Happiness stops rising with incomes.

It is good news that economists ponder what wealth creation is actually for, but highly selective evidence forms the basis for the money-doesn’t-buy-happiness bandwagon. The case for luxury taxes is based on psychological, rather than econometric, results. We also see that people quickly become habituated to changes in their circumstances, so huge investment returns or a large liquidity event will make individuals happier only for a year or two. While evidence verifies that too much choice when buying consumer goods such as wine or watches can cause stress, we also have plenty of evidence from the implosion of planned economies to show that lack of choice makes people very unhappy.

Personally, I don’t want economics professors and governments deciding which cars or boats should be available to me. What makes me suspicious of the motives of the happiness gurus, however, is the fact that they single out items like cars, but dismiss expenses such as books, charitable causes and other areas where we face an explosion of choices. Their selection reveals their own views of what is meaningful in life, rather than an objective assessment of evidence.

It is great that economists are leading the happiness debate—a sign of an exciting renaissance in my subject. But it will be a shame if those with prior political agendas hijack the issue. Many deep questions exist about the relation between money and happiness, and societies should examine them. A serious, unbiased assessment of the whole range of evidence by empirical social scientists would be a tremendous contribution.

Diane Coyle is author of The Soulful Science: What Economists Really Do and Why It Matters and runs the London-based consulting firm Enlightenment Economics.