mental health

Zen and the Art of Dissatisfaction – Part 33

/ Mikko Ijäs / Jätä kommentti

From Poverty to Productivity

Across the world, economists, sociologists and policymakers have long debated whether providing people with an unconditional basic income could help lift them out of poverty. Despite numerous pilot projects, there are relatively few long-term studies showing the large-scale social and health impacts of such measures. One striking exception, highlighted by the Dutch historian Rutger Bregman, provides rare empirical evidence of how a sudden, guaranteed flow of money can transform an entire community — not just economically, but psychologically and socially.

In 1997, in the state of North Carolina, the Eastern Band of Cherokee people opened the Harrah’s Cherokee Casino Resort. By 2010, the casino’s annual revenues had reached around 400 million USD, where they have remained relatively stable ever since. The income was used to build a new school, hospital and fire station — but the most significant portion of the profits went directly to the tribe’s members, about 8,000 in total.

The Findings: Money Really Did Change Everything

By 2001, the funds from the casino already accounted for roughly 25–33 per cent of household income for many families. These payments acted, in effect, as an unconditional basic income.

What made this case extraordinary was that, purely by coincidence, a research group led by psychiatrist Jane Costello at Duke University had been tracking the mental health of young people in the area since 1991. This provided a unique opportunity to compare the same community before and after the introduction of this new source of income.

Costello’s long-term data revealed that children who had grown up in poverty were far more likely to suffer from behavioural problems than their better-off peers. Yet after the casino opened — and the Cherokee families’ financial situation improved — behavioural problems among children lifted out of poverty declined by up to 40 per cent, reaching levels comparable to those of children from non-poor households.

The benefits went beyond behaviour. Youth crime, alcohol consumption and drug use all decreased, while school performance improved significantly. Ten years later, researchers found that the earlier a child had been lifted out of poverty, the better their mental health as a teenager.

Bregman (2018) uses this case to make a clear point: poverty is not caused by laziness, stupidity or lack of discipline. It is caused by not having enough money. When poor families finally have the financial means to meet their basic needs, they frequently become more productive citizens and better parents.

In his words, “Poor people don’t make stupid decisions because they are stupid, but because they live in a context where anyone would make stupid decisions.” Scarcity — whether of time or money — narrows focus and drains cognitive resources, leading to short-sighted, survival-driven choices. And as Bregman puts it poignantly:

“There is one crucial difference between the busy and the poor: you can take a holiday from busyness, but you can’t take a holiday from poverty.”

How Poverty Shapes the Developing Brain

The deeper roots of these findings lie in how poverty and stress affect brain development and emotional regulation. The Canadian physician and trauma expert Gábor Maté (2018) explains how adverse childhood experiences — known as ACE scores — are far more common among children raised in poverty. Such children face a higher risk of being exposed to violence or neglect, or of witnessing domestic conflict in their homes and neighbourhoods.

Chronic stress, insecurity and emotional unavailability of caregivers can leave lasting marks on the developing brain. The orbitofrontal cortex — located behind the eyes and crucial for interpreting non-verbal emotional cues such as tone, facial expressions and pupil size — plays a vital role in social bonding and empathy. If parents are emotionally detached due to stress, trauma or substance use, this brain region may develop abnormally.

Maté describes how infants depend on minute non-verbal signals — changes in the caregiver’s pupils or micro-expressions — to determine whether they are safe and loved. Smiling faces and dilated pupils signal joy and security, whereas flat or constricted expressions convey threat or absence. These signals shape how a child’s emotional circuits wire themselves for life.

When children grow up surrounded by tension or neglect, they may turn instead to peers for validation. Yet peer-based attachment, as Maté notes, often fosters riskier behaviour: substance use, early pregnancy, and susceptibility to peer pressure. Such patterns are not signs of inherent cruelty or weakness, but rather of emotional immaturity born of unmet attachment needs.

Not Just a Poverty Problem: The Role of Emotional Availability

Interestingly, these developmental challenges are not confined to low-income families. Children from wealthy but emotionally absent households often face similar struggles. Parents who are chronically busy or glued to their smartphones may be physically present yet emotionally unavailable. The result can be comparable levels of stress and insecurity in their children.

Thus, whether a parent is financially poor or simply time-poor, the emotional outcome for the child can be strikingly similar. In both cases, high ACE scores predict poorer mental and physical health, lower educational attainment, and reduced social mobility.

While Finland is often praised for its high social mobility, countries like the United States show a much stronger intergenerational persistence of poverty. In rigidly stratified societies, the emotional and economic consequences of childhood disadvantage are far harder to escape.

Towards a More Humane Future: Basic Income and the AI Revolution

As artificial intelligence reshapes industries and redefines the meaning of work, society faces a profound question: how do we ensure everyone has the means — and the mental space — to live well?

If parents could earn their income doing the work they truly value, rather than chasing pay cheques for survival, they would likely become more productive, more fulfilled, and more emotionally attuned to their children. In turn, those children would grow into healthier, happier adults, capable of sustaining positive cycles of wellbeing and productivity.

Such an outcome would not only enhance individual happiness but would also reduce public expenditure on health care, policing and welfare. Investing in people’s emotional and economic stability yields returns that compound across generations. A universal basic income (UBI), far from being utopian, could therefore represent one of the wisest and most humane investments a modern society could make.

Conclusion

The story of the Eastern Band of Cherokee people and the Harrah’s Cherokee Casino stands as powerful evidence that unconditional income can transform lives — not through moral exhortation, but through simple material security. Poverty, as Bregman reminds us, is not a character flaw; it is a cash-flow problem. And as Maté shows, the effects of that scarcity extend deep into the wiring of the human brain. When financial stress eases, parents can connect, children can thrive, and communities can flourish. In an age of automation and abundance, perhaps the greatest challenge is no longer how to produce wealth — but how to distribute it in ways that allow everyone the freedom to be fully human.

References

Bregman, R. (2018). Utopia for Realists: The Case for a Universal Basic Income, Open Borders, and a 15-Hour Workweek. Bloomsbury.
Maté, G. (2018). In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters with Addiction. North Atlantic Books.

Zen and the Art of Dissatisfaction – Part 32

/ Mikko Ijäs / Jätä kommentti

The Impact of Unemployment

In my previous posts I have been writing about Universal Basic Income (UBI). This would solve many issues related to unemployment as it would pretty much make it disappear. Unemployment is a vast problem and it has many has far-reaching effects, not only on an individual’s financial stability but also on their mental health and social identity. In many Western societies, much of an individual’s identity is shaped by their profession. This social construct is so ingrained that in casual interactions, one of the first questions asked is often, ”What do you do for a living?” However, for the unemployed, such questions can evoke a sense of discomfort and even shame. The notion of self-worth becomes deeply entangled with one’s employment status, and unemployment can trigger a series of social and psychological challenges. This post explores how unemployment leads to poverty, mental health issues, and intergenerational trauma, and underscores the need for systemic change to address these social and economic disparities.

In Western societies, people are often defined by their occupation. This identity construction is reinforced in everyday social settings, where one of the most common icebreakers is the question of what someone does for a living. For those without employment, these encounters can be awkward or even painful. Ironically, while people are eager to discuss their professions and often define others by their job titles in social settings, few would want their occupation to be engraved on their tombstone. For example, one does not often see epitaphs reading, ”Here lies Teuvo Virtanen, a knowledgeable and self-directed YEL product manager.” It seems people wish to define themselves through their family, pets, hobbies, and interests, rather than by their job. Despite this, unemployment, and the poverty it brings, are still viewed as deeply shameful in modern society. This societal stigma worsens the experience of being unemployed, reinforcing feelings of worthlessness.

The Psychological and Social Effects of Unemployment

The financial uncertainty caused by unemployment extends beyond the individual; it can also impact relationships, family dynamics, and children’s futures. Unemployed individuals often experience higher rates of mental health disorders, such as depression, anxiety, and substance abuse. It is often impossible to tell whether these mental health issues preceded the unemployment or resulted from it, creating a vicious cycle. The need for mental health treatment is exacerbated by the financial barriers that prevent unemployed individuals from accessing healthcare, further deepening the crisis. Additionally, bureaucratic requirements, such as being forced to sell one’s car to qualify for unemployment benefits, make it even harder for individuals to regain stability.

The strain caused by unemployment extends to more than just financial difficulties. The stress of living in poverty can lead to mental health problems such as depression, and can also increase the likelihood of substance abuse and violent behaviour. While these are real issues that impact society at large, the solution is not to force unemployed people into any job available. Doing so would only exacerbate the problem. Unemployed individuals are found across all social classes and professions, and it would be unfair to compel a highly educated researcher who has lost their job to accept work as a cleaner, especially when they are not eligible for unemployment benefits.

The Impact on Children: Intergenerational Trauma

Children are the most vulnerable in situations where unemployment and poverty are prevalent. Issues within the family can often have lasting effects on children, leading to trauma that manifests in the form of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Dutch-born American psychiatrist Bessel van der Kolk has been one of the leading researchers to bring attention to the issue of trauma-based stress disorders in the West. Van der Kolk (2014) references the ACE (Adverse Childhood Experiences) study, led by researchers Robert Anda and Vincent Felitti, which aimed to examine the prevalence and effects of harmful childhood experiences.

The ACE study revealed that traumatic childhood experiences were more common than previously thought. Two-thirds of participants in the ACE study had experienced trauma during childhood, with significant negative impacts on their lives. Around 10% of participants reported frequently being verbally abused by their parents or other household members, while more than 25% had suffered physical violence in their family. Over 28% of female participants and 16% of male participants had been sexually abused. Furthermore, 12.5% had witnessed their mothers being physically assaulted.

The ACE study included a scoring system for traumatic childhood experiences, with participants receiving points based on their responses to various questions about abuse. The study found that 87% of participants scored at least 2 points on the ACE scale, and one in six participants scored 4 or more points. Those who scored 4 or more points reported significant challenges in learning and behaviour, and these traumatic experiences followed them into adulthood. High ACE scores were directly associated with issues in work, family life, and life expectancy.

Van der Kolk notes that women with high ACE scores (4 points or more) were 66% more likely to suffer from chronic depression, and men with similar scores had a 35% chance. As ACE scores increased, so did the likelihood of depression, substance use disorders, and suicidal behaviour. Suicidal attempts increased by 5000% when ACE scores rose from 0 to 6.

Perhaps one of the most shocking findings from the ACE study was the correlation between ACE scores and sexual violence. Only 5% of women with a score of 0 had been victims of rape, while 33% of women with a score of 4 had been raped. Van der Kolk explains that children who witness domestic violence are at significantly greater risk of entering violent relationships themselves later in life.

Addressing the Root Causes: Economic Inequality and Public Health

Economic inequality and poverty are not only detrimental to individual well-being but are also deeply ingrained in society’s broader health challenges. According to Bessel van der Kolk, eliminating child abuse and improving economic conditions could lead to significant public health benefits, including reductions in depression, alcoholism, suicide rates, drug abuse, and family violence. The financial cost of child abuse has been estimated to be higher than that of cancer or heart disease, yet its societal impact remains largely ignored.

In his work When the Body Says No (2011), Hungarian-Canadian doctor Gabor Maté discusses how access to regular and adequate income is one of the most significant health-promoting factors. Wealthier individuals have the means to provide their children with good daycare, access to quality education, and healthier lifestyles. On the other hand, the poor often have few choices and may resort to leaving their children in the care of abusive family members. These socio-economic disparities have a profound impact on mental and physical health. I will continue this topic on my next post.

Conclusion

Addressing poverty and unemployment is not only crucial for the immediate well-being of individuals but is also a smart long-term investment in public health. Reducing poverty would lead to improved mental health outcomes, enhanced safety, and lower crime rates. In particular, reducing childhood trauma and its lifelong effects would be a significant step toward a healthier, more equitable society. The solution does not lie in forcing people into any job, but in addressing the root causes of economic inequality and providing support for those affected by unemployment.

References
Bregman, R. (2017). Utopia for Realists: How We Can Build the Ideal World. The Correspondent.
Kolk, B. van der. (2014). The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma. Viking.
Maté, G. (2011). When the Body Says No: Exploring the Stress-Disease Connection. Wiley.
Anda, R., Felitti, V. J., et al. (1998). The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study: Implications for Child Health. Pediatrics, 101(3), 573-578.

Zen and the Art of Dissatisfaction – Part 26

/ Mikko Ijäs / Jätä kommentti

Unrelenting Battle for AI Supremacy

In today’s fast-evolving digital landscape, the titanic technology corporations are locked in a merciless struggle for AI dominance. Their competitive advantage is fuelled by the ability to access vast quantities of data. Yet this race holds profound implications for privacy, ethics, and the overlooked human labour that quietly powers it.

Originally published in Substack: https://substack.com/home/post/p-172413535

Large technology conglomerates are engaged in a cutthroat contest for AI supremacy, a competition shaped in large part by the free availability of data. Chinese rivals may be narrowing the gap in this contest, where the free flow of data reigns supreme. In contrast, in Western nations, personal data remains, at least for now, considered the property of the individual; its use requires the individual’s awareness and consent. Nevertheless, people freely share their data—opinions, consumption habits, images, location—when signing up for platforms or interacting online. The freer companies can exploit this user data, the quicker their AI systems learn. Machine learning is often applauded because it promises better services and more accurately targeted advertisements.

Hidden Human Labour

Yet, behind these learning systems are human workers—micro‑workers—who teach data to AI algorithms. Often subcontracted by the tech giants, they are paid meagrely yet exposed to humanity’s darkest content, and they must keep what they see secret. In principle, anyone can post almost anything on social media. Platforms may block or “lock” content that violates their policies—only to have the original poster appeal, rerouting the content to micro‑workers for review.

These shadow workers toil from home, performing tasks such as identifying forbidden sexual content, violence, or categorising products for companies like Walmart and Amazon. For example, they may have to distinguish whether two similar items are the same or retag products into different categories. Despite the rise of advanced AI, these micro‑tasks remain foundational—and are compensated only by the cent.

The relentless gathering of data is crucial for deep‑learning AI systems. In the United States, the tension between user privacy and corporate surveillance remains unresolved—largely stemming from the Facebook–Cambridge Analytica scandal. In autumn 2021, Frances Haugen, a data scientist and whistleblower, exposed how Facebook prioritised maximising user time on the platform over public safety Wikipedia+1.

Meanwhile, the roots of persuasive design trace back to Stanford University’s Persuasive Technology Lab (now known as the Behavior Design Lab), under founder B. J. Fogg, where concepts to hook and retain users—regardless of the consequences—were born. On face value, social media seems benign—connecting people, facilitating ideas, promoting second‑hand sales. Yet beneath the surface lie algorithms designed to keep users engaged, often by feeding content tailored to their interests. The more platforms learn, the more they serve users exactly what they want—drawing them deeper into addictive cycles.

Renowned psychologists from a PNAS study found that algorithms—based on just a few likes—could know users better than even their closest friends. About 90 likes enabled better personality predictions than an average friend, while 270 likes made AI more accurate than a spouse.

The Cambridge Analytica scandal revealed how personal data can be weaponised to influence political outcomes in events like Brexit and the 2016 US Presidential Election. All that was needed was to identify and target individuals with undecided votes based on their location and psychological profiles.

Frances Haugen’s whistleblowing further confirmed that Facebook exacerbates political hostility and supports authoritarian messaging especially in countries like Brazil, Hungary, the Philippines, India, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, and the USA.

As critics note, these platforms never intended to serve as central political channels—they were optimized to maximise engagement and advertising revenue. One research group led by Laura Edelson found that misinformation posts received six times more likes than posts from trusted sources like CNN or the World Health Organization The Guardian.

In theory, platforms could offer news feeds filled exclusively with content that made users feel confident, loved, safe—but such feeds don’t hold attention long enough for profit. Instead, platforms profit more from cultivating anxiety, insecurity, and outrage. The algorithm knows us so deeply that we often don’t even realise when we’re entirely consumed by our feelings, fighting unseen ideological battles. Hence, ad-based revenue models prove extremely harmful. Providers could instead charge a few euros a month—but the real drive is harvesting user data for long‑term strategic advantage.

Conclusion

The race for AI supremacy is not just a competition of algorithms—it’s a battle over data, attention, design, and ethics. The tech giants are playing with our sense of dissatisfasction, and we have no psychological tools to avoid it. While tech giants vie for the edge, a hidden workforce labours in obscurity, and persuasive systems steer human behaviour toward addiction and division. Awareness, regulation, and ethical models—potentially subscription‑based or artist‑friendly—are needed to reshape the future of AI for human benefit.

References

B. J. Fogg. (n.d.). B. J. Fogg. Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._J._Fogg
Behavior Design Lab. (n.d.). Stanford Behavior Design Lab. Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_Behavior_Design_Lab
Captology. (n.d.). Captology. Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captology
Frances Haugen. (n.d.). Frances Haugen. Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frances_Haugen
2021 Facebook leak. (n.d.). 2021 Facebook leak. Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Facebook_leak

Zen and the Art of Dissatisfaction – Part 21

/ Mikko Ijäs / Jätä kommentti

Data: The Oil of the Digital Age

Data applications rely fundamentally on data—its extraction, collection, storage, interpretation, and monetisation—making them arguably the most significant feature of our contemporary world. Often referred to as ”the new oil,” data is, from the perspective of persistent capitalists, a valuable resource capable of sustaining economic growth even after conventional natural reserves have been exhausted. This new form of capitalism has been titled Surveillance Capitalism (Zuboff 2019).

Originally published in Substack: https://substack.com/@mikkoijas

Data matters more than opinions. For developers of data applications, the key goal is that we browse online, click “like,” follow links, spend time on their platforms, and accept cookies. What we think or do does not matter; what matters is the digital behavioural surplus, a trace we leave and our consent to tracking. That footprint has become immensely valuable—companies are willing to pay for it, and sometimes break laws to get it.

Cookies and Consumer Privacy in Europe

European legislation like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) ensures some personal protection, but we still leave traces even if we refuse to share personal data. Websites are legally obligated to request our cookie consent, making privacy violations more visible. Rejecting cookies and clearing them out later becomes a time-consuming and frustrating chore.

In stark contrast, China’s data laws are much more relaxed, granting companies broader operational freedom. The more data a company gathers, the more fine-tuned its predictive algorithms can be. It’s much like environmental regulation: European firms are restricted from drilling for oil in protected areas, which reduces profit but protects nature. Chinese firms, unrestrained by such limits, may harm ecosystems while driving profits. In the data realm, restrictive laws narrow the available datasets. Whereas Chinese firms harvest freely, they might gain a major competitive edge that could help them lead the global AI market.

Data for Good: Jeff Hammerbacher’s Vision

American data scientist Jeff Hammerbacher is one of the field’s most influential figures. As journalist Steve Lohr (2015) reports, Hammerbacher started on Wall Street and later helped build Facebook’s data infrastructure. Today, he curates data collection and interpretation for the purpose of improving human lives—a fundamental ethos across the data industry. According to Hammerbacher, we must understand the current data landscape to predict the future. Practically, this means equipping everything we care about with sensors that collect data. His current focus? Transforming medicine by centring it on data. Data science is one of the most promising fields, where evidence trumps intuition.

Hammerbacher has been particularly interested in mental health and how data can improve psychological wellbeing. His close friend and former classmate, Steven Snyder, tragically died by suicide after struggling with bipolar disorder. This event, combined with Hammerbacher’s own breakdown at age 27—after being diagnosed with bipolar disorder and generalised anxiety disorder—led him to rethink his life. He notes that mental illness is a major cause of workforce dropout and ranks third among causes of early death. Researchers are now collecting neurobiological data from those with mental health conditions. Hammerbacher calls this “one of the most necessary and challenging data problems of our time.”

Pharmaceuticals haven’t solved the issue. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors(SSRIs), introduced in the 1980s, have failed to deliver a breakthrough for mood disorders. These remain a leading cause of death; roughly 90% of suicides involve untreated or poorly treated mood disorders, and about 50% of Western populations are affected at some point. The greater challenge lies in defining mental wellness—should people simply adapt to lives that feel unfit?

“Bullshit Jobs” and Social Systems

Investigative anthropologist David Graeber (2018) reported that 37–40% of Western workers view their jobs as “bullshit”—work they see as socially pointless. Thus, the problem isn’t merely psychological; our entire social structure normalises employment that values output over wellbeing.

Data should guide smarter decisions. Yet as our world digitises, data accumulates faster than our ability to interpret it. As Steve Lohr (2015) notes, a 20-bed intensive care unit can generate around 160,000 data points per second—a torrent demanding constant vigilance. Still, this data deluge offers positive outcomes: continuous patient monitoring enables proactive, personalised care.

Data-driven forecasting is set to reshape society, concentrating power and wealth. Not long ago, anyone could found a company; now a single corporation could dominate an entire sector with superior data. A case in point is the partnership between McKesson and IBM. In 2009, Kaan Katircioglu (IBM researcher) sought data for predictive modelling. He found it at McKesson—clean datasets recording medication inventory, prices, and logistics. IBM used this to build a predictive model, enabling McKesson to optimise its warehouse near Memphis and improve delivery accuracy from 90% to 99%.

At present, data-mining algorithms behave as clever tools. An algorithm is simply a set of steps for solving problems—think cooking recipes or coffee machine programming. Even novices can produce impressive outcomes by following a good set of instructions.

Historian Yuval Noah Harari (2015) provocatively suggests we are ourselves algorithms. Unlike machines, our algorithms run through emotions, perceptions, and thoughts—biological processes shaped by evolution, environment, and culture.

Summary

Personal data is the new source of extraction and exploitation—vital for technological progress yet governed by uneven regulations that determine competitive advantage. Pioneers like Jeff Hammerbacher highlight its potential for social good, especially in mental health, while revealing our complex psychology. We collect data abundantly, yet face the challenge of interpreting it effectively. Predictive systems can drive efficiency, but they can also foster monopolies. Ultimately, whether data serves or subsumes us depends on navigating its ethical, legal, and societal implications.

References

Graeber, D. (2018). Bullshit Jobs: A Theory. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Hammerbacher, J. (n.d.). [Interview in Lohr 2015].
Harari, Y. N. (2015). Homo Deus: A History of Tomorrow. New York: Harper.
Lohr, S. (2015). Data-ism: The Revolution Transforming Decision Making, Consumer Behavior, and Almost Everything Else. New York: Harper Business.
Zuboff, Shoshana (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. PublicAffairs.