[uvdiv]

Even when it comes to the "pursuit of happiness," enshrined in our Declaration of Independence as one of the noble goals of government, our citizens are only the 15th most satisfied with their lives.

The text asserts the right of men [mankind] to pursue happiness, not the goal of government to provide it!

[firefoxman1]

That is such an excellent point. I don't know if this is an issue found in other countries as much as here, but I find (especially during election times) people take such pride in what they achieve, but blame the government for what they don't. It doesn't help when politicians are publicly using this attitude as a major part of their strategy.

[punee]

It is an issue that is found in other countries proportionately to the prevalence of socialism. The French, for instance, will not only blame everything on the government (or people who have had success), but expect everything from it (find me a job, keep me healthy, save my company from bankruptcy, provide me with nice state-sponsored TV fiction championing the values of "diversity", etc.). You don't want America to go down that road.

[_delirium]

Having lived in both the United States and Denmark, I think I would like America to go at least slightly more down that road. It frees up a lot of individual decision-making if very basic things are taken care of. Even in the U.S., nobody expects you to contract for your own police officers to investigate a crime if you get shot. Denmark just takes it a bit further and says you shouldn't have to contract for the ambulance and hospital that treat the gunshot wound, either. That frees you up to work on things that actually matter. Not having healthcare tied to employment frees up many options as well.

[smsm42]

It is, sadly, a very common opinion - if I have the right to pursuit of happiness, the government must provide me with my happiness. Ironically, after a century of bigger and bigger government, the citizens' confidence in the said government and its ability to provide anything resembling happiness has eroded considerably - as the author of the article notices. Even more ironically, the author absolutely fails to make this link, and complains the government doesn't intervene enough to provide the happiness to the people.

[antidoh]

A good point, but not the only useful point.

The role of government should be at least as good as the Hippocratic Oath: First, do no harm.

And while it's not the government's role to provide happiness, the structure and practice of government should at least not hinder the pursuit of happiness, and better should promote it. And if a government action does not promote the pursuit of happiness (in the large) ... why are we doing it?