金錢能夠買來幸福 money can buy you happiness

Forget what your parents, your self-help guides or your religion may have told you: money can buy you happiness.

忘了你的父母、你的自助指南或者你所信仰的宗教可能告訴你的話吧：金錢能夠買來幸福。

That, at least, is the conclusion from the number crunchers at the UK’s Office for National Statistics, who have combined data from surveys on household wealth and personal wellbeing.

這至少是英國國家統計局(Office for National Statistics)統計人員得出的結論，他們把有關家庭財富與個人幸福感的調查數據結合起來分析。

Life satisfaction, sense of worth and happiness are higher, and anxiety less, as the level of household wealth increases,” the ONS said in a paper released on Friday.

英國國家統計局在上週五發布的一篇論文中表示：“隨着家庭財富水平上升，生活滿意度、價值感以及幸福感會提升，憂慮會減少。”

Indeed, one very specific type of money has the strongest relationship with wellbeing: net financial wealth, which could be stocks and shares, savings in the banks or money under the mattress.

實際上，有一類財富與幸福感的關係最爲密切：金融財富淨值，它們可能是股票證券、銀行存款或放在牀墊下的錢。

However, Generation Rent — young people struggling to get on the housing ladder — need not despair entirely. The ONS found that increasing property or personal pension wealth did not result in a measurable increase in wellbeing. Levels of household income — rather than assets already owned — were also far less strongly related.

然而，租房一代（年輕人很難購房）不必感到絕望。英國國家統計局發現，房地產或個人養老金財富的增加不會帶來幸福感的顯著上升。家庭收入水平（而非已擁有資產）與幸福感的關係也談不上密切。

Surprisingly, although physical assets such as antiques, yachts, swish cars or stamp collections might induce smugness, the ONS found they had no relation to levels of personal wellbeing, which may or may not disprove the theory that it is nicer to cry in a Ferrari than on a park bench.

令人意外的是，儘管古董、遊艇、豪車或集郵等有形資產可能會讓人沾沾自喜，但英國國家統計局發現，這些與個人幸福感毫不相關，這或許可以——也或許不可以——證明這種理論是錯誤的：在法拉利(Ferrari)車裏哭泣要好於在公園長椅上哭。

The ONS asked individuals to rate their own wellbeing on a scale of 0 to 10, on questions such as how satisfied they were with life and were the things they did worthwhile? These responses were then crunched alongside household wealth and income, with the statistical model controlling for variables such as gender or ethnicity, to see what impact wealth or income had on an otherwise alike individual.

英國國家統計局邀請個人對自己的幸福感打分，分值從零分到10分，問題包括他們對生活的滿意程度以及他們所做的事情是否有意義。接着將這些答案與家庭財富和收入結合起來。這一統計模型對性別或種族等變量進行了控制，以瞭解財富或收入對其他條件都相同的個人的影響。

The ONS is confident the relationships it describes are statistically significant. For net financial wealth, for example, those in the bottom 20 per cent scored themselves on average 0.4 points lower than those in the middle 20 per cent.

英國國家統計局確信，其所描述的關係具有重大統計意義。例如，就金融財富淨值而言，那些處於最低20%的人羣給自己的打分比處於中間20%的人羣平均低0.4點。

The report is the latest entry into the debate about whether it is absolute or relative income and wealth that matter when it comes to improving wellbeing.

這份報告是圍繞以下辯論的最新嘗試：在提升幸福感的問題上，是絕對收入和財富重要，還是相對收入和財富重要。

For instance, in influential papers, the economists Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers tried to find evidence to support the idea that what matters for wellbeing is how you compare with those around you — in other words, keeping up with the Joneses. They failed.

例如，經濟學家貝齊史蒂文森(Betsey Stevenson)和賈斯廷茠爾弗斯(Justin Wolfers)在一些引起重大影響的論文中試圖找到證據，支持這種觀點：對於幸福感而言，重要的是你如何與周圍的人比較，換句話說，跟社會地位相同的人比較。他們失敗了。

After looking at multiple countries and numerous definitions of wellbeing and basic needs, they concluded: “If there is a satiation point [at which income and wellbeing are no longer related], we are yet to reach it”.

在對多個國家的情況以及關於幸福感和基本需求的多種定義進行考察後，他們總結稱：“如果說存在一個收入和幸福感不再相關的飽和點(satiation point)的話，那麼我們現在還沒有達到這個點。”

More importantly for policymakers, perhaps, they found that countries that enjoyed faster economic growth, on average also experienced greater growth in wellbeing.

或許，對於政策制定者而言更爲重要的是，兩位經濟學家發現，經濟增速較快國家的幸福感上升速度一般較快。

In 2006, David Cameron, then opposition leader, urged statisticians to focus more alternative measures of the national quality of life. “Wellbeing cannot be measured by money or traded in markets,” he said.

2006年，時任反對黨領袖的戴維慍蕓倫(David Cameron)曾敦促統計學家更多關注其他衡量國民生活質量的指標。他表示：“幸福不能由金錢衡量，也不能在市場交易。”

Yet the new statistics, which resulted from his policy drive, suggest perhaps you can have a good go.

然而源自於他的政策舉措的最新統計結果表明，或許人們可以試試這麼做。

Diane Coyle, founder of Enlightenment Economics, is one economist who thinks statistics should be focused on more tangible outcomes.

Enlightenment Economics創始人、經濟學家戴安娜科伊爾(Diane Coyle)認爲，統計應着眼於更切實的收入。

" I don’t think we should be measuring happiness at all. It is not a ‘policy useful’ measure. The government doesn’t have levers that easily affect happiness, and should concentrate on the things that government can do,” she said, pointing to employment or spending on mental health.

她表示：“我認爲，我們根本不應該衡量幸福感。這不是一個‘對政策有用’的指標。政府沒有辦法輕易影響幸福感，應關注於政府能夠採取的措施。”她指的是就業或者心理健康支出。

In previous work by the ONS, good health, type of employment and personal relationships have proved to have the strongest links to high levels of self-reported wellbeing. At least the first two are something the government can do something about.

在英國國家統計局之前的研究成果中，良好的健康狀況、就業類型以及人際關係被證明爲與自我報告的幸福感水平關係最爲密切。至少，前兩個是政府能夠爲之付出努力的。

And if you don’t believe the ONS, you might agree with Ronald Reagan when he said: “Money can’t buy happiness, but it will certainly get you a better class of memories.”

如果你不相信英國國家統計局的數據，你或許會同意羅納德里根(Ronald Reagan)的話，他說：“金錢買不來幸福，但肯定會提升你的回憶。”