It turns out that only a minority of people have unlimited desires.
Scientists from the University of Bath conducted a study within who tried to find out how much money people need to lead an ideal life. As the lead author of the study, Paul Bain, admits in an article for The Conversation, the team was surprised by the results.
Read also: Scientists have revealed how much heat the human body can withstand
The authors of the paper note that economists often consider people as beings who have unlimited needs but limited resources to satisfy them. But a new study shows that only a minority of people actually have unlimited needs. The majority would be happy with a significant but limited amount of money.
During the study, scientists interviewed 8,000 people from 33 countries located on all continents. Participants were asked to focus on what was needed to fulfill all their desires, presenting an “absolutely ideal life” without worrying about whether it could actually be achieved.
To assess economic need, the researchers asked respondents to estimate how much money they would need to achieve this ideal life. The researchers suggested imagining that the amount was won by participants in a lottery to prevent the amount from being viewed as a reward for hard work.
The lottery prize started at $10,000, and the top prize was $100 billion. Such a prize would make the winner the richest person in the world.
The scientists' assumption was quite simple: if people have unlimited needs, they will always choose the maximum prize. But in 33 countries around the world, only a minority chose $100 billion (from 8% to 39% depending on the country). In most countries, people chose a prize equivalent to $10 million. In some countries, such as India or Russia, respondents chose one million altogether.
Scientists also wanted to trace the difference between people with limited and non-disabled abilities. It turned out that young people were more likely to talk about unlimited desires than older people, although this figure depended on the country. In less developed countries, the effect of age was weaker.
The researchers also found that more people chose the $100 billion prize in countries where there was more socially acceptable inequality (known as “power distance”). and where more emphasis was placed on group life (so-called “collectivism”).
For example, power distance and collectivism are high in Indonesia, and almost 40% of the Indonesian sample chose US$100 billion. The UK has relatively low levels of collectivism and power distance, and less than 20% chose the maximum lottery prize.
In addition, the researchers asked people what the most important change they would make if they won the prize. And they also ranked various values that were important to them, such as having power or helping others.
And here a new surprise awaited the scientists. People with unlimited needs were more likely to tell us that they would spend money to help others, but in terms of values, they cared no more about helping others than people with limited needs.
