Finnish public discussion is often very critical of Finland. People keep comparing Finland to other countries and complaining how some specific thing is worse than in country X. That's probably a key reason Finland ranks so high here.

Happiness, when measured at population level, doesn't mean intense emotions. It doesn't mean that everyone is visibly happy. It means that people are generally content with their lives, because nothing is particularly wrong for most people.

If you look at the country rankings, all the usual suspects rank high: the Nordic countries, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and New Zealand. Whenever you rank countries by some measure of success or quality of life, you expect to see those countries near the top. All of them are wealthy and not too large, and they all have a culture where the people in charge generally try to make things right. It doesn't always look like that from the inside, but when you compare them to the rest of the world, it's pretty clear why they are so successful. Especially if you try to measure success by the quality of life experienced by the middle 80% of the population.

> A far right government with an xenophobic, anti-EU, "we need a strong leader" party being the second strongest

Other things on the list I can understand but not this one. The government is not "far right" and not "xenophobic" (although one of the party in the government might be labeled as such, persus). Compared to US for example I think the current government is much more on the left than either republicans or democrats. The leading party in finland (part of the government) is actively pushing for more work-based migration.

Where did you get the "we need a strong leader" rethoric that you mention? I have never seen that from Persus (the party you are refering to)

The government has generally been described as the most right in modern history in Finland. That is a mixture of "taking from the poor, giving to the rich" and a xenophobic agenda. That not all parties support the xenophobic line does not change the fact that such goals have been written into the agenda and laws are likely to be passed. Not fully as extreme as one party would like, but still.

Of course left - right is only one dimension in politics. Nowadays typically another dimension is conservative - liberal, but even 2 dimensions cannot measure everything. So the government could probably be described as the most economic right and the least liberal, I simplified that a bit to far right.

That party has no such strong leader agenda, but to my understanding polls show a clear correlation between "everything was better under Kekkonen" (a president for over 25 years with a somewhat authoritarian leader style) and voting for the "True Finns" / "Finns Party" today.

Either way this government is too young to have a major impact on the study in TFA. My point was more like the other way round: Happy people would not vote for the party of the dissatisfied, simple answers, everything was better before EU/the foreigners came. For those following German politics, "Wutbürger" (angry citizens) would typically not be happy people, would they?

> government has generally been described as the most right in modern history in Finland

Which is probably much more on the left than any US government for example and quite far from the "far right" you were stating in previous post.

> "taking from the poor, giving to the rich" and a xenophobic agenda

Quite strong words. This sounds very much like your personal opinion instead of a fact.

> to my understanding polls show a clear correlation between "everything was better under Kekkonen" (a president for over 25 years with a somewhat authoritarian leader style) and voting for the "True Finns" / "Finns Party" today

Sources please for the "clear correlation". This also sounds very much like your personal opinion.

> My point was more like the other way round: Happy people would not vote for the party of the dissatisfied, simple answers, everything was better before EU/the foreigners came. For those following German politics, "Wutbürger" (angry citizens) would typically not be happy people, would they?

Voting parties more on the right does not mean that "people are not happy", it mostly means that people understand economic principles.

The previous leftist government caused the Finland's debt level to raise to very dangerous levels while the economy shrinked at the same time and were only going to add more debt without cutting any expenses or encouraging new business. I personally think that business-positive government is a very good thing and apparently so do most of the happy finnish voters.

>> "taking from the poor, giving to the rich" and a xenophobic agenda > > Quite strong words. This sounds very much like your personal opinion instead of a fact.

Yes, strong words. In my opinion it's the worst government as long as I have followed Finnish politics. A vice prime minister who wants to shoot foreigners, that would not be acceptable in many Western democracies. (Yes, the statement is old and she might have written it only to get political supporters. But for me neither of them is an excuse.)

Just read any newspaper:

* Next month social benefits will be cut and more cuts are in preparation

* Unemployed foreigners will lose their permits and have to leave their country after a short time. Not yet decided, but the original plan was 3 months.

* The possibility for seeking political asylum can be suspended for 30 days (draft by the ministry)

That's what I call taking from the poor and the weak.

Despite that everybody agrees that the public debt is growing too fast, the government insists on lowering taxes (not drastically, but still) instead of raising them as the situation would require.

That's what I call giving to the rich.

The new government is growing the debt even further already according to current budget. And typically the budget is too optimistic, in reality it might come worse. I would not call that understanding economic principles, it's pure ideology that taxes must not be raised and benefits of the rich must not be touched.

> apparently so do most of the happy finnish voters.

The results were pretty unclear. Several government coalitions would have been possible. The winner did not want to compromise, but move to the right as far as they could.

If there were a election today, the Finns Party would lose quite a bit. Many of their voters are affected by the cuts and not happy.

So claiming that this government has a strong backing is a bit of an exaggeration. It does not help that they repeat it. They won the last election, but that's it.

> How does that lead to rank 1?

Because none of the items you mentioned affect happiness or the perceived life of the people in Finland. The vast majority won't and don't know people who commit suicide, murder or die from drugs. People may grumble about bus strikes but are mostly are happy with and trust public services, transport, police, press and government. And feel safe they won't be destitute even if lose their job.

BTW Finland doesn't have a far right government - there's a right wing party (which has shelved its anti-eu policies) as part of the government coalition. The proportional representation perhaps makes people feel less disenfranchised and 'happier'.

> The vast majority won't and don't know people who commit suicide,

That part I seriously doubt. I personally know of 2 suicides in the last 20 years. Not people that were close in any way, but people I had met. (Like the brother of the best friend of my wife or a classmate of my daughter.) One more accident where suicide is suspected to be the real reason by many. There are probably not many Finns with no relative who died from the consequences of alcoholism.

I would claim everybody should know someone suffering/having suffered from depression or other mental health problems.

And I have witnessed one suicide, which was not a pleasant view (that might be more of bad luck, probably fewer people have)

> There are probably not many Finns with no relative who died from the consequences of alcoholism.

Suicide is 1 per 7500 people - so I still think most people won't really know someone, but might know of, or have met.

But yes, if suicide included people who "drank themselves to death" or who had fatal accidents when drunk, or killed someone while drunk, close to everyone (including me) would know someone

"Happiness" is being confused with "contentment" or "basic satisfaction".