The least happy people we know

I'd disagree, though I still have a job. I still have savings, and I am still pretty young - 32.

My stepdad was fired few weeks ago, while financially it wasn't a big deal its still was a big deal for him. He worked for the last 20 years in that company, and it simply discarded him as trash.

IMO it was better for him, my mother has a good business going, and also she's a pretty good daily trader (she beats me big time).

"(she beats me big time)."

There are laws against that. You can sue her, put her in jail. :)

Haha :-)

I can't say that I'm surprised at this result since the study relies on such factors as "climate, taxes, cost of living, commuting times, crime rates and schools". I can't imagine that with respect to these limited factors that New York would fare well as compared to the rest of the country. My cousin who lives in Texas leaves work every day around 4pm every day and can pay golf in the late afternoons if he wants (weather permitting). Certainly sounds better than working until 9 or 10pm. But the study sounds pretty limited and I'm sure that they neglected to take into account many quality of life issues such as living amongst people who are more open to different points of view.

It's a little surprising in the sense of physical health -- we're in better shape in New York than the good folks in Louisiana, et al. To see the truth of this, all you have to do is go to an airport for a couple hours.

So I would have thought our relative slimness and our relatively high levels of physical activity would have helped to make us happier. Maybe they are indeed pluses -- maybe we just have overwhelming negatives.

I love New York, but it is a less appealing city than it was 20 years ago, when I arrived. There are fewer characters, fewer outsiders and non-conformists to keep things lively and interesting.

There are lots more chain stores and cookie-cutter apartments and people who dress like they just got here from Iowa, ie people who dress according to a rather boring template of what is acceptable. I mean no offense, but part of the pleasure of being in the city was seeing the inventiveness and flair of people who paid at least a little attention to fashion.

There is much less of that now, although people are generally clean and well-groomed. They're just not as creative as they used to be.

I do think part of the problem was and is AIDS. It robbed us of a generation of creative people, and the culture as a whole and New York in particular suffer from that.

Life without art and culture is probably not very happy for most folks.

"the study relies on such factors as "climate, taxes, cost of living, commuting times, crime rates and schools". I can't imagine that with respect to these limited factors"

Them's a lot more than "limited" factors, no?

Crime in NYC is way lower than most places.

I don't have an argument, but I disagree with the results of this study.
Would more sunshine make us happier? And to think that they are passing a tax on tanning as we speak.

It's the empathy thing.

i think it's because many out of town bigshots who comer here quickly get humbled by the City..

ie i'd rather be the ugliest one in the hottest party/orgy, rather than the prettiest one in a mediocre soiree.

or maybe it really is the taxes, nj especially

I'm sure it also has something to do with the New York workday growing from 8 hours to 12 hours.

Steve, you make a valid point. When I read this article, it struck me that the study only seemed to look at several objective factors that NY wouldn't fare well in. It didn't seem to take into account those subjective reasons that many people move to New York from other parts of the country. What is your opinion of the article?

hol69.... you are clueless. The correct way to verify the data is to take 1000 nycers out of NYC and see if they become "happier" in Hawaii.

GG.. .agreed.

This compares states, not NYC specifically. I'm sure if you took LIC out, the numbers would be much better.

Sloppy NYT reporting.

"I love New York, but it is a less appealing city than it was 20 years ago, when I arrived. There are fewer characters, fewer outsiders and non-conformists to keep things lively and interesting.

There are lots more chain stores and cookie-cutter apartments and people who dress like they just got here from Iowa, ie people who dress according to a rather boring template of what is acceptable. I mean no offense, but part of the pleasure of being in the city was seeing the inventiveness and flair of people who paid at least a little attention to fashion.

There is much less of that now, although people are generally clean and well-groomed. They're just not as creative as they used to be."

Is this a joke? I moved to New York in 1990, they year murders peaked above 2,200. Now it's what, 20% of that? Maybe we should ask the tens of thousands of people who are alive today because New York is a better, safer place than it was 20 years ago if they would trade their lives or the safety of their families and friends for a little edginess and contrived diversity. I say "contrived" because there is no question that the premise that there are "fewer outsiders" today is patently false. New York is way more diverse than it was 20 years ago by any standard save the one that GG is applying, which is the concentration of quirky, self-absorbed, tragically hip pseudo-intellectuals. Allegedly that has gone down, although I invite someone to propose some data to support the theory. And all this is without even mentioning that vast areas of the city have been revitalized as places where real people live their real lives in much more safety and comfort than was the case 20 years ago.

"This compares states, not NYC specifically. I'm sure if you took LIC out, the numbers would be much better." Nice

@sidelinesitter:
"where real people live their real lives"

seriously?
"real" people? living "real" lives?

is this akin to sarah palin's "where the real america is"?
give me a break!

what is "real" about them? the fact that they shop at target and walmart?

I mean settle in and make their lives in New York City
- live and work in the city; don't flee for the suburbs or elsewhere in the country after a few years
- not passing through to "do the NY thing" for a couple of years after college
- have and raise children in the city; heard of the Manhattan baby boom of the last 10 years?
This is hundreds of thousands of people choosing to live a significant part of their lives in this city. Since New York is less appealing to GG, maybe s/he should leave and all these other people who didn't get the memo about how unappealing it is can stay on and wallow in their ignorance of how bad their lives really are.

BTW, none of these people shop at target or walmart because there aren't any (that I've ever heard of, anyway) in Manhattan.

sideline while i dont agree with your sweeping remark about 'making lives in nyc' as most people who 'do the NY thing' leave not by choice as they'd actually stay in the city had they been able to afford, i do agree on your delightful bash at GG..

it's funny that the emo youth (cerebral or actual age) who complain about 'lack of character' or condos taking over manhattan don't make a trip uptown to thriving gay latino lounges, or head to arthur ave for some of the best albanian food, taking note of some (not all) bitter italians who've seen their neighborhood shrink by way of little chitaly, or skip to flushing for some authentic chinese checking out drunk koreans who take kareoke a little too competitively, or take part in some of the off-off-off broadway interactive theatre downtown that keeps itself 'off-off-off bway' status to keep the ohio/iowa zagat community at bay, or schlep to some of the best monthly under 30 year old muscle (or whatever your flavor) orgies at west 3Xth street that michael musto himself has yet to discover and write about at his third tier rag....but...

that would just be too 'alternative', or 'too ghetto' or too 'dangerous' and 2nd tier right?? always amusing to watch an idealist try to hold on to some 'edge' without actually having to put both feet out there. GG, please continue complaining about the condos and stick to your iowa set. you'd probably ruin the orgy for the rest of us, should you feel compelled to steo outsie your little bubble, thanks.

Has anyone noticed the article and study are based on states, not cities? That means New York's ranking not only encompasses plenty of areas with Targets and Wal Marts but great vastness with economies that have been struggling much longer than 18 months (although perhaps not as quickly gone from hero to zero) and weather that can only be called unbearable. As all know I'm a native Manhattanite and damn proud of it but sometimes we need to look beyond the island (and even gasp, beyond the metro area) and realize there is a world beyond arguing H&H vs Ess A Bagel or the cutest Nolita boutique.

well, ignorance is bliss...

you go lizyank...

do you mean to say that the 'finger lakes region' is less happy than manhattan because of bagels and boutiques?

w67,
make up a bed for me, I'm cold, tired and ready for some Polynesian punch.
Prehaps I can visit w/o the family and you can hook me up with the biggest Samoan girl you know.

"Top 10 states on the happiness scale are, in descending order, Louisiana, Hawaii, Florida, Tennessee, Arizona, Mississippi, Montana, South Carolina, Alabama and Maine."

Wow. I'd live in exactly one of those states. I'm suspicious of their definition of happiness, given that taxes factor in so highly. Wasn't there a study discussed a few months ago that showed that high taxes were strongly correlated with residential happiness and well being?

Falco. Be careful what u wish for, some of them get really big. ; )

Yeah, that study sounded pretty limited. A big factor is the cultural habits of the area: the tri-state area likes to belly-ache and complain and kvetch and bitch ------ we LOVE doing that. Down south and in Hawaii, everyone is mellow and fat and happy; bitching isn't quite so much of the cultural exchange.
They're just SAYING they're happy. They don't know shite.
We're actually pretty darned happy; we just like to bitch.

please folks, lets put all this aside and focus on mimi - I am very worried about her.
As you all know, the person who finds her CAN NOT SQUEEZE HER. SHE IS NOT A SQUEEKY TOY. Please see this link for more information on Mimi:
http://ihasahotdog.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/funny-dog-pictures-no-squeeze-me.jpg

upstate is gloomy and cold for about 6 months of the year (we had many halloweens covered in snow). one needs a boatload of SSRI's to survive.

Hey GraffitiG, great news! A small colony of characters, outsiders and non-conformists has resisted the Iowa-fication of New York: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/12/bushwick_hipsters_now_living_i.html?mid=streeteasy
The bad news is that they may still be "people who dress according to a rather boring template of what is acceptable." They're hipsters, after all, so presumably they wear the uniform.

Poorishlady, I am in total agreement.

I'd rather be miserable in New York than happy pretty much anywhere else in the world.

Sidelinesitter: I apologize if my long-winded msg sounded like a rant. Not my intention.

Somehow my msg about people being less creative got morphed into a msg about hipsters. It's fine if you want to take it that direction, but hipsters was not the subject of my original post.

I was talking about the kind of folks you still occasionally run into in town, they often have rent-controlled apts, are older, and have spent their lives producing interesting painting, sculpture, choreography, photography, etc.

I used to run into them fairly often, but now, hardly ever.

These kinds of folks who are creative but who don't come from money used to be able to make it as artists in New York more easily, There were still part time jobs in the economy, and they could still rent cheap studio space on the outer reaches of town.

Some of them got famous from their art and some didn't. But they didn't do it for the fame.

Those kinds of folks are almost completely gone now.

Hipsters, I know less about. But if you think we are better off without them, that sounds ok to me.

No one in their right minds would prefer NYC from 20 years ago to NYC now.

I'm with Tweed on this one. I know this study was about states, not cities, so we are talking about different things, but I've known people who have moved away from the NYC area, thinking things will be all nicer and better someplace else, and invariably, at some point they all come back.

Actually, NYC 20 years ago had its points ........