DIBELLA

On these pages, on previous occasions, I have written about the need to consolidate public services and municipal functions. Implicit in the continuing discussions about that topic is the reason for doing so.

Ostensibly, by consolidating services, cities and towns can generate economies-of-scale, cut costs and thereby reduce the overall tax burden. That cursory explanation does not go very far in uncovering our values and why we do the things we do as a body public.

A five-why exercise (why? why? why? why? why?) is an analytical device to identify the root cause of any action, or in this case, the public’s motivation for change. Such an analysis can challenge inferences made by those who advocate with great conviction for policy changes, but who really don’t know their ramifications.

The first why question seems pretty clear: why consolidate? Answer: to cut costs and thereby reduce taxes.

Second why question: why reduce taxes? Here’s where answers diverge. Our state leaders would probably say we need to reduce taxes so companies based here can make more profit. However, J.Q. Publico from Cranston is apt to say we need to reduce taxes to lessen the burden on citizen taxpayers already living in the state. That’s a complementary but slightly different answer that complicates the thread of further analysis.

Third why question: why support companies so they can make greater profits? By helping businesses make more profit, companies will find Rhode Island an attractive place to be. New companies will move here and companies already here will use the increased profits to expand their operations.

But there are several fallacies with this inferential thinking about how one good thing leads to another.

First, it presumes that the purpose of any business is to make a profit. That’s like saying that the purpose of a human being is to breathe. A human needs to breathe to function, but that isn’t its purpose. Companies need profit to exist, but in these days of thinking green, as the saying goes, “they do well by doing good.” Companies that are profit-driven often shift their actual costs to the social sector, like a company that pollutes the water or air. Is it good to support those types of businesses?

Second, if the state lowered corporate taxes, companies like CVS might expand their operations here — but are as likely to use the extra net revenue to increase stock dividends or, in this era of global markets, to expand not in Rhode Island but in Florida, Brazil or Indonesia. With regard to the impact of lowered taxes on J.Q. Publico, presumably that would give Rhode Islanders more money to spend on more important things, like lottery tickets and stuffies.

Fourth why question: why encourage businesses to establish or expand operations in Rhode Island? Greater business activity would increase employment and increase incomes.

Fifth why question: if employment was higher and residents had more income and more money to spend on items other than taxes, they would be happier. This last answer brings us to an interesting place and calls to mind the intention of our Founding Fathers that government provide its citizens with “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

If what drives our efforts to reduce taxes is ultimately the pursuit of happiness, then some changes are in order. First, instead of tracking how Rhode Island ranks in terms of tax liability, it would seem much more pertinent for our state officials to monitor our relative happiness. Such an approach might seem novel on a state level, but it isn’t on a country level.

Back in 1972, when the new king of Bhutan ascended to the throne, he made his country’s priority not economic growth as measured by GDP but gross national happiness, or GNH. That initiative was followed by a series of conferences, a bunch of research and an even broader focus on Gross International Happiness. (After all, shouldn’t we just be one big, happy world?)

The World Values Survey project, which has tracked data from 1995 to last year, found that the United States ranked 16th out of 98 countries in terms of overall “reported happiness.” Some of this research has looked at factors that cause happiness with a main focus on income. It turns out that once past a certain income threshold, happiness is not correlated with income. That finding is mindful of Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. After basic physical needs such as food, clothing and shelter are met, satisfaction is based on other considerations. This insight is affirmed in a book published this spring by Arthur Brooks, Gross National Happiness: Why Happiness Matters for America and How We Can Get More of It. Among the comparisons he makes, Brooks examines whether Democrats are happier than Republicans and whether liberals are happier than conservatives. Ultimately it’s not about political party or taxes but social and cultural values including charity, faith, hard work and optimism.

To take this back to the state level, what do we know about the relative happiness of Rhode Islanders compared to residents of other states. Actually, very little, since data on gross happiness have not been collected on that level but more to make cross-national comparisons. When you think about it and the people you know, are we Rhode Islanders happier than our neighbors in Massachusetts or Connecticut? How does our happiness compare with that of New Yorkers or Floridians? Are the states in the U.S. Southwest that have been growing in population over the past 10 years doing so because people are happier there?

Anecdotally, I think Rhode Islanders are a pretty happy bunch, and, as suggested by David Grimes’s essay (ProJo 25 July), we might be getting happier just by getting older. Our public concern for quality-of-place, culture, food and the arts seem appropriately focused on issues and values that contribute to happiness and may be one reason why our population, compared to that of our neighbors, has remained relatively stable over the past 10 years.

The governor’s idea to assemble a tax policy group to find ways Rhode Island can be more competitive is an excellent one. Yet there is no guarantee that lowered taxes will lead to what should be our ultimate goal — greater happiness. If the governor is a true patriot encouraging the pursuit of happiness, then he should appoint a working group on how to make Rhode Islanders happier. I’d be happy to volunteer.

Anthony J. DiBella is a professor at the Naval War College in Newport