Skip to content
MyFreud

Billionaires and Happiness: Does More Money Help

The famous plateau at seventy-five thousand dollars turned out to be wrong, and what replaced it is more interesting. Money keeps working, except for one group.

4 min read

Pop-art illustration of a person standing in silhouette at a floor-to-ceiling office window, facing a city skyline.

Key takeaways

  • The widely repeated claim that happiness stops improving above seventy-five thousand dollars a year came from a 2010 study, and the authors of that study helped overturn it thirteen years later.
  • The 2023 reanalysis found that for most people day-to-day emotional wellbeing keeps rising with income well past six figures, with no ceiling visible in the data.
  • The exception is the finding worth knowing. For the least happy fifth or so of people, wellbeing did flatten around one hundred thousand dollars, which suggests money reliably removes the suffering money causes and does very little about the rest.
  • Nobody has usable data on billionaires. The samples behind every one of these headlines top out orders of magnitude below that, so any claim about the very rich is extrapolation rather than evidence.
  • Satiation points vary widely by region and by which question you ask, which is a reminder that these numbers describe populations rather than predicting what any particular amount would do for you.

More money does keep making most people happier, including well past the point where everybody has been told it stops. The famous ceiling of seventy-five thousand dollars a year was a measurement artefact, and one of the researchers who produced it went on to help take it apart.

What replaced it is a better story than the one it replaced, and the interesting part is not about the rich at all.

Where the seventy-five thousand figure came from

In 2010, [kahneman-deaton-2010] analysed more than 450,000 survey responses and separated two things that had usually been merged. Life evaluation is what you say when you are asked to rate your life as a whole. Emotional wellbeing is the texture of an ordinary day: how much joy, stress, sadness and anger is actually in it.

Their headline was that the first kept rising with income indefinitely while the second levelled off at around seventy-five thousand dollars. That halfway result was intuitively satisfying, so the qualification fell away and the number entered circulation on its own.

The plateau that was not there

The problem was the instrument. The emotional wellbeing measure was scored in a way that pushed a large share of respondents to the top of the available range, and once a scale runs out of room, everybody above a certain point records the same answer whether or not they feel the same. The curve flattens because the ruler ends.

It was settled in 2023 by [killingsworth-2023-conflict-resolved] , who put both datasets together in what they called an adversarial collaboration, with the two researchers who disagreed working the problem jointly rather than trading papers. For most people, day-to-day emotional wellbeing continued to rise with income above six figures, with no ceiling visible in the range they could see.

It is worth pausing on how that happened. The author of the original finding co-authored the paper that overturned it, using a method designed specifically to stop each side quietly protecting its own result.

The group money did not help

The reanalysis found one clear exception, and it is more useful than the headline.

Among the least happy portion of the sample, roughly the bottom fifth, the relationship did flatten, at around one hundred thousand dollars. Above that, more money was not associated with better emotional wellbeing for that group.

The reading the authors favoured is the plain one. Money is extremely effective at solving the problems money causes, and those problems have an end. Once they are gone, whatever else is producing the suffering is still there, and income has no purchase on it. Grief is not cheaper at a higher salary.

That is the version of this finding worth carrying, because it converts an abstract debate about wealth into a question somebody can actually answer about themselves: is the thing making this hard a financial thing.

What rising income moves, and for whom Illustrative
0 25 50 75 100 Reported wellbeing 86 Life evaluation 61 Day-to-day emotion 78 Freedom from money worry
0 25 50 75 100 Reported wellbeing 84 Happiest fifth 58 Middle 21 Least happy fifth

A schematic of the relationships described in this article, drawn to show shape rather than measured values. The underlying findings are cited in the references.

The second view is the one to sit with. The bars show how much additional income moves wellbeing within each group, and the gap between the outer two is the whole argument.

Why nobody has data on billionaires

Every study cited here is built on ordinary survey samples. The top brackets they contain are high earners, not the very rich, and the distance between a high earner and a billionaire is far larger than the distance between a high earner and somebody on the median wage.

So there is no dataset that answers the question people actually want answered. Extending a curve past the end of its data is guessing with a chart attached, and the honest position is that the psychology of extreme wealth is anecdote, memoir and inference.

These thresholds are unstable even within the measurable range. A separate analysis of more than 1.7 million people across the Gallup World Poll put satiation at around ninety-five thousand dollars for life evaluation and somewhere between sixty and seventy-five thousand for emotional wellbeing, and found it varied substantially by region, arriving later in wealthier parts of the world. [jebb-2018-satiation] A number that moves that much with where you stand is not a fact about human beings.

Why your own raise did not feel like anything

Two mechanisms explain the mismatch between a real population-level effect and the almost universal private experience that money changed nothing.

The first is that the relationship is logarithmic. Each additional step of wellbeing costs proportionally more money than the last, so a raise of a few thousand does progressively less as your income grows. Percentages move people, not amounts.

The second is that the comparison group travels with you. Earning more usually means working alongside people who earn more, living somewhere more expensive, and recalibrating what an ordinary life looks like. Absolute position improves while relative position does not, and a good deal of the machinery that generates satisfaction is relative. That comparison machinery is the subject of our guide to where self-worth actually comes from, and it runs whether or not the numbers justify it. We have written separately about how badly other people’s good news can land when that comparison is running.

What this does not establish

None of it is causal. These are associations in survey data, and richer people differ from poorer people in ways that have nothing to do with the money. Health, security, control over your own time and the absence of chronic emergency all travel with income and all affect wellbeing on their own.

It also says nothing about what a specific amount would do for a specific person. A population curve is an average over enormously varied lives, and no individual is obliged to sit on it.

Is the worry actually about money?

Tick anything that is true this month. This is a sorting prompt rather than a test, and it produces no diagnosis.

0 of 5 ticked

What helps

Deciding which problem you have. The single most useful thing in this literature is the split between money-shaped suffering and everything else. The first has a solution and a size. The second does not get smaller when the first does.

Fixing the reference group rather than the income. You cannot easily change what you earn. You can change who you are measuring against, and that variable does more work than its reputation suggests.

Treating a windfall as a risk as well as a relief. Our guide to sudden wealth covers the evidence: the social consequences arrive faster than the benefits, and are the part nobody prepares for.

Naming what enough would actually look like, in numbers. Left vague, the target moves with you. Written down, it stops being a feeling and becomes something that can be reached or revised.

When to seek help

Speak to a doctor or a mental health professional if low mood has persisted for more than a couple of weeks regardless of your circumstances, or if money worry has become constant enough to affect your sleep and your concentration. If the pressure is genuinely financial, a free debt advice service is usually the faster route, and it is worth doing both rather than choosing.

If you are having thoughts of harming yourself, treat that as urgent and contact your local emergency services or a crisis helpline.

How MyFreud can help

MyFreud tracks mood against what is actually happening in your weeks, which is the only practical way to answer the question this article ends on. If your mood moves with your bank balance, the log shows it. If it does not, the log shows that too, and that is the more useful finding.

Download MyFreud and start today: App Store or Google Play.

Frequently asked questions

Does money buy happiness?

On average, yes, more than the popular version of this research suggests, and less than the amount of attention money gets would imply. Across large samples, higher income is associated with both a better overall evaluation of your life and better day-to-day emotional experience, and the second relationship continues past the point where it was long thought to stop. The relationship is logarithmic rather than linear, which is the part that gets lost: each further step up takes a proportionally larger amount of money to produce the same increase, so doubling your income moves you about as much whether the doubling starts at thirty thousand or three hundred thousand.

Is the seventy-five thousand dollar happiness limit real?

No, and the correction came from an unusually honest piece of scientific housekeeping. The 2010 study that produced the figure used a measure that hit its ceiling, which made the curve look flat when the instrument had simply run out of room. In 2023 the original author worked directly with the researcher whose findings contradicted his, reanalysed both datasets together, and published the result. Day-to-day emotional wellbeing keeps improving above that threshold for most people. The number survives in circulation mainly because it was a satisfying thing to believe.

Are billionaires happier than the rest of us?

Nobody knows, and it is worth being clear that this is a data problem rather than a polite refusal to answer. The large wellbeing surveys behind these findings are built on samples of ordinary earners, and the highest brackets they contain are still enormously far below a billion. Extrapolating a curve past the end of the data is not analysis. What the research does support is narrower and duller: among people wealthy enough to be studied, how the money was acquired predicted wellbeing about as well as how much of it there was.

Why does earning more never feel like enough?

Two things run at once. Adaptation means a raise stops registering as a raise within a fairly short time, since the new level becomes the baseline against which the next comparison is made. And the reference group moves with you: earning more usually means being around people who earn more, so a rise in absolute income can arrive alongside a fall in relative position. That combination explains why the curve is real at the population level and yet almost nobody experiences their own income as having made them happier.

If money helps, why am I still miserable after a pay rise?

The 2023 finding speaks to this fairly directly. Emotional wellbeing kept climbing with income for most people, but for the least happy group it flattened out around one hundred thousand dollars, which fits the interpretation that money is very good at removing money-shaped problems and close to useless against the others. If a pay rise changed your circumstances and not your mood, the most useful conclusion is that whatever is driving the mood was never financial, which is information rather than failure.

References

  1. 1.Kahneman D, Deaton A ( 2010). High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. doi:10.1073/pnas.1011492107
  2. 2.Killingsworth MA, Kahneman D, Mellers B ( 2023). Income and emotional well-being: a conflict resolved. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. doi:10.1073/pnas.2208661120
  3. 3.Jebb AT, Tay L, Diener E, Oishi S ( 2018). Happiness, income satiation and turning points around the world. Nature Human Behaviour. doi:10.1038/s41562-017-0277-0