<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hyperthymia and happiness</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dankohn.com/archives/283/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dankohn.com/archives/283</link>
	<description>Freedom of the press belongs to those who own one. - A.J. Liebling</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 07:10:56 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.dankohn.com/archives/283#comment-20</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Feb 2003 22:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dankohn.flydash.com/archives/283#comment-20</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1283956" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1283956&lt;/a&gt;

The price of happiness

SIR &#8211; The question is not whether money can buy happiness but how much money it takes (&#8220;Subtract rows, add sex&#8221;, July 27th). Paul Samuelson, in his famous economics textbook, presents an equation: happiness equals consumption divided by desire. At first glance crassly materialistic, this equation can also describe Buddha-like levels of serenity. Reduce your desire to zero and happiness becomes infinite.

Similarly, I derive great happiness from the assertion that it would take 170,000 ($260,000) a year to offset the loss of well-being my wife might suffer should I leave her a widow. In net-present-value terms this amounts to about 3m. Since my various life-insurance policies and other assets are worth only a small fraction of this sum, I go to bed easily, knowing that she has no incentive to murder me in my sleep.

Charles Krakoff
Amman, Jordan

SIR &#8211; If marriage yields 60,000 of happiness a year and widowhood deducts 170,000, then it is indeed far worse to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all.

Ross Frisbie
Philadelphia
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1283956" rel="nofollow">http://economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1283956</a></p>
<p>The price of happiness</p>
<p>SIR &#8211; The question is not whether money can buy happiness but how much money it takes (&#8220;Subtract rows, add sex&#8221;, July 27th). Paul Samuelson, in his famous economics textbook, presents an equation: happiness equals consumption divided by desire. At first glance crassly materialistic, this equation can also describe Buddha-like levels of serenity. Reduce your desire to zero and happiness becomes infinite.</p>
<p>Similarly, I derive great happiness from the assertion that it would take 170,000 ($260,000) a year to offset the loss of well-being my wife might suffer should I leave her a widow. In net-present-value terms this amounts to about 3m. Since my various life-insurance policies and other assets are worth only a small fraction of this sum, I go to bed easily, knowing that she has no incentive to murder me in my sleep.</p>
<p>Charles Krakoff<br />
Amman, Jordan</p>
<p>SIR &#8211; If marriage yields 60,000 of happiness a year and widowhood deducts 170,000, then it is indeed far worse to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all.</p>
<p>Ross Frisbie<br />
Philadelphia</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.508 seconds -->
