[HN Gopher] If it were my home
___________________________________________________________________
If it were my home
Author : kkwteh
Score : 207 points
Date : 2022-01-30 09:30 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ifitweremyhome.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ifitweremyhome.com)
| jakozaur wrote:
| This is so outdated. GDP figures seem to be from 2012. A lot has
| changed since then. E.g. USA GDP PPP is $63k in 2020 by World
| Bank, but this websites claims it is $53k.
|
| I see similar data points, were figures are decade old. Some
| countries improved a lot in the last 10 years.
| fikama wrote:
| Yep unemployment rates for Poland are also outdated. Ans source
| links follow to 404. It's pity becouse I really like the idea.
| instance wrote:
| Putting things in relative like that (e.g. 30% more likely to be
| murdered) always feels like much - in reality, one doesn't know
| the variance. This is just putting the averages of two datasets
| in relation. If both have a very wide confidence interval, 30%
| suddenly loses meaning to me..
| tomp wrote:
| Far left wing bias.
|
| "Use less energy" is highlighted in green (as if that's better)
| even though energy use is one of the hallmarks of civilisational
| progress.
| drchickensalad wrote:
| Energy use for its own sake is not progress; efficiency and
| technological results which are measured elsewhere are.
| MattPalmer1086 wrote:
| Environmental bias, sure. Why "far left wing?". Even centrists
| these days are pretty environmental in their thinking.
| tomp wrote:
| Leftwing environmentalists promote ideas like degrowth,
| depopulation etc (less power hence cleaner). Rightwing
| environmentalists promote ideas like nuclear power, etc (more
| power but cleaner).
| MattPalmer1086 wrote:
| Must be a US political thing (I'm assuming you're from the
| US).
|
| I don't think I've ever heard of anyone advocating degrowth
| or depopulation in the UK. We're more into increasing
| renewable energy.
|
| Some of the hard core environmentalists don't like nuclear
| energy, and they do tend to be more on the left side of
| politics.
| tomp wrote:
| Maybe if you read UK leftwing media...
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/12/want-
| to-...
| MattPalmer1086 wrote:
| The Guardian is certainly left wing and I do read it.
| That article is presenting research that shows the
| relative impacts of different personal choices, such as
| having fewer children, or not running a car. It's not
| necessarily advocating them as serious options for fixing
| the problem.
|
| The concluding statements say:
|
| "Chris Goodall, an author on low carbon living and
| energy, said: "The paper usefully reminds us what matters
| in the fight against global warming. But in some ways it
| will just reinforce the suspicion of the political right
| that the threat of climate change is simply a cover for
| reducing people's freedom to live as they want.
|
| "Population reduction would probably reduce carbon
| emissions but we have many other tools for getting global
| warming under control," he said. "Perhaps more
| importantly, cutting the number of people on the planet
| will take hundreds of years. Emissions reduction needs to
| start now."
|
| Seems reasonably balanced to me.
| sigmaprimus wrote:
| This thread is going a bit astray but the statement along
| the lines of:
|
| The reduction of population would probably work but it
| would take too long, is terrifying to me. * _Edit*_
| "WILL" take too long is even scarier.
|
| IMHO People are the best hope we have for innovating and
| solving the situation we find ourselves in, anyone
| preaching depopulation as a answer should be intensely
| scrutinized for what other beliefs they hold regarding
| final solutions.
| MattPalmer1086 wrote:
| I agree. I don't think the person who wrote that is
| advocating depopulation either. Just pointing out to
| anyone who might advocate it that it will take too long
| anyway.
| tagoregrtst wrote:
| But Id be living in Germany and not where I want to live.
|
| I hate these numerical comparison between countries. Don't I
| already know most of these facts? Aren't they really comparisons
| at the margins (rare event vs. rarer event)?
|
| How about other considerations like some people _like_ to live in
| a country where you can easily own a gun, homeschool your kid, or
| say whatever you want without fearing for your liberty (only your
| job)?
|
| Germans would rather not have these things, and thats cool, for
| them.
| joenathanone wrote:
| >where you can easily own a gun, homeschool your kid, or say
| whatever you want without fearing for your liberty (only your
| job)?
|
| Wow, these are the most important things to you? Sounds pretty
| dystopian.
| jdthedisciple wrote:
| Not sure what owning a gun (for self defense as crime is a
| reality), homeschooling your kids (so you can teach them your
| values instead of leaving that to the state whose values are
| in its own interest rather than your kids') and freedom of
| speech (selfexplanatory) have to do with dystopia ... ?
|
| Sounds pretty utopic in my book.
| tagoregrtst wrote:
| Not at all.
|
| These are the things Germans get hung on about the US.
|
| What I like about America are Americans. Especially middle
| America. They're salt of the Earth. I grew up in Europe, and
| Europeans are, not all mind you, cynical and bitter people.
| Its so weird to move to America and having complete strangers
| salute you, even strike a conversation with you.
|
| Thats why I love this country. Now, Europeans and europhiles
| obsess over guns, schools and free speech. They can shove it.
| We like our society the way it is. Otherwise, to live in an
| uglier version of Europe (European cities are beautiful), I
| would have stayed... in Europe!
| pessimizer wrote:
| People in the US are obsessed with like 5 wedge issues and
| conspiracy fantasies. They will gladly give up healthcare as
| long as their enemies have to give it up, too.
| tagoregrtst wrote:
| " They will gladly give up healthcare as long as their
| enemies have to give it up, too."
|
| Ive never met an American who didn't want health care so
| his neighbor wouldn't have it. Instead I find Americans
| extremely curious in how healthcare is done elsewhere since
| they keep asking me about health care wherever Ive lived.
|
| To Republicans I tell them American health care isn't that
| great (its terrible) and elsewhere's not that bad, even
| quite good.
|
| To Democrats I tell them the problems others have America
| doesn't, and I remind them that "greedy" America spends
| more _public_ money per capita on healthcare than almost
| any other country in the world.
|
| Americans are far more reasonable than they're given credit
| for.
| dannyw wrote:
| Having lived in China, I definitely value the ability to say
| whatever I want without fearing I would disappear.
|
| Having been the victim of a home robbery, I might like to
| have a gun, although I can't say I like what it means on a
| societal level.
| danparsonson wrote:
| Liking your country doesn't have to mean liking everything
| about it, and it doesn't have to mean not wanting to improve
| key quality of life metrics, which appears to be what this site
| is talking about. In fact, I would argue that thinking
| critically about areas where improvements can be made and
| pushing for those changes makes you more patriotic, not less.
|
| >... some people like to live in a country where you can... say
| whatever you want without fearing for your liberty... Germans
| would rather not have these things...
|
| I'm pretty sure Germany has roughly equivalent freedom of
| speech protection to the US.
| tagoregrtst wrote:
| "Liking [...] makes you more patriotic, not less"
|
| Agreed that a patriot criticizes his country (btw, Im Western
| European, not American. Yet) Chesterton wrote:
|
| "My country, right or wrong,' is a thing that no patriot
| would think of saying. It is like saying, 'My mother, drunk
| or sober."
|
| And I agree. Where I disagree is these metrics are that
| important, or even relevant. Especially since they are
| differentials of small numbers (however more likely I am to
| get shot at in the US compared to Germany its still a very
| rare event. Nor do I need to be told about Germany to know
| that there is poverty in the US.
|
| Instead, let's criticize America on its own. There's plenty
| of material,
|
| " I'm pretty sure Germany has roughly equivalent freedom of
| speech protection to the US. "
|
| No country has the legal speech protections the US has. No
| one is even in the same league. Thats why speech control is
| outsourced to private entities. The obvious example of German
| restrictions: try buying Mien Kampf or debating the veracity
| of the Holocaust. Or playing the original Wolfenstein with
| the real artwork in it.
|
| We all agree here (I hope!) that ppl arguing against the
| veracity of the Holocaust are factually wrong, that Mein
| Kampf is horrendous; _but I don't want to live in a country
| that imposes that on me_. Germans are cool with that. Germans
| recognize that _they_ need these restrictions placed upon
| them. Thats the beauty of nation states - nations can impose
| their own rules on themselves.
| gattilorenz wrote:
| I'm also quite sure it's harder to fire someone in Germany
| for something they tweeted, and "opinions are my own" is not
| as popular as a disclaimer.
| tagoregrtst wrote:
| You don't loose your job, you just go to jail.
|
| Which is fine, Germans believe that they need mental
| straightjackets or they start invading neighbors. But those
| arent the rules I want were I live
| gattilorenz wrote:
| > Germans believe that they need mental straightjackets
| or they start invading neighbors.
|
| Are you implying that Americans don't regularly (as in,
| at least once every decade after the last World War)
| invade other countries even without those "mental
| straightjackets"? :)
|
| And yes, I know it's stupid to ascribe this to
| "Americans", but that's the same as saying that of
| Germans... perhaps we're both talking out of prejudice?
| tagoregrtst wrote:
| Americans stupidly invade countries literally out of the
| goodness of their hearts and naivete of their minds.
| Proof of this is the type of propaganda needed to prod
| the naturally isolationist American people to war.
|
| (Americans mind you. not their leaders. The leaders are
| cutthroat internationalists)
|
| Germans invade their neighbors out of a feeling of
| superiority, or needing their "living space". Again, look
| at the propaganda. (Not all! The German opposition to
| Hitler was heroic. But outnumbered)
|
| What drives Germans to war should be _suppressed_. What
| drives Americans to war is fundamentally good and should
| be _augmented_ with proper history lessons in the hope
| they'll learn to stop believing their leaders.
|
| And as disgusting as American wars are... you really want
| to compare American wars to the Germans'?
| gattilorenz wrote:
| Sorry, I find the implication that Germans have some form
| of natural propension towards war as ridiculous as they
| get.
|
| It's the kind of joke I would make with friends, like
| Woody Allen's urge of invade Poland if he listens to too
| much Wagner. I can laugh about it, but it's not an
| argument.
| tagoregrtst wrote:
| First, German's predilection for imposing on others how
| to live is alive and well. Ask Poland, Hungary, Greece,
| etc.
|
| Obviously this is not an ethnic part of German's being.
| Ethnically Im probably German, and as you might tell Im
| not in large agreement with them - racial arguments are
| boring. The Prussian educational model (still extant),
| however, has long been suspected and researched as a
| reason for German's inability to disobey and effectively
| oppose Hitler's murderous regime.
|
| Im not the first to say this, btw
|
| Second, you wrote
|
| "I'm also quite sure it's harder to fire someone in
| Germany for something they tweeted, and "opinions are my
| own" is not as popular as a disclaimer."
|
| To which I countered that German law puts you in _jail_
| for saying things you'd merely loose your job for in the
| US.
|
| Now, Im not one to judge or belittle others' laws as long
| as they don't impose them on other countries (yes, I
| don't like America's penchant for exporting "democracy"
| to the ME). I assume peoples have a reason for their
| society's laws. In the case of Germans and their speech
| laws, I offered _Germans'_ standard explanation why they
| dont have free speech. _Germans_ , shocked by the
| depravity of their crimes that the American troops
| literally dragged them into the camps to witness, believe
| they cant have total free speech because they're prone to
| get over excited and start invading their neighbors.
|
| Who am I to judge? I don't, its their society to
| structure as they please. But in _my_ society, we like
| American style total free speech.
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| The OP feels like a show HN type of submission to me. Its a din
| toy not to be taken too seriously
| abrands wrote:
| Interesting
| hereforphone wrote:
| mberning wrote:
| These are so disingenuous. It's like comparing aggregate
| schooling scores between the US and some Scandinavian country and
| concluding that every kid in America gets a worse education.
| False. If you were to constrain for home life (two parent
| household), income level, etc. you would find that the US is very
| on par in many aspects. The real question to me is why does the
| US have such a large population of extremely downtrodden people
| that will never escape their station in life.
| nathias wrote:
| If I lived in the US I'd have 92.7% more money, sounds about
| right.
| lmm wrote:
| The UI seems backwards? I'm in a country and want to see what a
| list of other countries are like compared to my current country
| vsareto wrote:
| Easiest if you use the URL:
| https://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/US/CA
|
| The first country is your home country. The second is the
| country you're comparing to.
| MattPalmer1086 wrote:
| It's certainly a bit unclear how to compare one country to
| another.
|
| You have to go to Compare Countries , and it automatically
| selects a home country. You have to click the small link in the
| text to select a different home country.
| itronitron wrote:
| hmm, a lot of these stats are worded in a very obtuse way.
|
| Calculating percentage difference of two percentages overstates
| their differences in regards to the underlying statistic.
|
| For example... 'be 12% more likely to be unemployed' is used to
| state the difference between an unemployment rate of 5.6% and 5%
|
| Unfortunately that removes a lot of usefulness from the site.
| cowsandmilk wrote:
| Why? That is the far more correct way of presenting data.
| rolisz wrote:
| Yes and no. 5 is 12% away 5.6, but so is 50 and 56. I would
| argue that the latter difference is much bigger and more
| likely to be noticeable by average Joe going about his daily
| life than the former.
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| Or compare 1% and 2% to 50% and 100%
| wowokay wrote:
| BobbyJo wrote:
| It's not though. If you take a random sample of people the
| odds that one is unemployed is .6% higher in one set than the
| other, not 12. The 12 only makes sense if you are only
| sampling from the unemployed, which is not how anyone on the
| street is going to parse that statement.
| konschubert wrote:
| The difference between 5% and 5.6% is approx 11%. But I
| agree it's more useful to look at percentage points here
| AutumnCurtain wrote:
| Seems like adding a hover/click to see the raw numbers feature
| would be nice
| b3orn wrote:
| That feature already exists, also includes the source of the
| data.
| wepple wrote:
| Per-capita expenditure on healthcare is higher in the US than
| anywhere else, we know this. But it doesn't cover
|
| - quality of healthcare
|
| - how much is actually out of my pocket
|
| Compared to Australia, NZ, the UK, I have better healthcare in
| the US. And financially it's insignificant.
| wepple wrote:
| For those downvoting, I assume you've lived in all 4 countries
| and have first hand experience like I do too. Let's discuss
| pros & cons of each!
|
| The American system is so deeply flawed and broken in many
| ways; high inequality is one result. But the states is just
| that: a loose collection of highly varying fairly independent
| states. YMMV.
| 300bps wrote:
| _high inequality is one result_
|
| Agreed. In the US if you work at a very large company that
| predominantly has high value employees then you very likely
| have the best health coverage in the world by far.
|
| I am the beneficiary of such a health plan. I pay $2,400 per
| year for my family plan. My total out of pocket after that is
| $750 per year.
|
| Oh and unions. They have great health coverage generally as
| well.
|
| Everyone else has from good to terrible.
| pessimizer wrote:
| > I pay $2,400 per year for my family plan. My total out of
| pocket after that is $750 per year.
|
| Your company also pays at least as much directly, and it's
| part of your compensation.
|
| I'm not sure how relevant the healthcare of wealthy people
| is, though. Wealthy people have good healthcare everywhere.
| bagacrap wrote:
| I think it would have to know my age or other vitals for a lot of
| this. For example someone born in 1950 in Colombia might have a
| very different life expectancy than someone born in 2010.
|
| I thought it would be more interesting if they asked you your
| age, sex and socio/economic percentile ("privilege") because in a
| lot of places the mean experience is quite different from many
| folks' reality.
| Closi wrote:
| At least one of these statistics is calculated completely wrong -
| For instance, when looking at the "Americans have 22.43% less
| free time" statistic, that's _not_ what the data says - It says
| they work 22.43% less than Americans.
|
| But if I work 22% less, that doesn't mean I get 22% more free
| time (because, for instance, if I work 20 hours and have 100 free
| hours, working 50% less will mean I get only a 10% bump in free
| time).
|
| Similarly the "make more money" statistic is calculated based on
| GDP per capita rather than on earnings (so for instance, while
| the site claims a 33% difference in earning, the Germany mean
| income is c$47k-$52k USD depending on the source while in the US
| it is c$55k-$57k, so while earning is higher it is not at the 33%
| difference claimed). GDP per capita tends to increase with
| income, but will absolutely diverge depending on the economic
| situation, as it's actually adding up Consumption + Investment +
| Government Spending + Net Exports and then dividing by the
| population, which isn't a valid way to work out how much is paid
| to workers.
|
| Considering two basic stats are so far out, it doesn't fill me
| with confidence on the others...
| bgdam wrote:
| Similarly it says I would spend 76.3% more money on healthcare
| if I were in Germany rather than India. While the comparison is
| between healthcare spend per capita, the inference drawn is
| completely wrong as for most procedures I would be completely
| covered by insurance in Germany whereas in India it would be
| highly dependent on the exact insurance policy I have and even
| then outpatient procedures would not be covered.
|
| So in reality if I were in Germany I'd be spending way less on
| healthcare than if I were in India.
| pessimizer wrote:
| Or in India you would die 76.3% more often.
| quantumwannabe wrote:
| Germany has a median household disposable income after taxes
| and transfers and adjusted for PPP of $31,323 (2018) and thes
| same stat for the US is $42,800 (2019), which is ~37% higher
| [1].
|
| The OECD, which is Wikipedia's source, defines this stat as:
|
| "Household adjusted disposable income includes income from
| economic activity (wages and salaries; profits of self-employed
| business owners), property income (dividends, interests and
| rents), social benefits in cash (retirement pensions,
| unemployment benefits, family allowances, basic income support,
| etc.), and social transfers in kind (goods and services such as
| health care, education and housing, received either free of
| charge or at reduced prices)."
|
| The OP site uses a different statistic that does have the
| inaccuracies you described, but it correlates fairly well with
| the more representative statistic described above.
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_c...
| Closi wrote:
| But if the statistic is "earns more money" then you shouldn't
| adjust it for purchasing power (because the statistic is
| earns most money, not earns most money adjusted for
| purchasing power).
|
| As a similar example - I am taller than my sister, but if I
| adjust heights for the average for our genders she would be
| taller. That doesn't mean she is taller than me though! (But
| she is taller relative to the average girl than I am tall
| relative to the average guy).
|
| Then your wiki link displays _another_ statistic which is
| disposable income adjusted to PPP - which is again different
| to money earned. It 's a fine statistic - and probably more
| useful than just looking at the amount of money people earn -
| but it's not how much money people earn!
|
| I don't mind which is used, but the title should match the
| statistic.
| azernik wrote:
| More:
|
| For "be X times more/less likely to have babies" they use the
| per capita birth rate, which is strongly affected by age
| distribution, as opposed to the age-adjusted Total Fertility
| Rate.
|
| For "spend X% more/less on health care" they show total _public
| and private_ spending, i.e. they include government subsidies,
| so that Israel 's less generous welfare state shows up as "you
| spend 50% less than Germans on healthcare". Which, no.
| pessimizer wrote:
| > For "spend X% more/less on health care" they show total
| public and private spending
|
| Absolutely agree with the first one, but for healthcare,
| public + private spending is the reasonable number to use.
| Not talking about the real number hides a lot of sins, such
| as the fact that US _public_ spending on healthcare is
| already as much per capita as fully socialized systems, and
| allowed M4A to be attacked as "doubling" health care
| spending when it actually lowered it. Also, if I were a "run
| the government like a household" conservative, I'd add that
| the money comes from the taxpayer anyway (although that's
| wrong.)
| Closi wrote:
| Well the healthcare numbers have some other interesting
| biases - for instance that paying less on healthcare is
| implied as good (as it's coloured in green rather than red).
|
| But this then puts, for instance, Botswana as green for
| healthcare spending when compared to the UK despite the UK
| health outcomes being better.
|
| Also, when I clicked on Botswana I also noticed that their
| GDP per capita figures are completely wrong.
| q1w2 wrote:
| When an article or website clearly showcases their agenda,
| you should expect that they cherry pick and misrepresent
| data.
|
| Conclusions need to be data-driven, rather than agenda-
| driven.
|
| A good sign of this is when data presented doesn't
| demonstrate a clear conclusion, and when different articles
| show analyses that initially seem to support different
| agendas.
|
| Truth is about nuance and nuance complicated and confusing -
| often seemingly contradictory on the surface.
| Beltiras wrote:
| Also: how is using more electricity bad? I live in Iceland
| where we almost solely produce electricity with hydro and
| geothermals. I drive a Tesla which reduces our gasoline
| consumption. There's a lot of built in assumptions that ignore
| nuance that matters a great deal in the final analysis.
| northwest65 wrote:
| According to wiki the Karahnjukar Dam took 4000 tons of
| steel, and flooded 440,000 acres, and presumably consumed an
| ungodly amount on concrete. Presumably you can't keep
| expanding that sort of infrastructure forever.
| Beltiras wrote:
| Hydro and geothermal have non-zero emissions of course.
| They last for a very long time thou. It's a bit like buying
| an electric car. The emissions might look bad at the outset
| but you come out ahead really quickly.
| northwest65 wrote:
| Yeah, I too live in a country that uses a fair amount of
| hydro. Low in service emissions are nice, but on the flip
| side hydro kills an insane amount of animals and
| permanently destroys their habitats. We have geothermal
| too, but nothing making the sort of power the hydro does.
|
| The only thing that is clear is that using more
| electricity could be accepted as 'bad' by many important
| metrics.
| thenoblesunfish wrote:
| Plus, "free time" and "time not working" are different. Two
| time sinks I'm thinking of are commuting (lots of time for
| Americans) and childcare.
| rory wrote:
| A bit odd to single out that Americans spend a lot of time
| commuting, when average American commute times are some of
| the shortest in the developed world.
|
| Example: https://www.statista.com/statistics/521886/travel-
| time-spent...
| notahacker wrote:
| Well it does tell you what the sources are, which I think was
| more the point than providing an accurate number despite
| reporting it to two decimal places. Data availability is
| obviously a factor here (otherwise median income differences
| are arguably a lot more representative than mean income or GDP
| per capita differences)
|
| On a similar note, I'd argue that "unequal society" was a
| better label than "class divide", which usually implies lack of
| social mobility and fractured social groupings rather than
| simple ranges of income. But it does tell you exactly how they
| calculated what it calls the "class divide"
| Closi wrote:
| Agree with your note on the "class divide" label - e.g. at
| the moment the USA shows a bigger class divide in the notes
| than India for instance, which still implements a caste
| system.
| tlogan wrote:
| Question: how it can be that Mexico unemployment is lower than
| US?
| geekamongus wrote:
| This is cool. I wish it had some kind of a wizard to walk you
| through so that you could get some personalized (but not too
| personal) results, and build out a profile for you, to make it
| more relatable.
|
| For example, ask me my income, my family size, my religious
| views, etc. Then give me a "profile" of a fictional person in
| country X to whom I could relate.
| somenewaccount1 wrote:
| Man, life sure is better when you don't have to arm your own
| military.
| melenaboija wrote:
| Or yourself
| rainworld wrote:
| The purpose of NATO, per its first Secretary General: to "keep
| the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down."
|
| The thing the American ruling class fears most (at least until
| now, the rise of China) is an alliance between Russia and
| Germany, and they'll go very far to prevent that. The purpose
| of the continuing American occupation of Germany is not to keep
| Russia from invading Germany, there's zero risk of that.
| samatman wrote:
| > _keep Russia from invading Germany, there's zero risk of
| that._
|
| Granted that 1945-1990 was somewhat of an anomaly, it was a
| recent and important one...
| somenewaccount1 wrote:
| Oh yeah, because of all the great Eastern European alliances
| Russia is known for. /s
|
| While that would suck, why on gods earth would democratic
| Germany align itself with Russia? Looking for another Berlin
| Wall? They really loved that the first time.
|
| There's no fear of either an alliance, or invasion, thanks to
| American and other Nato troops. But continue live ingin your
| ivory education tower - that's what we fight for after all.
| perfobotto wrote:
| This seems specifically designed to make the us look bad. If you
| try to compare us and Libya it almost seems like it would be so
| much better to move there which is stupid. Statistics are
| calculated in such a way that is just unfavorable for the us
| notahacker wrote:
| It tells you what the sources are. The most commonly used
| source is the CIA World Factbook. It strikes me as a little
| unlikely the CIA has a hidden agenda to make US statistics look
| bad. Anyway, if you're looking at it from a non-IS IP the US
| isn't the baseline.
|
| Also strikes me as a little unlikely that anyone actually
| reading the descriptions rather than looking at the colours
| would prefer Libya to the US on the basis of the stats (sure,
| that healthcare is really expensive and that prison population
| is insane, but I'd rather earn 5x as much and live longer than
| have a smaller carbon footprint)
| robjan wrote:
| I don't think it's specifically targeting anyone, it's just
| oversimplifying issues. e.g. a place may look really good on
| average salary but terrible in terms of GINI (inequality).
| Neither should be taken in isolation
| [deleted]
| rootusrootus wrote:
| This just seems like a classic example of how to lie with
| statistics. And that assumes the comparisons are even valid -- it
| is notoriously difficult to compare measurements that sound the
| same on the surface between different countries that have
| differing methods at calculating the value.
| frankfrankfrank wrote:
| It is also a good example of the magic dirt/soil concept that
| is meant denigrate and abuse people and cultures for their work
| and achievements.
|
| It's a toxic, defeatist, abusive, and deeply unhealthy
| mentality to have.
| merricksb wrote:
| Last significant discussion about this here in 2011:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2119220
| Lemmih wrote:
| The sources link is broken and some of the data is wrong (or
| maybe old). The site says the Danish life expectancy at birth is
| 79 years. CIA factbook (the supposed source) has the number as
| 81.45 years.
| jakedata wrote:
| Oh goodie! If I lived in Chad I would use 99.9% less electricity,
| clearly a win. I would also die 31 years earlier - why isn't that
| one green too? Dying early is clearly much better for the
| environment than hanging around using up resources and belching
| CO2.
| jakedata wrote:
| ...replying to myself here to possibly avoid being downvoted to
| oblivion: This is an example of sarcastic critique. The goal is
| to illustrate the entirely arbitrary nature of the green vs red
| labels given to various categories such as electricity
| consumption. Thank you for your time.
| johnday wrote:
| I'm not sure it's "arbitrary" that people living longer is
| considered an upside.
| jakedata wrote:
| Nor is greater electricity consumption strictly a downside.
| Using more responsibly sourced electricity could be
| considered a good thing if it offsets charcoal sourced from
| a rainforest.
|
| Dying 30 years earlier certainly can reduce your lifetime
| energy consumption.
| DangitBobby wrote:
| Metrics cannot be perfect. That doesn't mean "don't have
| metrics" it means "think carefully about what your
| metrics actually mean." All other things being equal in
| two countries, it's a positive if one uses less
| electricity.
| chrischapman wrote:
| Upvote for 'Oh Goodie' and the humour in general. But had to
| reflect on the sad reality of the following being in green!
|
| > spend 99.58% less money on health care
|
| That is apparently a 'benefit' of living in the Democratic
| Republic of the Congo. When compared to:
|
| > die 23.88 years sooner
|
| perhaps the health care statistic should have been in red?
| DangitBobby wrote:
| This criticism doesn't make sense. You could argue that the
| expense is a contributing factor to why the US' healthcare is
| better, and if it had a single category that said "healthcare
| is 90% better in other country because it costs less" then
| that would be misleading somehow. But that's not at all what
| happened. They gave two metrics: comparative life expectancy
| and comparative healthcare expense. The metric where your
| country fares better is red, the one where it fares worse is
| green. You cannot argue that lower cost isn't purely better
| if you are solely examining that single metric. Splitting it
| into separate metrics allows you to do so.
|
| Your backlash against the representation says more about your
| beliefs than it does about the site.
| sigmaprimus wrote:
| That was somewhat of an ad hominem attack, I believe the
| point that was being made is that Red and Green have
| certain connotations, generally Red = Bad, Stop, Danger and
| Green = Good, Go, Safe. I don't think it has anything to do
| with ones beliefs and though it may indicate an opinion,
| there is no value in criticizing someone for having a
| different opinion when they provide it in the appropriate
| space such as a comments' forum.
| DangitBobby wrote:
| > Red and Green have certain connotations, generally Red
| = Bad, Stop, Danger and Green = Good, Go, Safe.
|
| Yes, this was understood. The context I gave my answer in
| was after seeing other comments which indicated that the
| site was somehow designed to make the US look bad. The
| only reason I can even fathom for how a commentor would
| question the inclusion of the healthcare cost metric is
| from embarassment at healthcare costs here and wishing to
| justify it with a discussion of outcomes (which, as I
| pointed out earlier, is already included in the life-
| expectancy metric).
|
| I don't see how any interpretation of their comment can
| get around the fact that GP doesn't agree that healthcare
| costs should have been included as a "benefit", which I
| take issue with. Healthcare costs are a valid concern,
| and something I'd look into before emigrating. To me, big
| healthcare costs is a gigantic red flag for a country. In
| fact, health care costs (and other sensibilities around
| public welfare) are near the top of the list for why I
| might some day emigrate.
|
| Why do you think GP doesn't see lower healthcare costs as
| a benefit?
| [deleted]
| smeej wrote:
| The one for Vatican City made me laugh!
| thejosh wrote:
| This information is crazy out of date?
| sigmaprimus wrote:
| Oh Boy, another one "these" submissions...
|
| Rather than get into the agenda behind such a site, I'll just
| scroll to the bottom of this page and find a comment beaten down
| by the mob and try to bring some balance.
| arendtio wrote:
| I like the idea and the site, but at times it fails to transport
| the magnitude. For example, sometimes a metric is communicated as
| 'percentage' and somestimes as 'times'. And 26 times is something
| completely different than 26%.
| nopcode wrote:
| CIA World Factbook is a horrible and usually outdated source.
| throwaway22032 wrote:
| I think this site would be improved a lot by removing the
| colouring or at least normalizing it so that 'more' is always one
| colour and 'less' another.
|
| Electricity and oil are essentially access to material wealth. An
| American uses more because they probably have a bigger house on
| more land and a fancy big car.
|
| Spending more money on health care could be good if it means you
| have greater access, or bad if it means you're just paying a lot
| for the same.
|
| A class divide isn't automatically worse, it could be great for
| you if you're on top.
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| Whoa. As a US citizen, I clicked on Peru and wasn't surprised by
| anything (hello 96% less spent on healthcare) -- except that I'll
| experience 6% more of a class divide than Peru. The Gini index is
| interesting:
|
| "The GINI index measures the degree of inequality in the
| distribution of family income. In Peru it is 48.10 while in The
| United States it is 45.00.
|
| This index measures the degree of inequality in the distribution
| of family income in a country. The index is calculated from the
| Lorenz curve, in which cumulative family income is plotted
| against the number of families arranged from the poorest to the
| richest. The index is the ratio of (a) the area between a
| country's Lorenz curve and the 45 degree helping line to (b) the
| entire triangular area under the 45 degree line. The more nearly
| equal a country's income distribution, the closer its Lorenz
| curve to the 45 degree line and the lower its Gini index, e.g., a
| Scandinavian country with an index of 25. The more unequal a
| country's income distribution, the farther its Lorenz curve from
| the 45 degree line and the higher its Gini index, e.g., a Sub-
| Saharan country with an index of 50. If income were distributed
| with perfect equality, the Lorenz curve would coincide with the
| 45 degree line and the index would be zero; if income were
| distributed with perfect inequality, the Lorenz curve would
| coincide with the horizontal axis and the right vertical axis and
| the index would be 100."
|
| c.f https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient
| amelius wrote:
| In the past poor people generally didn't understand how much
| they were screwed over by the upper classes. However, it seems
| that in the US, smart people increasingly end up at the wrong
| side of the divide, which could mean we're heading for
| interesting times.
| peruvianthwa wrote:
| I was born and lived in South America before I moved to the US
| and I'm not mentioning this so that somehow I'm granted enough
| authority to trust anything I say, but to encourage people to
| look further than this just plain numbers.
|
| I truly wish I knew how to get this point across with
| Americans: - Yes, we have expensive health care in the US -
| Yes, we are privilege because most of us have jobs that provide
| us with relatively good health care policies
|
| I think this fight-for-a-greater-good has blinded people as to
| give examples like yours -- utterly disrespectful. Most of the
| time health care in those countries cannot and is nowhere close
| to be compared to the US, UNLESS, of course, you go to private
| practices where you're back to "uhm, so maybe it's not so cheap
| after all". If you're so inclined in advocating for new policy,
| I welcome you to travel and experience, ask the locals, etc,
| how their healthcare system works.
|
| This site claims that people would spend 93.33% less on health
| care in Venezuela, that is, if you're lucky enough to even get
| health care.
|
| This site claims that people would spend 88.81% less on health
| care in Argentina, that is, if you can afford to wait long
| enough to get whatever medical attention you need.
|
| I'm more than willing to answer any questions if you have them.
| I'm just trying to raise awareness because I DO NOT want
| America to become what I escaped from.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| This mentality is really holding the US back from joining
| other developed Western nations in solving this problem. We
| see this with the Cuban immigrants in Florida and their
| boneheaded reactions to labeling any attempts to move towards
| the European system as "socialism". At a certain point, it
| feels like immigrants from these kinds of countries are a
| liability and thats difficult to say but I don't know what
| else will stop the US from being continually pulled back from
| progress.
|
| YES we acknowledge that the US system is better than third
| world countries. However medical debt is the largest cause of
| bankruptcy in the US by far!
|
| The fact that employers provide healthcare causes it to be
| used as a ball and chain reducing freedom because losing that
| healthcare will always be hanging over employees heads.
|
| Finally, many people who are "insured" are paying out the
| nose for terrible heath-care. 40% of Americans can't even
| cover a 400$ emergency but now they are forced into buying
| insurance through the "Obamacare" marketplace. Basic plans
| that have multi-thousand dollar deductibles essentially are
| free money to the insurance companies because if those people
| can't afford 400$, you really think they are going to shell
| out for the deductible for anything other than dire
| emergencies?
|
| If you are rich, the US healthcare is by far the best of the
| best. For everyone else, it is a mafia racket that is not
| preferable to what Europe and the rest of the developed world
| has. The majority of natural born Americans want to move
| towards a kind of healthcare system that the rest of the West
| has because with the advent of the internet and increased
| travel we have seen our fellow compatriots in these countries
| and what they go through.
|
| Yet we keep hearing these terrible talking points from shell
| shocked immigrants of Latin America and other poor nations
| who do not seem to understand what it is really like in the
| rest of the developed world.
|
| [1]: https://abcnews.go.com/US/10-americans-struggle-
| cover-400-em...
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| Thank you. I literally went bankrupt due to going to the
| hospital when I had no health insurance. I had no idea how
| to bring up that point to this person, since it's obviously
| a sensitive issue with them and they've seen some heavy
| stuff. Nonetheless, we each live in our own realities, and
| mine is that the healthcare system was an enormous burden
| on my life.
| bee_rider wrote:
| The site claims to combine the public and private healthcare
| costs. I guess these private practices would also be included
| in their figure, unless they are under the table or something
| like that.
|
| On the other hand, the medical stats are generally tricky to
| parse, right? I guess most of the cost in the overall system
| comes from dealing with rare emergencies (such that most
| people won't encounter such an emergency during their
| lifetime) (I think this is the case, but it is just my gut
| talking, maybe someone can correct me). I guess the figure
| should will depend on how we price the availability of these
| emergency services, into the overall price. Or other sort of
| customer-service type things that aren't 100% related to just
| providing the best possible medical treatments. This seems
| more like an accounting thing to me. Also Americans are
| generally pretty unhealthy, so our costs will naturally be a
| bit high.
|
| Which isn't to say I'm happy with the US system -- it clearly
| needs some improvement. I'm just not sure this 93.33% figure
| is why. I'm not sure we need to compare to Peru. It is
| unfortunate that the right in the US seems to have complete
| ownership of American Exceptionalism -- it ought to be
| possible to say "we're the most powerful and richest country
| ever, we should have exceptional healthcare."
| im3w1l wrote:
| Since you asked how to get your point across: This is
| obviously an emotional topic for you. But I think you need to
| be patient, and realize that people aren't trying to be
| disrespectful. They are doing the best they can with the
| information they have available. Maybe you could tell your
| stories.
|
| Which country are you from? What happened when your cousin
| broke his leg? When your aunt had cancer? How do the blind
| and wheelchairbound fare? Did you ever come down with a
| tropical disease?
| narrator wrote:
| Certainly makes clear that the solution to American healthcare is
| anything you can think of except spending more money on it.
| frankfrankfrank wrote:
| That applies to basically everything in and related to America.
| Healthcare, education, "defense", social programs,
| immigration... it's all really just a con job by a subset of
| what is a kind of neo-aristocracy/nobility that pilfers and
| pillages their income and wealth through con jobs committed
| against mostly the middle class by way of how the whole system
| works.
|
| In many ways the system is not any different than a casino; the
| promise of winnings and riches, while the whole theater around
| it is purely meant to provide confidence (i.e, the con in
| confidence trick) to separate people from their money while
| making them think they had a good time (feeling good about
| themselves, the primary appeal to people's narcissism).
|
| Yet, somehow no matter how much we blow at the Casino called
| education/healthcare/"defense"/social programs ... the only
| thing that gets better are the bank accounts of the executives
| and directors and presidents while all the measures and
| statistics and metrics have scraping a bottom for decades.
|
| The only war the US government and the parasitic people that
| make it up have ever waged successfully, is the war on getting
| the value of the work the middle class does into their
| parasitic pockets through all manner of schemes and con jobs.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| It does not have to be like this. What Americans need to see
| is not bigger or smaller government but more 'effective'
| government. Is the government using the resources it does
| have effectively. Obviously the answer is no. But hoe have
| other countries managed to solve this problem? It seems like
| its down to historical chances where events that played out
| in the country's history dictated how the government ended up
| behaving and the values of the people that run it.
|
| For example: If you consider the massive losses after WW2 and
| the effort it took to rebuild after the war, it seems like
| the aftermath resulted in many of those countries in Europe
| establishing programs with the idea that the society stands
| together as one and should help each other out. This
| mentality affects many European government behaviors to this
| day.
| dang wrote:
| Past related threads:
|
| _If It Were My Home_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13709405 - Feb 2017 (1
| comment)
|
| _IfItWereMyHome.com: Your Life in a Different Country_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10806405 - Dec 2015 (2
| comments)
|
| _Compare your country to any other place_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9472001 - May 2015 (2
| comments)
|
| _Living conditions in other countries compared to your own_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2726967 - July 2011 (3
| comments)
|
| _Website calculates how your life might be like in another
| country_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2119220 - Jan
| 2011 (106 comments)
| davidmurdoch wrote:
| I thought the "consume oil" category was a weird one to have on
| here until I realized they weren't talking about food oils. Haha
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-01-30 23:01 UTC)