Early Retirement Extreme Forums

I am studying many indeces about quality and satisfaction of life, e.g.:
- Quality of life in EU
- OECD BetterLife
- Happy Planet Index
- Numbeo.com Quality of Life
- Social Progress Index
- World Happiness Report

Many times Nordic countries from Europe are on the top and are "best in class", as well as Australia, New Zealand, Swiss.

Are you also interested in such indeces, studies, papers?
Do measure your own satisfaction with life?
Do you compare yourself with such "best in class"-countries?
Do you evaluate and investigate such information when making decisions in life?

I honestly don't pay any attention to these "happiness" competitions. They seem to all focus on something that isn't my focus. For example, I don't speak any of the nordic languages, so that is a big minus. I hate cold weather and overcast skies. That probably also rules out Scandinavia. Therefore, the top of the list is out. I really enjoyed New Zealand, but it is a looong way from my family. Big minus. Plus, the cost of living is high. People and nature are great in New Zealand, but it doesn't match the negatives.

I live in a gorgeous part of the US. Tons of really wild nature and open space, but also city life with everything you could want. The best of both. A very sunny climate. You just can't beat the lifestyle. I guess the micro-environment, i.e. what you have in a circle of a 3 hour drive from your home, matters far more than an overall national score. I can't imagine why I would pay attention to some obscure national score, when it really is your direct personal environment that matters more than anything.

MDFIRE2024 wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 09, 2017 2:00 am

Are you also interested in such indeces, studies, papers?

In terms of using it to find a place to live? Not really.

Considering the difficulty in accurately scoring a single metric, attempts to score countries on a complex metric seems impossible. For example, even just ranking US states by tax burden requires homogenizing various income, property, and consumption taxes into a single number to do the ranking. The final product (the index) doesn't really tell you anything, at least in terms of deciding where to live, since all the taxes are flattened into one number. If my consumption is low, I don't have a car, and I'm a smoker, where do I live for the best tax situation? The index tells me nothing, since I don't know if a highly ranked state is ranking highly for low sales tax, but also has high cigarette and gas tax.

And that's just taxes, which are at least easy to measure. Now add in quality and cost of health insurance, transportation, cost of living, and other hard-to-measure attributes.

So there's that. But in terms of using such metrics for further research, I do find them interesting.

I don't see how you could quantify something so subjective..

RealPerson wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:44 pm

I guess the micro-environment, i.e. what you have in a circle of a 3 hour drive from your home, matters far more than an overall national score. I can't imagine why I would pay attention to some obscure national score, when it really is your direct personal environment that matters more than anything.

This is also one conclusion I had after hours of studying and thinking about it. On the other hand, I have to admit that I can't really measure my micro-environment and compare it with other micro-environments, if I hadn't been there once.

At the end I thought about my environment and found that I quite like it, but I guess many people think that way. For many people there own micro-environment is quite good. Is there a bias or a fallacy?

Those kind of indeces etc. are sometimes based on objective numbers, e.g. employment rate, air pollution, and are sometimes based on questionnaires which ask for the subjective satisfaction of life of real people. Then there are differences between subjective well-being between countries. Some people in some countries are happier than other.

Chris wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 09, 2017 8:23 pm

In terms of using it to find a place to live? Not really.

When it comes to decisions in life, e.g. choosing a place to live, I guess some information from such indeces could be important, e.g. cost of living, air pollution, ... So why not using it to find a place to live?

MDFIRE2024 wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 09, 2017 2:00 am

Are you also interested in such indeces, studies, papers?
Do measure your own satisfaction with life?
Do you compare yourself with such "best in class"-countries?
Do you evaluate and investigate such information when making decisions in life?

Not a whole lot.
No.
No.
No.

To me "satisfaction with life" is a state of mind and environment is not a big enough component in what goes into that for me to look for a place to make me satisfied. It doesn't escape me that being a US resident is a big contributor to that (as compared to say, a resident of a Middle Eastern country embroiled in civil war).

I would be interested in seeing one for US states.
Edit: Well, here you go: https://wallethub.com/edu/happiest-states/6959/

The US seldomly rank very high in most indicators (except health care cost, GDP/capita, and military spending) relative to the rest of the developed world, but this hides the fact that internal US variations are very high. For example, the highest average life expectancy is found Marin County, CA at 82 years which is as good as Japan; whereas the lowest is found in Oglala Lakota County, SD at 62 years which is getting close to third world status. These are the outliers ... but we are talking a 20 year range on the mean of the distribution of the people from various counties. It's hard to believe that this doesn't matter even at the individual level.

Because the US is so diverse, this makes it hard to conclude anything from the US average. (The US also has one of the highest Gini indexes in the developed world (along with Mexico and Brazil), so it's good to be well-off here .. but that also means it must suck to be poor.)

In terms of seeking out places to live, I think books like American Nations are more useful.Indiana and California are practically two entirely different countries both when it comes to numbers and how they look and feel but also culture and values. It explains the different cultural values and attitudes found in various parts of the country. It would be absolutely great if a similar book existed that covered the EU "areas", Central America, etc.

Because the US is so diverse, this makes it hard to conclude anything from the US average. (The US also has one of the highest Gini indexes in the developed world (along with Mexico and Brazil), so it's good to be well-off here .. but that also means it must suck to be poor.)

Depends on the type of "poor" we're talking about. There will always be some cases of extreme poverty in the US-of-A but I think those can be explained away by either a dysfunctional personality type or a mental condition that retards their ability to be upwardly mobile. In my corner of the country (Northeast), the "poor" live pretty good compared to the poor in the 3rd world. I used to be "poor" - I'm a first generation immigrant who grew up in the US with parents who spoke zero english and had zero cash when they arrived. It's amazing what can be done when you work hard, are willing to listen, are not afraid to ask questions, and dedicate your life to learning. I think poverty, at least in big cities with thriving economies, is self inflicted. I love this country - it's been the best thing that ever happened to me.

I think anyone whose miserable in the USA, and isn't abjectly poor, is being ungrateful and suffering from "green grass" syndrome or just loves to wallow in misery. If you have ever uttered the words "my flight leaves at "X" time" or "<insert paid amusement of choice> was <insert emotional response to experience here>" and complain about being poor - you suck at working hard, learning new skills, and thinking outside the box.

Almost nobody lives "in the aggregate" of any country's statistics, so most of this kind of data is of little personal import to the individual, especially when trying to compare developed countries. I suppose it might have some import as to "who do you want to surround yourself with", but most of these issues are highly localized and could vary considerably even just a few miles away. This suggests that moving within one's country could be a relatively easy fix for most people.

The fact that a human's perception of "lot if life" depends a good deal on where that ranks relative to those around him, "big fish small pond" syndrome, also mitigates the value of these statistics. Since I currently spend some time in a very affluent, high/advanced standard of living community, and some of my time in a community with standards approaching those of a 3rd world refugee camp, this is very clear to me.

There are other reason why sometimes humans don't prefer a situation that is objectively better. A good friend of mine was married to a Swedish citizen, but didn't want to live there because everything seemed too vanilla to her compared to the U.S. The chaotic edge is a more interesting place to live, and therefore more likely to increase happiness if you are the type that craves stimulation/challenge more than comfort/security.

Many thanks to you for your answers and feedback. They let me see it from different perspectives and views. I researched more about the "Grass is always greener on the other side" syndrom. I also think, that some people use those kind of indeces just to compare oneself. In addition to that a "Top10 of the best cities to live in" attracts people and newspapers use that.
Maybe the thing with satisfaction of life (subjective well-being) is also more common than decades ago. There has been and still is a small hype about happiness and joy. There are tons of books about "becoming happier" etc.

MDFIRE2024 wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 09, 2017 2:00 am

I am studying many indeces about quality and satisfaction of life, e.g.:
- Quality of life in EU
- OECD BetterLife
- Happy Planet Index
- Numbeo.com Quality of Life
- Social Progress Index
- World Happiness Report

Many times Nordic countries from Europe are on the top and are "best in class", as well as Australia, New Zealand, Swiss.

Have you prepared overall top?
Very interesting topic anyway.

I think obstacles are [if we speak why people don't care about ideal countries]:
1. Values in life. I don't want to start big discussion there

(*) 2. "Political correctness". We are rather not the same. Even if syllabuses for studies (I do not speak only about university level education) are the same, you as "bro" will alwyas choose your "bro" [ I speak about recruitment process and quality of living as foreigner in terms different than salary]. And in case of lays off, guess who will lose their job first...

"Free-market" and "openness" are fairy tales [in many cases, not in all].

To give a point: America is "living" from Mexican cheap labour. Why don't they open borders and accept more demanding positions? Are those cultures so different? You can see how many prestigous jobs (medical doctors, engineers, scientists - we must agree that some knowledge is pretty universal in those jobs) are protected by local guilds [in every civilized country]...

Of course, you can see american dream in the movies. Bold, bright and young (for example educated) people go there and support the empire (America, countries of West Europe).

But who paid for that? Is it America? Isn't it neocolonialism? Where is the difference?

It could be difficult to grasp for many for you, because you live in "very developed" countries. There believing in "work hard, you will be rewarded" is very easy [moral/ethical] trap to fall in. The probablilty that you wake up and don't see your neighbourhood devastated in bombing run for somebody's "FREEEEEEEDOM' is very low...


3. Being able to join in to X country. Most[/every] "intelligent" countries have some kind of immigration policies (explained in previous point). It's not to easy to pass them. Required skills+capital tend to be very high for people outside "the best".

Very often this is work also for 2-3 generations before you're "local". In between you're the devil and the deep blue sea:
a) Your family and "homies" will argue that you sold yourself for money (but in reality you work under your ambition/skills)
b) You will not be "bro", because you're new and many estabilished stereotypes. (**)

(*) I know that many people will say that I am "racist" [my reaction to that: , try to go to "worse" country and tell us how they had served you], but "treat me as young engineer who is interested in truth, not as a politician who wants be elected".

(**) I envy muslim cultures. They immigrate to "better" countries. They have many babies. They work there or receive valid help from government (in this case I do not dispute that). However, they "work-buy-die"[/buy goods, work for, do not assimilate in new culture] in their own circles. That's neo-neocolonialism

Anyway, personally I will "tackle" German speaking countries in near future.
I like peace of mind and according to short table I was presented in high school they can provide it to me (I also know the language and can provide some useful skills).

I thought about Nordic countries, but there you need more specific about language (1 language = 1 country)... And no sun means no fun. I heard that many people take antidepressants from this issue.

EDIT: Argh.. I've entered my submaniac state and did small lecture on world justice in topic about good country to live to total strangers

Kind of. I think the lists are there for good reasons.
However it depends on what is important to people I guess. I am big on climates and on cost of living. I prefer as comfortable and mild a climate as possible. Most of the top world countries have cold climates which is off putting. Conversely Australian cities get extremely hot and humid which is unpleasant. Most of the top world cities have a very high cost of living as well and not necessarily high income.
I would love to be able to live and work in USA. Note live and work, not be a citizen, as the international US tax sounds expensive, bizarre and ridiculous. USA is very appealing except I would only want to be there without quite a lot of capital. I think US can be too free market for people without capital. Things like enormous education costs, expensive medical care (no free medicare), weak employment rights, and from what I understand very little annual leave and public holidays. Not much of a safety net. Probably part of why USA as a country and all of its cities rank very low compared to the rest of the developed world. I think it can be easier to get trapped in the rat race and dependent on your jobs with all of that. Mind you on the other hand cost of living in some parts of USA is extremely low and pay is high which could balance that out. I would be stoked to live in Southern California. The culture and climate completely appeal and the cost of living would be not too bad and high income. Now that I have a bit of capital and provided I could get a high paying job, I think it would be a great place to live.
Otherwise southern Portugal is a place which very much appeals, with its warm and sunny climate and low cost of living.

thrifty++ wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 16, 2017 12:13 pm

I would love to be able to live and work in USA. Note live and work, not be a citizen, as the international US tax sounds expensive, bizarre and ridiculous.

The US Tax Code also applies to US residents - not just citizens.

thrifty++ wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 16, 2017 12:13 pm

I would be stoked to live in Southern California. The culture and climate completely appeal and the cost of living would be not too bad and high income.

Southern California is a high tax and high cost of living region. In my opinion it is third highest in the USA - behind New York City and San Francisco Bay Area.

When Saudi Arabia ranks higher than Italy I understand these indeces aren't for me
https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/ ... ountry.jsp

Work has so far been the biggest determinator of my location, and I have empirically noticed that salary has an incredible effect on perception.
When I started working I lived ok in Paris because I was barely making enough money to share an apartment with friends and provide semi-basic needs after my self imposed at the time minimum savings rate of 20%.
My parents are from the Milan area in Italy and I could afford to go back and visit them no more than twice a year (with an approximately €100 flight).
In addition to that, I was working as a sales rep and had to be stuck all day in the horrible Paris traffic.
Living with such constraints reduces the perception of life quality.

Now fast forward 10 years an I was living in NYC with my wife, a nice salary, able to afford a 1 bedroom apartment in my favorite area (Battery Park) while saving 50%+ of my income, walking to work every day.

No wonder I rank New York approximately 1542675274282 times higher than Paris

I think persona situations matter too much for these indices to be reliable for everybody