# What is the value of a sunny day?

An actuarial can determine the cost of productivity, impacts on health, and the resources used. They can quantify this into a dollar amount. And if that value were … say … “a buck twenty-five” would they be wrong?

How you answer this question is important because it deals with crossing meta-cognitive boundaries. It’s a problem in the class of **Gödel’s incompleteness theorems**** **where logically self-consistent sets of axiomatic assumptions cannot validate themselves.

If a sunny day is happiness then happiness is worth a $1.25 makes perfect logical sense to you then **you** ** might** need to work on your work-life balance. For most of us we intuit that even if a $1.25 (or $1,250 we’re just quibbling over magnitude) is actually the value of a sunny day it is only so in

*monetary terms.*

When you build your products, ask yourself:

What the value of this [action|product|effort] is in terms of sunny days?

Is it just about dollar amounts? Is there more going on? When should you ignore one set of axiomatic terms in favor of another?

Are you a robot?