A team of researchers from some of the nation’s top universities has confirmed the bromide that “money can’t buy happiness,” inadvertently leading teams of money-pursuing employees everywhere to wonder aloud what the heck they’re working for.

 

Don’t you love how scientists are continually testing whether conventional wisdom is really wisdom? What adage will science attempt to confirm or deny next? One rumor I heard is that researchers are working with selected groups of bungee-jumpers on the “look before you leap” assertion, while a task force of research ornithological microeconomists are making the first scientific challenge to the belief that a bird in hand is worth two in the bush. And, of course, the “penny saved is a penny earned” aphorism was long ago utterly and completely disproved by experts in the alimony and taxation sciences.

 

Anyway, researchers were able to confirm the money/happiness mutual-exclusivity thesis by asking people on the Forbes 400 list whether their obscene wealth had led to obscene happiness, then asking possession-challenged Maasai herdsmen in East Africa whether their abject poverty had led to abject sadness. It turned out that each group has the same level of happiness, although it would have been interesting to see if that remained true were the Maasai forced to work for people on the Forbes 400 list, and were the people on the list made to herd goats. Scientists hesitated to pursue that question however, citing potential conflicts with a team exploring the truth of what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

The researchers did point out that although money doesn’t buy happiness for those of us who are either very wealthy or goat-herders, money can buy happiness if you happen to be among a group known in technical terms as the poor. “People who are poor seem to get much happier when their monetary prospects improve,” said one of the researchers, in what I have named the Well DUH! Exception.

 

But researchers claim the happiness is only temporary. Lottery winners return to their pre-winning level of happiness within five years, and the people Oprah gave Pontiacs to returned to their pre-Pontiac level of joy when they learned of their income-tax obligations.

 

I don’t know how the researchers measured this, but they claimed that wealth accounts for only 1 percent of the happiness reported by those who answered the happiness survey. I’m just speculating here, but I’ll bet that puppies licking your face accounts for 5 percent of happiness, knowing that your nail fungus is under control adds another 10 percent, one-step floor wax is worth 12 percent, heated car seats add at least 15 percent, getting enough fiber counts for 17 percent, seeing your children leave home boosts it by 20 percent, watching a rival suffer from a debilitating skin rash enhances happiness by 30 percent, having your team win the Super Bowl is good for 40 percent, and being saved from a flaming non-luxury car can increase your happiness by 45 percent. Hanging up on a survey person can boost happiness by 50 percent.

 

What surprises me is that this research hasn’t popped up as a bludgeon in management-union negotiations. Imagine being in management, negotiating in the confident certainty that money won’t buy happiness. Why, you could suggest a lick in the face from a puppy instead of a cost-of-living increase and probably cinch the deal, particularly if the union representative happened to also be a Maasai goat-herder.

 

What I took to be the real point of this research was that we should be thankful for what we have, because the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. At least I think it is. A team of geographer-agronomists is trying to confirm that as we speak.