Happy Workers = Better Workers

[b&i_c]

What really annoyed me in Civ II/SMAC was that happy people/talents didn't work any better than normal people. I mean if you are happy with your life, you will want to give more to the city, or, the forceful way, if you are receiving luxuries/psych, then you will be required to work more.
I think that this should be shown by happy workers producing +1 of each resouce on the square they are working.

I also think that unhappy people/drones wouldn't really be as efficient as normal workers (at the end of the SMAX manuel it says "My pathfinding was sub-par, even for a drone"), which could be shown by them having -1 of every resource on the square they work (unless that makes it negative).

[Buck Birdseed]

Actually, recent scientific studies show that content office workers are worse at their jobs than sad ones.

[b&i_c]

Well then go with the requirement that if you recieve luxuries you have to work harder.

[red_jon]

It's a ridiculous notion that the richer the individual, the more they produce. The poorer will have to work harder to make ends meat, so end up producing more.

[Theben]

I once argued for this with a request for a Happiness SE rating, but it is unlikely that Firaxis will include SE in civ3. I also realized that having happy people produce more & unhappy produce less leads to spiraling situations: happy people produce more luxuries, make more content people happy, which leads to more luxuries, etc., and vice-versa.
If you want, you can just consider the entertainers to be the % of workers who are unhappy and producing less.

[b&i_c]

Originally posted by red_jon
It's a ridiculous notion that the richer the individual, the more they produce. The poorer will have to work harder to make ends meat, so end up producing more.

No, Talents aren't richer, they are citizens that can perform above average duties, and I think that this should be actually reflected by them producing more.

[Dauphin]

All I know is that happy workers take fewer sick days.