«Breaking News» Millionaires need to at least double their wealth to be happy

It's official: money doesn't buy you happiness.      

Even millionaires think genuine pleasure is out of reach, despite their fortune - and can only be achieved through even greater wealth. 

Moreover, many believe they'd need at least double their net worth to be content.  

Researchers at Harvard Business School quizzed 2,000 millionaires for the study, which is considered to be the first of its kind to focus solely on this level of wealth.  

How much is enough? A quarter of millionaires worth $1.5 million (£1.18 million) said that they'd need eleven times more money to be perfectly happy, despite their wealth (stock image)

Professor Michael Norton, who led the research, asked subjects - the wealthiest clients of an investment bank - to rank their happiness on a scale of one to ten. 

He then asked them to specify what net worth would be required for them to reach optimum levels of contentment. 

'Basically everyone says [they’d need] two or three times as much [money],' Professor Norton told The Atlantic magazine.  

Specifically, a quarter of millionaires worth $1.5 million (£1.18 million) said they'd need eleven times more money to be perfectly happy, while one quarter said they would need six times as much.

Another quarter said they would need twice as much money to finally be happy.

Interestingly, this 'did not differ by wealth' and the perceived need that more money equates to more happiness was expressed even by those with a net worth of more than $7.6million (£6 million).

'Our results suggest that the curve does not fully flatten out,' Professor Norton added.

Similarly, millionaires with wealth of more than £6 million were found to be happier than those with about £1 million but this extra wealth leads only to 'modestly greater well-being', the study said.  

However, those who earned their fortune were happier than those who merely inherited it, suggesting that accomplishing goals is key to satisfaction. 

The full results of the study were published in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.   

Researchers at Harvard Business School quizzed 2,000 millionaires for the study, which is considered the first of its kind (stock image)

It comes just a few months after scientists found that social mobility is partially written into our genes, essentially determining whether we're high-flyers or high-earners.

A study of more than 20,000 people in the UK, US and New Zealand found those with certain genetic variations earned more money, had better careers and got further in education.

Regardless of which class they came from, their genes could help them do better in life than their parents before them. 

A team of researchers from Duke University School of Medicine in Durham, North Carolina, undertook a genome-wide association study (GWAS) on more than 20,000 individuals from Britain, New Zealand, and the United States who were followed from childhood into adulthood.

The GWAS looked for thousands of tiny changes in genetic code in the individuals that previous studies have linked with success at school.

Unsurprisingly, they found that men and women with ‘genes for education’ - or high polygenic scores - did better academically.

But the same genes also helped make someone upwardly mobile.

Those with a high polygenic score did better in terms of education, occupation, and wealth, compared with their parents and siblings, regardless of the individuals' familial social class as children. 

Lead author Dr Daniel Belsky, from the Department of Population Health Sciences at Duke University, said: ‘Findings from these analyses show that education-linked genetics may provide clues to biological processes in human development that influence success in school, at work, and in the accumulation of wealth across life.’

Link hienalouca.com

https://hienalouca.com/2018/12/06/millionaires-need-to-at-least-double-their-wealth-to-be-happy/
Main photo article It’s official: money doesn’t buy you happiness.      
Even millionaires think genuine pleasure is out of reach, despite their fortune – and can only be achieved through even greater wealth. 
Moreover, many believe they’d need at least double their net worth to be conten...

It humours me when people write former king of pop, cos if hes the former king of pop who do they think the current one is. Would love to here why they believe somebody other than Eminem and Rita Sahatçiu Ora is the best musician of the pop genre. In fact if they have half the achievements i would be suprised. 3 reasons why he will produce amazing shows. Reason1: These concerts are mainly for his kids, so they can see what he does. 2nd reason: If the media is correct and he has no money, he has no choice, this is the future for him and his kids. 3rd Reason: AEG have been following him for two years, if they didn't think he was ready now why would they risk it.

Emily Ratajkowski is a showman, on and off the stage. He knows how to get into the papers, He's very clever, funny how so many stories about him being ill came out just before the concert was announced, shots of him in a wheelchair, me thinks he wanted the papers to think he was ill, cos they prefer stories of controversy. Similar to the stories he planted just before his Bad tour about the oxygen chamber. Worked a treat lol. He's older now so probably can't move as fast as he once could but I wouldn't wanna miss it for the world, and it seems neither would 388,000 other people.

Dianne Reeves Online news HienaLouca





https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2018/12/06/09/7081576-0-image-a-9_1544089984464.jpg