Sections
Home » Happiness » Does Inequality Make Us Unhappy?

Does Inequality Make Us Unhappy?

A new study suggests Americans' happiness declines when there’s a wider gap between rich and poor.

scales by Jeevs Sinclair

Photo by Jeevs Sinclair

In 1980, the average American CEO's income was 40 times higher than that of the average worker. Today, it is well over 300 times higher.

A new study suggests this rising income inequality in the United States doesn’t just affect Americans’ pocketbooks; it affects their happiness. Over the past four decades, according to the study, the American people have been the least happy in years when there was the widest gap between rich and poor.

In the study, which will be published in an upcoming issue of Psychological Science, researchers examined 50,000 responses to the General Social Survey, which has tracked well-being in the United States since 1972. The researchers, led by Shigehiro Oishi of the University of Virginia, zeroed in on Americans’ levels of happiness between 1972 and 2008, along with their perceptions of how fair and trustworthy other people are. Oishi and his colleagues compared these responses both with participants’ reported household income over those years and with a U.S. Census measure of income inequality.

A sense of fairness and trust are associated with happiness perhaps because they are a building block of social relationships and community.

Consistent with previous studies, the results show that the American population as a whole is less happy in times of greater income inequality. However, this wasn’t true across all income brackets: Only low-income participants—people whose income placed them in the bottom 40 percent of the entire U.S. population—reported reduced happiness in times of greater inequality. For other Americans, inequality was not reliably linked to greater happiness or unhappiness.

But what sets this study apart from previous research is that the observed link between unhappiness and income inequality was traced to psychological factors, not simply economic ones. People weren’t unhappy just because their income was lower. Instead, the authors’ analysis revealed that greater inequality was linked to reductions in trust and perceived fairness—and it was drops in those attitudes that made people feel less happy.

This finding echoes other research linking fairness and trust to happiness.

“A sense of fairness and trust are associated with happiness perhaps because they are a building block of social relationships and community,” says Oishi, “and having satisfying social relationships is important [to happiness].”

Marriage protester, photo by Elijah NouvelageMaking a Difference Makes You Happy
Studies: Activism brings greater life satisfaction and more experiences of freedom, competence, and connection to others.

In the study, Oishi and his colleagues argue that their results may explain why economic growth has not been accompanied by increases in happiness in the United States, unlike in other developed nations. The problem, they suggest, is that gains in national wealth in the U.S. haven’t been distributed equally, and this inequality has caused Americans’ happiness to suffer.

Still, the authors acknowledge that the changes in happiness they observed could be due to factors other than declines in trust and perceived fairness, such as satisfaction with one’s job or neighborhood, for which they didn’t account. They say more research is needed to flesh out the link between inequality and happiness.

For now, they write, this much is clear: “Americans are happier when national wealth is distributed more evenly than when it is distributed unevenly.

“If the ultimate goal of society is to make its citizens happy,” they add, “then it is desirable to consider policies that produce more income equality, fairness, and general trust.”


Carmen Sobczak is a Greater Good editorial assistant. This article is republished through a special collaboration between Greater Good and YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions.

  • Equality and the Good Life
    An interview with epidemiologist Richard Wilkinson, whose research shows that what the healthiest and happiest societies have in common is not that they have more, but that what they have is more equitably shared.
  • A History of Happiness
    We can learn a lot from older traditions that focused on being good rather than feeling good and measured happiness in lifetimes, not moments.
  • What Is the Good Life?
    Is the American Dream really the good life? There is a way to live the good life that both brings happiness and requires far less of the Earth.
YES! Magazine encourages you to make free use of this article by taking these easy steps. Sobczak, C. (2011, August 24). Does Inequality Make Us Unhappy?. Retrieved May 21, 2012, from YES! Magazine Web site: http://cms.yesmagazine.org/happiness/does-inequality-make-us-unhappy. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons License


You won’t see any commercial ads in YES!, in print or on this website.
That means, we rely on support from our readers.

||   SUBSCRIBE    ||   GIVE A GIFT   ||   DONATE   ||
Independent. Nonprofit. Subscriber-supported.




Reader Comments

slippery slope

Posted by Stephanie at Aug 25, 2011 01:42 PM
“If the ultimate goal of society is to make its citizens happy,” they add, “then it is desirable to consider policies that produce more income equality, fairness, and general trust.”

That is a slippery slope. I wouldn't say the goal of a society is to *make* its citizens happy, but to provide the conditions in which happiness can be obtained. That may sound subtle, but the assumptions that go along with each perspective can have far reaching implications. A society that sees itself as responsible for making others happy is likely to have decisionmakers who see it as their responsibility to engineer solutions that may accord with one person's (or a dominant) idea of what happiness is. A society that recognizes this is up to the individual is more likely to provide conditions in which people can self-actualize their own happiness.

on the subject of happiness

Posted by d.m. at Aug 30, 2011 07:05 PM
what would make me personnaly happy is being able to participte in the democratic process by organizing a political party called the green-marxist party and have it run in elections.
also perhaps to see referenda on wheher car dealer ships should be in the area. a referdum on whether or not to cotunue the car industry. i assume this magazine seeks such.
also on happiness i assume that a mixed economic system where people say give fruits to each other for free and one with communal property where ll money goes to citizen owned produce shared together .

a new transportationn of street trolleys built by connecting steel cables to pots and others to telephone wires .
in addition principles of anarchism where protection of nation includes protesters equipped with magnetic and energy shield to stand up to smal arms fire. also the premise that those who protect nations think and not be niform gun training places. also includes the u.n. in the idea. the film ron paul the revolution and the anti-war movement put the blame on guns so anarchists and u.n. could say defend u.s.a. better in not focusing on weapons as way to fight. the technques of mac guyver using what comes to hand and brains would also come in handy.

no gun defence in happiness

Posted by d.m. at Aug 30, 2011 07:16 PM
on the subject of happiness i think ron paul and many americans would be happy with the principles of defence of the u.s.a. via green peace and other organization. these could use magnetic and energy shields to negate small arms fire.
in addition this fits with anarchist principles in being a non coercive approach. there could also be training in disaraming bombs dropped from air craft. from my understanding other onjections are these are not disarmed and destroyed before landing on heavily populated areas. so paratroopers could fly up there administer gases in mid airr or puncture the bombs and disengage the targeting and explosive mechanisms. i notice no one did such during any of the wars. the peace types appeared to have no means and the armed forces apprantly no predilection to disarm bombs from air craft in mid air, i notice that the police in los angeles have bomb squads for disarming smaller bombs than the ones the air force use. well maybe the u.n. or u.s. citizens could disrarm the ones from the air forc or even any hostile space faring species.

British riots

Posted by Jeff Mowatt at Sep 08, 2011 09:57 PM
The random outbreak of rioting in British cities a few months ago indicated a widespread problem of perceived inequality. This was not an uprising driven by those needing food but by icons of wealth as perceived in ownership of iPhones and laptop computers, for example.

I was reminded that in 2003, after his fast for economic rights in Chapel Hill NC, I'd worked with founder Terry Hallman on a community wealth creation strategy from which I take this extract.

http://forestofdean.socialgo.com/[…]/i-didnt-predict-a-riot-but_52.html

People Who Love YES! Find Out Why... Subscribe Today

Personal tools