patrick.net

"Quality of Life Index is an estimation of overall quality of life by using empirical formula (the formula is an our opinion and it's based on experiments). The actual formula might be changed. Currently, we put the highest weight to pollution - if the environment is polluted too much, the economy or safety cannot fulfill it. We put the second highest importance to safety, since it is more important to feel safe rather than wealthy, in our opinion. etc. The number 65 is added so that the numbers are in such range so it rarely goes under zero (65 is a range modifier).

index.main = 65 + purchasingPowerInclRentIndex - (priceToIncomeRatio * 2) - cpiIndex / 5 + safetyIndex * 3 / 4 + healthIndex / 2 - trafficTimeIndex / 2 - pollutionIndex;"

Let's see, the 2 biggest factors are pollution (US at 20th) and safety (US at 55th) for calculating quality of life (US at #2). Anyone else see where this just seems wrong?

dublin hillz says

Overall, I would say that we are doing pretty well.

So in your mind shopping at walmart and eating at mcdonalds trumps crime, pollution, and healthcare as quality of life issues.

I agree that we can do better in regards to those variables but despite these issues we are still outpeforming the vast majority of the world which speaks to the fact that they have serious issues of their own despite our rather uninspiring rankings in terms of crime/pollution/healthcare.

I think where we are very dominant is in terms of what we can buy for our money - having 2nd highest purchase power in the world while having rent/rent + cpi/groceries all in the 20s allows this to manifest. Then, you add in the fact that we have the most affordable real estate in the world when earnings are taken into account and the financial standard of living dominance starts to emerge.

There are many places in the world that don't make shopping the focus of their society. A quality of life index that values consumerism over all other considerations is only valid for a society that values consumerism over all other considerations.

bob2356 says

There are many places in the world that don't make shopping the focus of their society. A quality of life index that values consumerism over all other considerations is only valid for a society that values consumerism over all other considerations.

It's not about discretionary shopping only. The index is concerned with necessities such as rent, groceries and "baskets of goods." I think it's important to compare these costs across societies instead of making these variables in competition vs healthcare/crime/pollution which I agree are also important to evaluate.

dublin hillz says

It's not about discretionary shopping only. The index is concerned with necessities such as rent, groceries and "baskets of goods."

Groceries depend on your definition. Americans eat a lot more preprepared, prepackeged cheapest ingredients foods . In other countties countries people make things from scratch with good quality fresh ingredients that cost more because they value good meals. Baskets of goods also runs into the idea of cheap thowaway vs buying higher quality longer lasting goods.

You keep coming back to the cost of shopping as being synonomous with quality of life. There is no doubt things are very cheap in America I can live for 30-50% less compared to some places I've lived overseas. I value things like being home by 5, 8 weeks vacation, having time to cook a good dinner with the family all participating, going out for a bike ride or some tennis afterwards over being able to rush around and buy cheap goods. People in many places outside of the US feel the same way.

bob2356 says

You keep coming back to the cost of shopping as being synonomous with quality of
life.

It's one thing to have a choice between consumerism and leisure/vacationing. It's quite another to have no choice at all because of corrupt leadershit at the top of some of these countries or simply because they are poor overall. Ultimately, the countries with low local purchase power index rankings don't have that choice to make and are doomed to material deprivation and misery. Just look at who makes the "top 10" list - ethiopia, ghana, cambodia, venezuela, syria, moldova, nepal, georgia, armenia and el salvador. Venezuala by the way also ranks dead last in qualify of life index.

dublin hillz says

Ultimately, the countries with low local purchase power index rankings don't have that choice to make and are doomed to material deprivation and misery. Just look at who makes the "top 10" list - ethiopia, ghana, cambodia, venezuela, syria, moldova, nepal, georgia, armenia and el salvador. Venezuala by the way also ranks dead last in qualify of life index.

I'm not talking third world shitholes and you know it. Now you are just throwing out bullshit. I've lived in some of the middle ranked countries that have not very good purchasing power or consumer price index. Guess what, that's not what people there look at as quality of life. The index reflects the priorities of the people who created the index which is American. Sorry you can't grasp that not every country values rampant consumerism as it's top priority even when they do have the resources to do so.