This paper examines the complex relationship between income and satisfaction, using data from the 2006 Gallup World Survey, which includes opinions on life satisfaction in 130 countries. While a strong correlation is found between income and satisfaction (both across and within countries), this challenges the Easterlin Paradox, suggesting a new paradox: "unhappy growth," where faster economic growth is associated with lower levels of satisfaction. The losses in satisfaction linked to growth are more pronounced in material aspects of life and are greater in richer and more urban societies. At the individual level, higher income tends to increase satisfaction, but an increase in the income of the social group to which an individual belongs has the opposite effect. This "aspiration treadmill" can lead to a paradox where economically successful groups with high aspirations have lower satisfaction than economically and socially marginalized groups with lower aspirations. The complex relationship between income and satisfaction has significant implications for political economy. It suggests a mechanism for explaining characteristics of economic and social populism. The paper also discusses the limitations of GDP as a measure of well-being, highlighting the need for alternative indicators that account for environmental and social costs. It finds that economic growth is inversely related to life satisfaction, particularly in countries with higher income levels. This "unhappy growth paradox" is attributed to increased expectations and aspirations generated by economic growth, especially in high-income countries. The paper also explores the influence of individual income on satisfaction, finding that income has a significant positive effect on satisfaction with personal conditions, but less so on collective aspects. It concludes that satisfaction is influenced by both individual income and the income of the reference group, with the latter having a stronger effect in material aspects of life. The paper highlights the importance of considering social comparisons and the role of group income in shaping satisfaction, suggesting that economic growth may have negative effects on satisfaction due to increased competition and demands on public policy.This paper examines the complex relationship between income and satisfaction, using data from the 2006 Gallup World Survey, which includes opinions on life satisfaction in 130 countries. While a strong correlation is found between income and satisfaction (both across and within countries), this challenges the Easterlin Paradox, suggesting a new paradox: "unhappy growth," where faster economic growth is associated with lower levels of satisfaction. The losses in satisfaction linked to growth are more pronounced in material aspects of life and are greater in richer and more urban societies. At the individual level, higher income tends to increase satisfaction, but an increase in the income of the social group to which an individual belongs has the opposite effect. This "aspiration treadmill" can lead to a paradox where economically successful groups with high aspirations have lower satisfaction than economically and socially marginalized groups with lower aspirations. The complex relationship between income and satisfaction has significant implications for political economy. It suggests a mechanism for explaining characteristics of economic and social populism. The paper also discusses the limitations of GDP as a measure of well-being, highlighting the need for alternative indicators that account for environmental and social costs. It finds that economic growth is inversely related to life satisfaction, particularly in countries with higher income levels. This "unhappy growth paradox" is attributed to increased expectations and aspirations generated by economic growth, especially in high-income countries. The paper also explores the influence of individual income on satisfaction, finding that income has a significant positive effect on satisfaction with personal conditions, but less so on collective aspects. It concludes that satisfaction is influenced by both individual income and the income of the reference group, with the latter having a stronger effect in material aspects of life. The paper highlights the importance of considering social comparisons and the role of group income in shaping satisfaction, suggesting that economic growth may have negative effects on satisfaction due to increased competition and demands on public policy.