Work as “disutility” and money as “happiness”: Cultural origins of a basic market error

Abstract

The market economists' hedonic equation, namely, money and leisure are the pleasures that reward people for the pain of work, has been shown in recent research to be erroneous. Beyond a decent minimum, increased income contributes little to happiness (subjective well-being) and often a person's actual working activities are enjoyed more than are leisure activities. Achievement at work is a much more important source of happiness than is a high standard of living. But market institutions and market economics cannot accommodate the idea that work is rewarding in itself or that money is not the principal source of utility. The mistaken interpretations of work as pain and money as pleasure do not, however, have their roots in the market economy or in its interpretation by market economists; they have deep historical roots in biblical, classical, medieval, and modern thought. The consequence of this cultural inheritance is that our ambivalence about work and money obstructs the development of a producer economy where work satisfactions may be given priority over consumer satisfactions so as to maximize genuine “utility,” or long term happiness.