoming developed.

When I compare and contrast to the New World: I find a much more welcoming culture that encourages personal progress. And not only are nerds welcome, but all sorts of productive folk. It's absolutely no surprise to me that the US is outperforming the rest of the world economically to a comical degree.

replies(7): >>42173586 #>>42173695 #>>42173745 #>>42173842 #>>42175404 #>>42175551 #>>42176878 #
1. akudha ◴[18 Nov 24 16:10 UTC] No.42173745[source]▶
U.S is outperforming everyone else economically. At what cost though? And for how long?

There is an insane wealth gap. People always seem to be stressed. There is plenty of food, but quality isn’t great. We don’t even need to start on healthcare and housing and college tuition. Then there is gun violence. Women’s rights are going away slowly too.

Sure, developing countries have lots of problems too. I suppose each person has to decide what kind of problems they are ok dealing with?

Sad part is - most of these problems are man made. Even sadder is that just a few dozen people seem to be the cause for most problems

replies(4): >>42174023 #>>42174193 #>>42174241 #>>42175214 #
2. FredPret ◴[18 Nov 24 16:33 UTC] No.42174023[source]▶
> There is an insane wealth gap.

Your unexamined prior is that this is a bad and unsustainable thing. It was always thus.

> People always seem to be stressed.

They really aren't. Americans are extremely happy and relaxed compared to where I'm from.

> We don’t even need to start on healthcare and housing and college tuition.

I think we do. Healthcare in the US has more red tape and expense than would be optimal, but the actual outcomes are still good. Keep in mind some caveats:

- US healthcare spend drives a ton of medical innovation that then benefits the rest of the world

- North America is going through a Fentanyl crisis that's cutting life expectancies

> Then there is gun violence. Women’s rights are going away slowly too.

This is a problem but not with the economy.

replies(1): >>42221698 #
3. returningfory2 ◴[18 Nov 24 16:48 UTC] No.42174193[source]▶
> I suppose each person has to decide what kind of problems they are ok dealing with?

What problems do you think people in the United States have that people in Mexico don't? Of this list you gave, most of them seem to apply to people in Mexico.

replies(1): >>42176488 #
4. sifar ◴[18 Nov 24 16:52 UTC] No.42174241[source]▶
>> There is an insane wealth gap.

Relative wealth gap in developing countries dwarfs that of the developed ones.

Source: Personal observation.

replies(2): >>42175105 #>>42175859 #
5. Timon3 ◴[18 Nov 24 18:09 UTC] No.42175105[source]▶
Is there a reason to trust your anecdote instead of looking at data? I'm sure this topic has been researched.
replies(2): >>42175703 #>>42175844 #
6. psunavy03 ◴[18 Nov 24 18:17 UTC] No.42175214[source]▶
The violent crime rate in the US is a fraction of what it was 30 years ago. The only difference is that now every crime is getting blasted from the rooftops by the news media as propaganda to generate clicks on ads.

There is a violent crime problem in specific neighborhoods of specific cities, largely tied to gangs and the drug trade. But there is zero empirical data to suggest that it is more of a nationwide problem than it was in the 1980s and 1990s.

The majority of gun deaths in this country (60-80 percent jurisdiction-dependent) are people committing suicide, often middle-aged men. Beyond that, the average gun murder is a young man with a criminal record killing another young man with a criminal record using an illegally-possessed handgun.

replies(2): >>42176087 #>>42176408 #
7. ◴[18 Nov 24 19:00 UTC] No.42175703{3}[source]▶
8. baq ◴[18 Nov 24 19:15 UTC] No.42175844{3}[source]▶
Yeah it’s called the gini index. US isn’t great but isn’t anywhere near the worst.

In absolute terms though just look at pictures of e.g. rural Russia va Moscow.

replies(1): >>42176560 #
9. FuriouslyAdrift ◴[18 Nov 24 19:17 UTC] No.42175859[source]▶
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_we...

tl;dr as of 2021 Gini coefficents, Brazil is the worst and Japan is best large nation... (there's tons of nuance missing here, but that's the basics)

10. returningfory2 ◴[18 Nov 24 19:39 UTC] No.42176087[source]▶
There's also the fact that way more Americans are killed by cars than in homicides. This is not to diminish the importance of tackling homicides. But the high level picture of "what is most wrong in America" is definitely skewed in weird ways that is independent of the underlying reality.
11. fuzztester ◴[18 Nov 24 20:14 UTC] No.42176408[source]▶
>The violent crime rate in the US is a fraction of what it was 30 years ago. The only difference is that now every crime is getting blasted from the rooftops by the news media as propaganda to generate clicks on ads.

How about all the mass shootings that we read about, happening every few weeks or even more frequently, sometimes back-to-back, on average, in the US? That's not violent crime? Of course it is.

>a fraction of what it was 30 years ago

And statistics don't paint the full picture, not by a long chalk, unless all you are is a bean counter. What about the personal and family and friends' trauma of all the victims and their circles? We can dismiss that as negligible, right? /s

Check these:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_th...

There were so many that I got tired of scrolling.

JFC.

replies(3): >>42176595 #>>42176669 #>>42176677 #
12. akudha ◴[18 Nov 24 20:21 UTC] No.42176488[source]▶
I was talking about immigrants. If you are deciding between two countries, each one is likely going to have a different type or level of problems - man made or otherwise. Australia is too hot, Canada is too cold. Scandinavia might be too progressive for some, Saudi Arabia might be too regressive for some.

And so on. What kind/level of issues to put up with - I suppose that varies from person to person

replies(1): >>42221820 #
13. Timon3 ◴[18 Nov 24 20:26 UTC] No.42176560{4}[source]▶
Thank you for bringing up this data point! I'm sure we both agree that's a much better argument than "trust me" :)
replies(1): >>42188345 #
14. ◴[18 Nov 24 20:29 UTC] No.42176595{3}[source]▶
15. psunavy03 ◴[18 Nov 24 20:35 UTC] No.42176669{3}[source]▶
What about the personal and family and friends' trauma of all the victims of drunken driving, alcoholism, and their circles?

Should we re-enact Prohibition, given that there are orders of magnitude more people who've been victimized by alcohol than firearms? No, that's absurd. You regulate the problem through hard, data-driven analysis, not waving the bloody shirt. Be that violent crime or addiction.

16. compiler-guy ◴[18 Nov 24 20:35 UTC] No.42176677{3}[source]▶
Don’t confuse, “the overall crime rate is down signicantly in very good ways” with “and therefore the remainder is fine”.
replies(2): >>42176696 #>>42177707 #
17. psunavy03 ◴[18 Nov 24 20:37 UTC] No.42176696{4}[source]▶
Also don't confuse the law of diminishing returns with "therefore the remainder is fine," either. There's room for regulation of many of the ills of our society, but you will always reach a point where trying to stamp out that last bit you can't get ends up taking away things that make life worth living.

I can't imagine more of a hell than being forced to live a life wrapped up in bubble wrap so someone else is convinced I'm "safe."

replies(1): >>42177724 #
18. fuzztester ◴[18 Nov 24 22:15 UTC] No.42177707{4}[source]▶
Yes, but you are talking about data and logic, while I was making a point about humanity (humanitarianism? need to check which is appropriate).

If you are from the US, and feeling defensive about my comment, and/or if you want to treat your people's deaths and crippling as just statistics, it's your call, shrug, and maybe also your death or crippling by gun violence some day, again, statistically, you know.

replies(2): >>42177933 #>>42178502 #
19. rightbyte ◴[18 Nov 24 22:46 UTC] No.42177933{5}[source]▶
If the success is not cheered we might regress to the old bad times. It is not like the only path forward is even less violent crimes.
20. psunavy03 ◴[18 Nov 24 22:50 UTC] No.42177977{6}[source]▶
Yeah, so you misrepresented what I said to call me an alcoholic and thus denigrate my point via an ad hominem. Instead of actually engaging with my argument on the merits, you misrepresent it and act like a troll.

Goodbye, you aren't worth my time.

replies(1): >>42179167 #
21. compiler-guy ◴[18 Nov 24 23:42 UTC] No.42178502{5}[source]▶
The statistical probability of gun violence affecting me is much lower than it has been historically. That is worth celebrating. And I have seen exactly no one in this thread dismiss the ongoing pain caused by the remainder as negligible. But--and this is the entire point--that amount of ongoing pain is less than it has been in the past. Definitely still real, but less of it than before.

Yes, we absolutely mourn those who are still affected by it, and we do what we can to prevent additional deaths.

But the idea that we should not be happy about our progress is absurd.

22. sifar ◴[19 Nov 24 21:35 UTC] No.42188345{5}[source]▶
I understand, however it was a disclaimer not a "trust me". One of the main reason such metrics are not as reflective of the reality is that for developing countries, the taxes are not reported accurately. A lot of wealth is officially unreported - and it is a massive amount. Such things are not captured by official statistics, by virtue of being unreported income, which leads to an incomplete or distorted picture of reality.
23. BehindBlueEyes ◴[23 Nov 24 16:30 UTC] No.42221698[source]▶
Women's rights may be more of a problem with the economy than one thinks - pressure on those rights aren't necessarily just ideological. Zooming in on this one aspect within the bigger picture, at a country level you can shape the economy via controlling immigration (do we welcome brains? do we welcome labor?) and via controlling natality (do we need to make our own labor?). If a country is hostile to immigration or limits immigration to an elite, I can well imagine eroding women's rights for purely economical reasons - needing labourers the country is not willing to welcome from abroad. Could also be done with incentives instead of taking away rights but different debate. Womens' rights determine if/how/where women can contribute to the economy, and how easily.
24. BehindBlueEyes ◴[23 Nov 24 16:51 UTC] No.42221820{3}[source]▶
I agree with you, but for anyone reading this who considers immigration: that's just a third of the decision - another third of the problems is only visible once you live there a while, and the last third is the same problems you had before that you take with you.