While on vacation in distant locales, people often find that time moves quite differently than in the places they're used to. Robert Levine and his colleagues have studied the speed of life in cities around the world and across the U.S. In a series of experiments they measured how fast a single pedestrian in a downtown center covered a distance of 60 feet, timed how long it took to complete a simple commercial transaction, and recorded the accuracy of randomly selected clocks in the downtown business area. They found that places with a faster pace of life also had stronger economies, and that people in larger cities tended to move faster than those in less populated areas.     So as you might expect, fast-moving people are associated with fast-moving economies. But does that faster life translate into greater happiness? In faster places, people were more likely to smoke, less likely to take the time to help strangers in need, and more likely to die from heart diseases. Yet Levine and his colleagues found that people in faster places tended to report feeling somewhat happier with their lives than those who lived in slower places. A city's pace of life was indeed "significantly related" to the physical, social, and psychological well-being of its inhabitants.     However, the relationship between income and reported happiness is far from obvious. According to the "Easterlin paradox(,)" (named after economist Richard Easterlin), once people have enough money to meet their basic needs, having more money is not necessarily correlated with higher self-reported happiness. Easterlin's claims are controversial and not universally accepted; even if his theory is correct, wealthier nations might be happier overall if they address the basic needs to more of their people. In any case, the ongoing debate indicates that we need to be careful when making connections between happiness and overall economic factors.     Among individuals in a society, busyness -- or the feeling of busyness -- seems to be an important factor in well-being. That feeling of busyness -- of having a lot to do and too little time in which to do it is often associated with stress and anxiety. However in many contexts being "busy" is badge of honor: Busy parents are seen as devoted to their children's well-being and the busy lawyer can charge a premium hourly rate. In US studies, the happiest people reported that they were busy, in the sense that they had little excess time, yet did not feel rushed.     Levine's work raises the possibility that an individual's feelings about their use of time contribute as much or more to their happiness as does economics. Now the big challenge is to find out which way the causal chain works: Does the feeling of being active, yet not rushed, contribute to happiness? Or does happiness allow people to perceive  their use of time in positive ways? Which of the following does Easterlin paradox support?
People in faster places may suffer from poorer health. Happiness is possible only when one's basic needs are met. People in underdeveloped countries are less happier. High income does not necessarily ensure life satisfaction.
Question: While on vacation in distant locales, people often find that time moves quite differently than in the places they're used to. Robert Levine and his colleagues have studied the speed of life in cities around the world and across the U.S. In a series of experiments they measured how fast a single pedestrian in a downtown center covered a distance of 60 feet, timed how long it took to complete a simple commercial transaction, and recorded the accuracy of randomly selected clocks in the downtown business area. They found that places with a faster pace of life also had stronger economies, and that people in larger cities tended to move faster than those in less populated areas.     So as you might expect, fast-moving people are associated with fast-moving economies. But does that faster life translate into greater happiness? In faster places, people were more likely to smoke, less likely to take the time to help strangers in need, and more likely to die from heart diseases. Yet Levine and his colleagues found that people in faster places tended to report feeling somewhat happier with their lives than those who lived in slower places. A city's pace of life was indeed "significantly related" to the physical, social, and psychological well-being of its inhabitants.     However, the relationship between income and reported happiness is far from obvious. According to the "Easterlin paradox(,)" (named after economist Richard Easterlin), once people have enough money to meet their basic needs, having more money is not necessarily correlated with higher self-reported happiness. Easterlin's claims are controversial and not universally accepted; even if his theory is correct, wealthier nations might be happier overall if they address the basic needs to more of their people. In any case, the ongoing debate indicates that we need to be careful when making connections between happiness and overall economic factors.     Among individuals in a society, busyness -- or the feeling of busyness -- seems to be an important factor in well-being. That feeling of busyness -- of having a lot to do and too little time in which to do it is often associated with stress and anxiety. However in many contexts being "busy" is badge of honor: Busy parents are seen as devoted to their children's well-being and the busy lawyer can charge a premium hourly rate. In US studies, the happiest people reported that they were busy, in the sense that they had little excess time, yet did not feel rushed.     Levine's work raises the possibility that an individual's feelings about their use of time contribute as much or more to their happiness as does economics. Now the big challenge is to find out which way the causal chain works: Does the feeling of being active, yet not rushed, contribute to happiness? Or does happiness allow people to perceive  their use of time in positive ways? Which of the following does Easterlin paradox support?
A. People in faster places may suffer from poorer health.
B. Happiness is possible only when one's basic needs are met.
C. People in underdeveloped countries are less happier.
D. High income does not necessarily ensure life satisfaction.
Answer: