Posted by thatoneengineer 12/16/2025
“Please imagine a ladder with steps numbered from zero at the bottom to ten at the top. Suppose we say that the top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you. If the top step is 10 and the bottom step is 0, on which step of the ladder do you feel you personally stand at the present time?”
Personally feels a little more convoluted than just asking "How happy are you, on a scale of 0-10?"
I'd also bet that they found the above "convoluted" question was one that led to the same people giving more consistent answers from day to day and moment to moment.
Even if I'm wrong I hope you see this is a much thornier problem than just asking a question and assuming the answer tells us anything about the person taking the survey.
There is also a lot of value in a question that works well enough, that you ask consistently over long stretches of time (or long stretches of distance). Maybe it's not perfect, but the longitudinal data would be worthless if they updated the wording every single year.
Although I'm no survey expert, the thing I'd like to bring to everyone's attention is how easy it is to not take into account people that have a degree of numeric or math illiteracy... which I guess they are the main target demographic that is included by these questions (and I can also guess that they make a worryingly large part of the demographic, because our systems are rarely inclusive).
In my experience, having met people from multiple countries during the time I've been living abroad, what I have noticed is that — in this world filled with inequality — it is a privilege to be able to have a good grasp in scientific subjects. And, for lots of different factors, people have setbacks or trauma that make it difficult to learn a subject that is either boring or painful to them.
So, yes the questions are a bit convoluted, but they help paint a mental image for probably the majority with a thing that they may be closely familiar with: stairs... Plus, it probably helps statisticians get a better signal to noise out of the questions, too.
Adding this nuance to the question serves to invite deeper thought and avoid assigning a motivation-based rating (like when you give the Uber driver 5 stars when what you felt was actually just "satisfactory").
A more basic rating question can invite other kinds of influence, such as a motivation in how they'd like their life to be perceived rather than how they genuinely feel it to be.
In surveys with less nuance the data tends to correlate around the extremes.
My happiness changes depending on many external factor and varies by hour and days, but the answer to the former question aren't going to change quite as often, would have probably provided the same answer over the entire year.
Socioeconomic mobility isn't the only thing that affects happiness. A good wife/husband contributes a lot to happiness, for example.
Some people will interpret it one way, some a subtly different way, but is there a reason that people's interpretation changes over time in a way that is more rapid and more significant than the underlying question of how good their life is broadly? Probably not.
There may be cultural differences that make it tricky to do comparisons between cultures / countries, but it should give something useful when looking at the same culture / country over time.
Your question is likely to be interpreted as you asking the person's current MOOD hence different answers on different times are likely. While you are thinking of a less changing wider concept.
The social context is important too, there is a social stigma around admitting that you are not happy which will play into this question too.
Now I know it's a metaphor and not a literal ladder, but it does make me wonder if that association skews the results at all..
hmm maybe answering 10 means: I only expect my life to down-roll from now on?
For Finland, discussion seems to hinge on whether "happiness" is "close enough" to "contentedness".
Things that for example the article author's favorite USA does not have. But of course a Murkin' can't accept that. I fully expect him to gripe that somehow the Corruption Perceptions Index is also somehow unfair to his favorite country too, and just cannot be right.
You had me at blaming "elites".
What's really rich is Americans deciding they no longer like their self-assigned World Police role, and managing to blame their supposed allies for that. Never underestimate the quality of Russian psyops, I guess.
These are America's choices. And it's America's choice whether to wield these in world-leading competitiveness or as ossified self-serving bureaucracy.
Other countries make other choices about where to do world-leading R&D (that Americans can take advantage of as lower prices). Chinese solar, for example.
Yes, and now they're starting to choose differently. Which is a shame, because shaming a country for acting in the worlds self-interest is a very strange thing to do.
People on HN tend to argue it’s sufficient data to be statistically significant, but I don’t see how.
(For example, he cites Blanchflower and Bryson because he prefers positive affect as a measurement of happiness – but doesn't note that Blanchflower and Bryson pool data for 2008-2017, so in terms of rankings they may be measuring something meaningful but different.)
The simplicity is nice, but for the (probable) fact that suicide attempts/rates and emigration don't correspond... so lets not call it happiness.
Lousy public transport, bankrupting healthcare and education, mass shootings, traffic, pollution.
Nobody is fooled into thinking Americans are happy.
It's a simple question, sure, but it's not clear that it's a very meaningful one, even if other approaches aren't necessarily any better. When I think of the word happiness, I don't exactly associate it with suicide or rarely smiling.
The point I took from the article is that we should stop paying attention to this meaningless metric. I didn't read it as a request to replace it with another metric.
We live with a near-universal imbalance: the reign of thin hormones. These thin hormones promise satisfaction but never deliver. They spike and vanish, leaving behind only the impulse to chase the next hit. Philosophers once spoke of desires that change the self; today, our neurochemistry is being short-circuited before the self even enters the conversation.
A thick hormone is slower, steadier. It reshapes you in the process of living it—like the oxytocin that comes from trust, or the endorphins that build with persistence. But thin hormones—those dopamine flickers from notifications, likes, and swipes—do nothing but reproduce themselves. They deliver sensation without transformation, stimulation without growth.
Modern systems have perfected the art of hijacking our endocrine circuitry. Social media fires the neurons of connection without the chemistry of friendship. Porn delivers the hormonal spike of intimacy without the vulnerability that generates oxytocin. Productivity apps grant the dopamine signature of accomplishment with nothing actually achieved. We’ve built an economy not of meaning, but of molecules. And none of it seems to be making us more alive.
At this point in my life if I see something with United States looks good compared to the rest of the world I just immediately assume it is a lie. Because the United States is nothing but lies and greed anymore. We cannot even claim innovation as a central motivator anymore.
The odd thing however is that when I ask them whether they think the average Finn is happy, they say absolutely not, but when I ask them whether they themselves are happy, most of the time I get a "oh this place is actually pretty great for weirdos like me, I just mean like, normal people would hate it here". But that's the thing: No one normal chooses to live in Finland!
If you ask a Finn, most people are actually quite harsh to the Finnish government, economy, etc - specially as of recent, since Finland now has one of the worst unemployment rate in EU. But lifestyle here is quite sober, everyone has hobbies and are quite dedicated to them. I guess the Sauna and Avanto culture are the main happiness drivers here, and tbh after experiencing it, I wouldn't change for anything else.
You see it in things like business confidence going in both directions at various times, pessimism when things are going well, optimism when things are going poorly.
It is very convenient in politics, because you can choose which figure to report to make it seem like you are saying the same thing but you can switch between them to make things look good (or bad l, depending on your attention)
Happiness is found in different places for different people, thankfully.
Sometimes Norwegian TV would show Finnish dramas while I was growing up in the '80s, and the standing joke was that the typical Finnish drama had two guys hiking through the forest, one of them saying something, and then half an hour more of hiking before the other would reply. I don't remember whether that was accurate (it's not as if I'd have kept watching), but I suspect not.
That report is correct, it just they advertise with the wrong word in the headline, I guess because it is more click-bate title than having it as "The most content country"
Firstly because the social benefits system keeps a lot of people out of trouble ' call it bribery if you like, but it meets basic needs. Secondly because there's a lot of private "security" types around - for example in the supermarkets, keeping out drunks and dealing with shoplifters - letting the police focus on the real stuff.
Unhappiness sounds much more pedestrian.
The quote really needs the first two lines:
Now is the winter of our discontent
made glorious summer by the sun of York.
York (Richard's brother, Edward, now King Edward IV) has overthrown King Henry VI. There's also an important pun: "York" also refers to their father, also named Richard, who was the Duke of York until his death at the hands of Henry's faction. So Edward is also the "son of York".
That said, Richard is being sarcastic. He's plotting the next political overthrow, which will also be successful. And who will in turn be overthrown again. That, at least, will put an end to it, if for no other reason than that literally everybody else is dead.
In this case, it's not too hard. Shakespeare likes giving you oppositions, like "winter" and "summer". Put the stress there, and the audience will follow. And you don't need to breathe at the end of the line; it can flow directly into the next one.
Even with Trump we see a lot of policies and directions that the Democrats have pursued previously.
[1] https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/alcoholis...
I get it if you feel like that question falls short of representing your own personal concept of happiness, but that question is the standard in positive psychology research for measuring self reported subjective well being, and hardly enough to say the report is "beset with methodological problems".
Titling it "The World Happiness Report Is a Sham" and calling it "beset with methodological problems", I would expect some more serious scientific malpractices, like data fabrication, calculation errors, sampling problems, p-hacking, etc., not "I think there are some problems with this variable".
The World Happiness Report can be traced back to the UN General Assembly Resolution 65/309, which was proposed by Bhutan. Therefore the intended definition of happiness in this context is similar to the one in Bhutan's Gross National Happiness index.
My immediate problem with this is the lower bound of responses in a given country would be determined by your perception of the safety nets available to you. Someone in a Scandinavian country where there are virtually no unsheltered homeless people probably doesn't index their zero to "dying of exposure on the sidewalk due to untreated mental illness," while an American who sees that regularly would.
I've always figured that this is in fact a big reason why the Nordic countries do so well on the survey: the average is lifted not by shiny happy people holding hands, but by the strong safety net ensuring that you can't fall into a pit of despair.
Seriously, though, I think it is because it has a good natural environment and strong extended families. But that is about to change with their new planned city.
The person in the Scandinavian country, when asked this question, will think "hmm, well I am not in America, so I will add 3 steps to my answer" and, och se där, up they go to the top of the World Ranking.
> bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life >>>for you<<<.
..and when asked this, I believe they consider how bad it can get for them in their country.
Based on my experience living and talking with people in Scandinavia and eastern europe.
Yes, This is what I failed to express in my previous comment.
Maybe I am not understanding this - do you think the average American regularly sees people dying of exposure on the sidewalk? Or what do you mean?
This bet kinda horrified some people, but I think I got my point across.
"Ecological fallacy! Ecological fallacy!," I screamed, flapping my arms pointlessly at my laptop.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_fallacy#Individual_...
I'll spoil it: - Finland 38 - Norway 71 - Spain 137
(fun fact: USA is 31)
ranked by suicide. If you visit it, and the vibes and feelings you have don't match the statistics, the statistics are shit I'd say. And maybe cities and rural areas destroy this statistic. But what do I know (but the article agrees with me)
Then, the relative size of a bottom or top absolute threshold is highly meaningful. Even if it's a fraction of a percent, populations are huge and suicide rates are not rounding errors at all -- they're actually quite statistically significant.
And as macabre as it is, suicides are objective facts mostly unaffected by methodology, and unaffected by translation issues, cultural differences, etc.
This is why suicide rates are actually a powerful mental health statistic, just like height is a powerful physical health statistic, at the population level. There's obviously still a lot both of these metrics don't say, but the fact that they are highly objective makes them extremely valuable.
"The large variations in the systems and processes to define mortality causes imply there may be very different numbers of deaths that are registered with a specific cause. This creates a problem for cross-country comparisons of mortality by cause in general, and even more so for deaths of despair, and suicides in particular.
The person responsible for writing the cause of death on the death certificate may be different across countries. In some countries, the police are responsible, while in others a medical doctor, coroner, or judicial investigator takes on this role. Differences in doctors’ training, access to medical records, and autopsy requirements contribute to these discrepancies. The legal or judicial systems that decide causes of death also vary. For instance, in some countries suicide is illegal and is not listed as a classifiable cause of death, leading to underreporting or misclassification of suicides as accidents, violence, or deaths of “undetermined intent.”[25]
Data on suicides, even when reported, can be inaccurate due to social factors as well. In some countries, suicide might be taboo and highly stigmatised, so the families and friends of the person who committed suicide might decide to misreport or not disclose the mortality cause, causing underreporting of its incidence. In other societies, such as Northern Europe, there is less stigma attached to suicides, and alcohol and drug use."
https://www.worldhappiness.report/ed/2025/supporting-others-...
I wouldn't be surprised if cultural differences are actually the largest factor that explains a country's suicide rate. Not easy to prove, of course, but I would be very careful drawing any conclusions from differences in suicide rates between countries with vastly different cultures.
I think you can also expect large differences in how countries report their suicide rates.
That's a pretty strong assumption, seems more likely that there's variation at the extremes than not. For example, if a small percentage of the population deals badly with extended nighttime in long winters, then it'll affect Finland's most-unhappy stats (and suicide rates) without meaning much for the average happiness.
Prove it
[1]: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/seisakunitsuite/bunya/hukushi_kai...
The fact that people want to change their culture is possibly an early indication of a shift, which could take decades or centuries to actually occur. And such a cultural shift can also lose momentum and be still-born.
---
I find counting suicides innovative. But if you do it in a global context without looking at the cultures as confounding factor: It's wrong.
There are many other confounding factors, such as a forgiving national (personal) bankruptcy regime. The USA has a pretty forgiving regime compared to other countries. But that doesn't mean you can say it correlates with how happy people are. Because - like suicides - the number of people that go bankrupt might not significantly correlate to the average happiness rate. Because a (small) minority of people go bankrupt / commit suicide.
It's in fact perfectly reasonable and possible to suppose that a country with higher average suicides and harsher penalties for bankruptcy still ends up higher on the happiness index. Because perhaps health and social-contact / family factors impact the rating more, on average.
If people are happy, you have less suicides. I don't need a study for that.
Also, I Spain your view of Spain is tainted. I think very few people would choose an average city in Spain over e.g. Copenhagen where 20% of the Danish population live.
In reality the average Spaniard isn't experience the majority of that, as those are perceptions that arose from the rose-tinted glasses of tourists. Most tourists don't know about the Eurozone crisis, the regional disparity, and the consolidation of Spain's economic growth engines to 1-2 cities.
Spain is a good developed country with a decent QoL as is reflected by it's HDI and developmental indicators (and the fact that it has outpaced historically richer and more developed Italy is a testament to that), but tourists almost always take a rose-tinted view whereas locals almost always take a negative view.
And I think this is the crux of the issue with how the "World Happiness Index" is used in American discourse - in the US almost no one vists Europe or other parts of the World for extended periods of time and most Americans lack familial or social ties in Europe. As such, idealized images of Europe ("a socialist paradise" or "white Christendom under siege") have taken hold in popular discourse and are used as proxies for the American culture war.
If you're a tourist, you get to experience only those parts. If you live there, you have to experience the other 99% of the life also and it's not so great.
I’d never want to live in perpetual summer. Seasons brings joy.
Even this is a typical myth that I often hear from Scandinavians. In fact different parts of Spain (or England or France) have also clearly demarcated seasons.
If you want to experience the joy of Autumn then the crisp, long days of an English Fall are incomparably more distinct than the unrelenting darkness that’s almost indistinguishable from Winter in Scandinavia, for instance. And when Spring comes to the valleys of the temperate regions of Spain, then the blossom and explosion of wild flowers is miraculous.
But like I said, from preschool onwards Scandinavians are indoctrinated with the belief that they live in the best of all possible worlds, and no amount of actual experience can ever dent that notion.
From the gently self-deprecating nature of your answer I’m guessing you’re British - and this is indeed the whole point of what I’m saying.
I genuinely and deeply miss this aspect of the English character which is totally lacking in Sweden - the websites called “shitLondon” or the insistence that English food is inferior to Italian or French cuisine or this repeated idea that it always rains (it doesn’t). That self-mockery simply doesn’t exist here, apart from when it’s some sort of humble-brag.
In my case, the cure was traveling and living abroad for 7 years now, it made me realize that Spain is actually a great country.
Having a culture that produces happier people in worse circumstances doesn't make those people less happy.
The question is whether stoicism in the face of what most people would categorize as suffering should be classified as “happiness”.
Also a genetic component.
If this is a dig at the largely pork/cabbage/potato-based diet of Northern Europe, you will be relieved to hear they don’t follow it.
Source: Am one.
A 10 in Afghanistan is not the same as a 10 in Canada. Societies have different perception of “the best” based on each individuals experience, what society values and what they think is possible.
So while helpful in tracking happiness over time within the same country, it can’t be used to compare countries.
Also, I think it's easy to misunderstand the Finns from the surface of us. We don't exhibit happiness, and we don't express happiness in a way that is easily observed. Finland ranks at the top of trust in other people, and being one of the least corrupt countries in the world. Those two metrics are a hint into how we Finns relate to other people. Also, it's difficult to get to know Finns, and for this reason it's difficult for outsiders to understand the Finns and the mentality.
On the anecdotal side, earlier this year I solo-traveled the US for 4 weeks, and out of those I got into deeper conversations, I was struck by how sad people were. That made me more convinced that I live a very happy life, in a happy place.
Edit: Some references: Weapons per capita: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_g... Corruption index: https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2024 Trust in others: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-where-people-trust-e...
So there is a huge incentive for religious societies to let a family member's suicide appear like an accident. Suicide rates are an extension of mental health disease rates and extremely hard to compare without correcting for many factors.
I would far rather live somewhere where people look unhappy but are actually pretty content with life than somewhere where people feel compelled to look happy even though they are actually feeling pretty miserable.
But then again I am an aging Scot so I'm biased. ;-)
Edit: I'm also just back from a visit to Finland.
The level of societal trust here is still very high. I say "still" because methinks Western media and social media serve to erode such things. My 0.01€, YMMV.
That said, note that both things mentioned in here will raise average happiness:
> But it turns out that the residents of the same Scandinavian countries that the press dutifully celebrates for their supposed happiness are especially likely to take antidepressants or even to commit suicide.
Saying you are unhappy is in a sense saying you need a better quality of life, or deserve more happiness, both of which are kind of taboo under the Law of Jante.
When I start deep questions about financial safety, the future and so on, just by asking I can be labelled as a pessimist. And I'm far from that.
I'm a fairly resolved and confident introvert, but I know many timid people that feel ashamed that they don't feel "happy" in these large group of people, that are extremely agitated and yelling around to grab some piece of attention they need.
And what is being shown in social media, documentaries and etc is just one pov.
In a warm climate you see people walking around feeling comfortable.
In a cold climate, the people you see are freezing.
The point about hot environments is true, but people are not anxious and your body rarely hurts. They are lazy and their minds blank out. It is often too hot to do anything except try to scam anxious northerners and move away from mosquitos.
You're right that once it gets over +30°C or so, you'll be miserable whatever you wear. But there is a large temperature range below that that is wonderful. The Bay Area is almost always in that zone.
Personal safety, good health, financial stability, access to education, job security, low stress, and strong family and social ties do not necessarily make people smile or laugh. They create a sense of contentment. That is precisely where Scandinavian countries excel.
Please imagine a ladder with steps numbered from zero at the bottom to ten at the top. Suppose we say that the top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you. If the top step is 10 and the bottom step is 0, on which step of the ladder do you feel you personally stand at the present time?