Gene Epstein of Barron’s explains why he’s no fan of basing public policy on measures of happiness.

Since money can’t buy happiness, the world’s governments must focus on the goal of happiness, placing it above monetary measures like growth of gross domestic product. That view is set forth in the “World Happiness Report 2017,” published in association with the United Nations.

The report’s authors inveigh against “the tyranny of GDP,” while declaring, no doubt happily, that “happiness is increasingly considered the proper measure of social progress and the goal of public policy.” …

… The metrics turn on rating contentment or lack thereof on a scale of zero to 10, in the way that women have been rated by chauvinist men. In this case, instead of simply asking, “On a scale of zero to 10, how happy are you?” the happiness researchers prefer to add a layer of pseudo-science. We read of “the Cantril ladder question,” worded as follows: “Please imagine a ladder, with steps from zero at the bottom to 10 at the top. The top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you, and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you. On which step of the ladder would you say you personally feel you stand at this time?” …

… EVEN IF THESE MAD SCIENTISTS actually knew how to measure happiness, the idea that politicians and their appointees should elevate themselves to being the stewards of our contentment is anathema to those of us who care about freedom. The Declaration of Independence does say that the “pursuit of happiness” is one of the rights that government must secure for us. But how we pursue it is our own business, and how we define happiness is our own affair.