I’m looking for perspectives on which countries most effectively combine high quality of life with low social and economic inequality.
New Zealand has good QoL but does have issues with inequality with the Maori (original Polynesian settlers). They are strict about immigration which tries to help reduce immigrant inequality. Australia has better economic QoL, but there is no wildlife in NZ that will kill you.
Sweden has it but also massive immigration and crime, while getting poorer and poorer.
I would go for Netherlands i think. Switzerland is nicer but much more expensive too.
Norway is also nice. Still money there and hasnt been wrecked by immigration yet.
I’d love to see a comparison of crime statistics between Sweden and various US cities.
You might want to look at the IHDI, inequality-adjusted human development index.
It takes the life expectancy, years of education, and GNI (PPP) per capita, and adjusts it for inequality.
Ideally it shouldn’t even take GNI into account, imho (but an economic type-agnostic system, that takes the environment into account as well).
The top 15 is:
-
Iceland (Nordics)
-
Norway (Nordics)
-
Denmark (Nordics)
-
Switzerland (Central Europe)
-
Netherlands (Western Europe)
-
Belgium (Western Europe)
-
Finland (Nordics)
-
Germany (Central Europe)
-
Sweden (Nordics)
-
Ireland (Western Europe)
-
Slovenia (Southeast Europe)
-
Australia (Oceania)
-
United Kingdom (Western Europe)
-
Canada (North America)
-
Czech Republic (Central Europe)
The IHDI still has some issues, though, like not taking workplace democracy, environment and sustainability, and public transit into account. Had that been done, Spain probably would rise quite a bit higher.
I’d also add that a lot of these countries have very strict immigration policies.
-
There’s the Gini coefficient , which is an index for social inequality. Its easier to spot the blue countries and guess if you’d like to move there.
Edit: although looking at the map, its strange to see India and Japan having the same color. Anecdotally, I think the gap between rich and poor is much greater in India than in Japan, education and drinking water for example. Ive lived in both countries, and I think India should be yellow or orange, like southeast Asia.
Nordic countries are the best example. A lot of Europe might fit depending on how low “low social and economic equality” is defined.
Looking at this data Norway seems to have low levels of economic inequality, low rates of poverty, and a high median disposable income (behind Luxembourg but around that of France and Austria).
Its far from perfect, but I imagine social inequality for stuff like gender and race is pretty low, officially speaking at least. I get the feeling that Scandinavians can be a big negative about foreigners, but I have zero firsthand knowledge on that.
Norway admittedly has gigantic, relatively recent, oil and gas reserves that allow it to fund all sorts of social programs. Not saying those are bad or anything, just not a particularly exportable model.
Except that the Nordic model has been replicated across all the Nordic countries, of which only Norway has vast natural resources.
And even then, Norway, under the policies of the Nordic model, was already quite rich before it discovered oil.
It’s actually pretty exportable. There’s a lot of countries out there that have natural resources that should be the property of the people instead of wealthy individuals.
If you’re going to start nationalizing previously established resources, that’s going to have all sorts of wild reprecussions and is not what Norway did.
But beyond the logistics, which similarly profitable resources are you thinking of?
Norway did nationalize their oil though?
previously established
In other words, Norway established this stuff pretty quickly when oil was discovered. That’s wildly different from taking over existing private enterprise.
People really don’t like it when you take things away as opposed to having a set of rules before anyone begins.
Norway did that, though. The pension fund that’s financed from that oil, is nationally owned, iirc.
previously established
In other words, Norway established this stuff pretty quickly when oil was discovered. That’s wildly different from taking over existing private enterprise.
People really don’t like it when you take things away as opposed to having a set of rules before anyone begins.
We take nothing away and give everything to the people. Capitalists are the problem.
Yeah, this isn’t going to be productive or interesting.
Have a nice day.
Well of course it won’t be the same. Thats why you have to export it.
All of them. All of a nations natural resources rightfully belong to the people from oil to water. From rare earth minerals to timber.
All of a nations natural resources rightfully belong to the people
Yes and we have a liberal democracy to determine how best to use them. Thankfully, most folks understand that simply nationalizing resources comes with huge reprecussions which greatly outweigh the gains.
Do you have a successful example of your proposal in mind?
A liberal democracy isn’t exactly a free democracy. Billionnaires have far more buying power and so the odds are much more in their favour to bribe and corrupt institutions. That is why they like “liberal” democracy and corporate dictatorships.
If you want to understand, then go to one of those US “for profit” prisons. Works well, huh?
Not every liberal democracy is America.
If you want to understand, you might go to Canada where strict campaign finance laws generally reign in billionaires.
Most Oil and Gas reserves remaining in the US are on public land, as is the massive lithium deposit just discovered in southeastern Oregon. Then there are the seabed polymetalic nodules that will be mined sooner or later. There are plenty of opportunities to nationalize natural resources, what is lacking is political will.
Lithium is not nearly as profitable as oil. It costs a huge amount to extract and refine (China has such a chokehold on critical minerals, not because they have so much more but because they’ve built an incredibly efficient set of supply chains.)
And personally, I am very much not in favour of tearing down what little protected land is left in America. But you will be happy to know that trump strongly agrees with you and is opening up a swathe of public land for oil and gas.
Interestingly enough, Norway was already doing quite alright before they discovered the oil - they were at 10th place amongst all European countries. The oil has given them additional wealth, but it has become somewhat of a national myth that the oil is the sole reason for Norway’s success, leading to their current reluctance to spin the industry down, despite it running fully counter to Norway’s self-image of a green nation.
Tenth among European nations in the 60s isn’t particularly good and is not thr standard that makes Norway the model everyone wants to emulate.
Consider how much of Europe was under communism or fascism and there’s really not a lot of competition.
It wasn’t a terrible place but not the high quality with which we currently associated Norway.
The only reason their society is that way is because it’s not diverse.
all the scandavaian counrties are having issues because of increasing immigration is destroying their social harmony. the natives don’t want to give the new immigrants the benefits they get, and the immigrants dont’ want to assimilate to the scandavian values/lifestyle.
Do you have sources you can cite?
In English if possible. Though I’ll understand if not, and make due with what you have.I lived in Sweden for a bit and have travelled through most of Scandinavia over the years, what that person is saying is true. Saw it first hand and it had only gotten more of any issue in the last 20 years.
99% homogenous culture with 99% literacy rate with a big social safety net and high taxes to pay for all the high quality of living. Then you take in refugees over and over again in the past 30 years. The refugees are being put into the same neighborhoods, they form communities since they are all suffering the trauma of displacement together. The communities want access to the huge social safety net but not have to pay taxes or assimilate/learn the native language. Both sides feels abused by the other and the problem just gets bigger and bigger over time.
It makes sense and every Scandinavian country has been dealing with it for a while now; it is a huge struggle for them. It is a challenging hurdle that none of them have been able to figure out how to resolve it.
Take Sweden for example, you have 9mil people living in a country about the size of California. Lots of room, resources and stability. Then 200k refugees need a place to call home. They have pride for their homeland and don’t want to forget it. The Swedes have just fundamentally altered the foundation of their society in a statistically significant way by bringing a very different cultural heritage, background, traditions and people it a mostly unchanged political system based on hundreds of years of tradition. There is a lot that both sides have to adapt to as it is a new paradigm for each to accept.
That’s a tough nut to crack and historically speaking one that is usually solved over a few generations as tensions calm and the two cultures mix. The ones who grew up with the two cultures always being present are usually the ones who resolve it once they are decision makers. Or it is constant tension until violence erupts and everyone always hates each other from then on. Flip a coin but I have my fingers crossed that Scandinavia figures it out. It is a beautiful part of the world that could use a bit of outside influence to spice up their geometric architecture and people.
PS I can’t remember the population of Sweden off the top of my head so I just guesstimated. No idea on # of refugees, just picked that one out of a hat to illustrate a point. 200k could be about right, could be lower or could be higher. ¯\_ (ツ)_/¯
When I visited Oslo, I bumped into some pakistani lads, and we had a nice long chat about the history of immigration in Norway.
Back in the 70s, Norway imported lots of workers for the oil industry. At the time, most of them imagined that they would go back home sooner or later. if you live like your mind is in Pakistan, but your body is in Norway, it’s just not going to work long term.
In the next 30 years, more and more of them realized that they actually quite like it in Norway, since they have a job, house, car, family, children and so on. In the 00s they also started acting like it. Now, the immigrants and their children have been living like regular people for about 20+ years.
However, that applies to the fraction of immigrants who have already spent about 30 years in that country. Contrast that with the Afghani, Iraqi and Syrian immigrants in Sweden. They haven’t been there for 30 years yet, which means that they haven’t fully come to terms with the fact that they’ve left their home country behind and they aren’t going back. Once they cross that mental threshold, they begin to act like this is their new home country. Before that though, you can expect to see all sorts of nasty side effects.
The communities want access to the huge social safety net
As anyone would and as should be provided to them lest they be treated as second class citizens in their new country. You want tensions to rise, restricting the same benefits that are a right for everyone else is a good start.
but not have to pay taxes
Again, as anyone might. But then, of course, this is non-negotiable. Maybe some subsidy can be given to help people get started in a new country with next to no resources, connections or money, but the taxes come with the perks and the perks come with the taxes. That’s just the beginning and end of that.
or assimilate/learn the native language
You couldn’t pay me to give the slightest fuck that a 1st generation immigrant, let alone a refugee who was forced to leave their home, doesn’t assimilate into the local culture or learn the native language. They have to obey your laws and participate in and contribute to your society. But they do not need to fall in line with your culture. I get that that can be challenging and cause some conflict. American history is full of this stories. But immigrants bring their own culture, their own language, their own races and religions. Those are not things to erased, they are things to be remembered, honored, shared, and ultimately merged.
And it won’t happen all at once. It will happen over generations. Their kids will assimilate a bit, and they’ll share their culture with their native peers. What’s strange and foreign now will become familiar ethnic diversity to your kids. A few generations from now, you’ll eventually have a shared culture that shares roots from distant places but comes together into one intertwined whole.
There’s certainly a lot of problems with America, and there’s been and is no shortage of bigotry and struggle against new cultures coming in. But that amalgamation of cultures, languages, cuisines, styles, architectures, myths, histories, religions, etc. into American Culture while still honoring distinct cultural and national identities is still one of our greatest features (when the nazi racists aren’t in charge that is). That’s the nature of being a nation of immigrants. Welcome to the Melting Pot, baby.
Yo, I think you are attacking the wrong person here.
I don’t know where you read into what I said and got off track because I am not the strawman you seem to be painting me as…?
I am totally on the side of the refugees in these scenarios, I never said otherwise. The subtext of what I was saying was it is a good thing for any culture to be open to outside influence and the Scandinavian countries have been isolated culturally more so than many other areas of the world. Honestly, one of my favorite pastimes while living in Sweden was calling out the Swedes for the racist bullshit, and very specifically around this exact topic.
They opened their borders for refugees because they had space, stability and wealth to share with those in need. That does say a lot about their culture and wanting to help others but the system shock it caused created backlash that has yet be be resolved. You can’t treat some citizens one way and another set of citizen another. I did not say the social safety net shouldn’t be provided for them as I believe they should have every right as equals in their new country. I honestly wish my opinion on the matter could be used to stop this schism on the opposite side of the world to where I currently live but I don’t have that ability. Racists are gonna racist and as much as I hate that I am powerless to stop it worldwide.
I grew up around many cultures; many of my friends parents were first gen immigrants and didn’t speak the native language but they tried. I don’t fault them one bit for not learning it, languages are hard. I’ve learned 4 as an adult, none have been easy but my interest in foreign languages started when learning foreign words/phrases around the dinner table at my friends houses growing up.
Oddly Swedish was the most difficult but not for the usual reasons. I tried to speak it but Swedish people would inevitably hear my terrible accent and then just assume I know English and respond that way. Hard to practice when everyone under the age of 60 speaks fluent English and want to show it off. But that is Swedish pride for you, I can’t dismiss that maybe they opened their borders to refugees with the assumption their life was so much better than what the refugees were used to that they would of course want to assimilate to Swedish culture. Which kind of is the basis for the whole problem, they didn’t expect the refugees to have a different opinion and made no space for them to do so. Which is also why they need to assimilate towards each other, not only in one direction, and that takes a few generations worth of time.
It kinda feels like you parroted what I said back to me but… angrily? It feels like you’re working something out that doesn’t really have anything to do with me. It’s ok though, I think we are both on the same page.
I apologize. You’ve misunderstood the intent of my comment. I wasn’t, in any way, attacking you. I was just providing commentary on one small part of your comment regarding the general opinion on and summary of the issues. None of what I said was meant to be accusatory or even directed at you at all. Those uses of “you” were rhetorical, not actually you. Sorry that I wasn’t clear about that. It sounds like we are in more or less complete agreement.
Got ya, no worries!
I can get into one of those rhetorical “you” soliloquies as well from time to time when incensed about an issue. I completely understand and I’m glad we are fighting the same fight.
I’m a Norwegian living in Denmark, and can confirm that the views stated are true, unfortunately. The racism is increasing really fast, buy do is the inequality for the general population, and there are many (not all, but many) refugees who refuse to learn Norwegian. There are even refugees who’s been in Norway for 30 years who don’t speak a lick of Norwegian, while their kids sounds like Norwegian native speakers.
while their kids sounds like Norwegian native speakers.
But isn’t that actually an indication for strong assimilation? You can’t expect everybody to be a language genius :) but on the other end of the spectrum there could be sub-cultures that last for many generations.
Right I don’t know why everyone gets pissed off about language in particular with first generation immigrants. Particularly refugees. Learning a new language is a massive undertaking, and it’s a skill many never master even with years of practice. Plenty, I’m sure, feel that they can get by without it by living in their communities, so they’re not motivated. And I don’t think they should be. Far easier for their children to learn and assimilate, break down that language barrier and bridge that gap. It’s absurd to expect everyone to speak one language.
Far easier for their children to learn and assimilate, break down that language barrier and bridge that gap.
Lmao, their parents are gonna use their kids as free human translators… I feel bad for those kids… cuz I was one of those.
I was born in China, moved to the US.
Like literally every customer service call, every form they fill, every letter, even going to insurance company, or car dealership, or buying a house, or like filing taxes, I had to translate everything. Omg it hurts my brain so much, drained my energy. Like literally, just chillin’ and like, there’s a letter and my mom wants me to translate… 💀 I sometimes lack the advanced vocabulary in Chinese to even explain what it means lmao
But… it is what it is lol 🤷♂️
As a non-EU person in Denmark, I can confirn, that the “everyone is equal” club is not available for everyone
Would you recommend Denmark to someone from the US considering taking a job there?
Even considering all the problems and quirks of living in Denmark, I would still recommend it, compared to many places in the world, US included. But if you have a way to get paid “US money” in Denmark, it would be even better :)
Getting hired is still a problem, but it’s more of a global problem now, and it depends on what you do.Copenhagen is a rad town, I’d recommend visiting if you have time before you have to accept/decline the offer.
Out of all the Scandinavian countries it is the one I would prefer to live in above the others. It shares a land border with Germany, so Central Europe is easily accessible and if you are in Copenhagen then Sweden is just a drive across a very long bridge. Due to this I’d say Denmark is the more culturally open and mixed than the other Scandinavian countries.
Yes, Danes look the most “normal”, compared to other Scandinavians. Don’t expect smalltalk to work, and don’t expect to be accepted in groups of long-term friends (so, most of them), but otherwise Danes are more social and “European”.
That’s not intirely true. Some people definitely are like that, like in any country. Others agree that if you work and pay taxes, you deserve all the same benefits.
Antarctica
Plus immigrant friendly, I guess.
Plus immigrant friendly, I guess.
I mean, this is exactly why I kinda side-eye Lemmings when they are like “why did you choose to move to 'such a shithole’¹ like the US, isn’t China much better”, (¹their words btw, not mine) like… (first of all, I didn’t even choose, my parent did) lol I’d go to Norway if they took us, but no they don’t lmao, the US was our only option for emigration… it was either this or stay in mainland China with all that pollution stuff and Hukou bullshit and crowded, and hard to find income.
… and there goes most of them.
I don’t know from experience, and I haven’t researched it, but that kinda sounds like Canada.
Maybe Germany.
Canada has a lot of immgration that has brought about increasing inequality.
Canada was going to have the inequality anyway. The immigration is a scapegoat for the declining quality of life but many policy decisions outside of immigration were already impacting quality of life. The housing bubble and oligarchy/monopoly of major sectors (grocceries, telecommunications etc) are the main issues driving inequality in Canada.
Canada could support its ambitious immigration goals if it were willing to invest in the country to support them, such as extensive public transit overhauls and nationalizing essential services like rail, communications, and energy.
To be clear, I am extremely pro-immigration, but many of the immigration policies as written are tools used to suppress wages. This is the reason we see so many immigrants, often with degrees and training we refuse to recognize in Canada, in low paying, minimum wage jobs. I personally had the pleasure of working with a wonderful woman from the middle east who was a qualified teacher, stuck working 30 hours a week in a grocery store deli because we refused to recognize her degree or decade of experience. She spoke perfect English, was incredibly pleasant, and visibly intelligent and well-mannered, but she’s a brown immigrant, so fuck it, minimum wage for her.
We can take immigrants at the rate we have been while not using them to further wealth inequalities. But as a friend of mine says, the purpose of a system is what it does, and the current iteration is not about creating a multi-cultural nation.
For additional clarity, this isn’t to say that you’re wrong and immigration isn’t being used as a scapegoat. I’d just argue that the problem is more substantial than simply calling the issue a scapegoat suggests. There is a real problem, but it’s not in that we’re accepting immigrants at all; it’s the conditions we’ve agreed to accept them under.
None of them.
Pretty much all high quality of life countries have large economic inequality, and life is great if you’re in the top quarter of the economic strata, and everyone else is often struggling.
Also if you want to emigrate, you better have a high paying specialist career.
Nor really true. In most northwestern countries you’ll find a high quality of life even when not rich and though there is still inequality, it’s not even remotely comparable to the US, for example.
I’d recommend researching quality of life metrics and cross referencing with nations’ gini coefficients.
Most European countries.
You and tubulartittyfrog have basically the exact opposite comments
Not really. In most European countries inequality is still huge, with service jobs earning less than a living wage.
There are graphs in the book The Spirit Level which show exactly this. The two things correlate. From memory Iceland, Japan and maybe Poland do well, or at least they were when the book was published.
Xandar
Is that real or is it like Narnia?
Removed by mod
you have an aparthied on your list? lol i mean yes off course israelis themselves are happy to enjoy unchecked privileges and ethnic supremacy, while palestinians get ethnic cleansing and genocide.
Not to mention that Hungary, China, and Japan are pretty terrible to live in. Two are dictatorships and one’s also got a terribly racist society with a thatcherite.
Poland’s also shitty whenever there’s a far-right party in power (the national-conservatives).
Yeah, China has the Hukou bullshit. They deny kids of migrant parents from going to public school in the cities where the parents work, and cities are where you really find income, so since the kids follow the parent’s Hukou status, I was born in Guangzhou (a city), and I don’t get the city’s Hukou, I get my parent’s status from rural Taishan.
So parents had to:
- either lets the kids be left behind in their village so they can go to school there, and to be cared for by relatives, like grandparents, meaning they rarely see their parents
or
- pay for a privately-run school out of pocket (which is worse than public school)
also for option 2, you’d need to be able to afford to rent (there are a lot of people hoarding apartments and then profit from this btw, you see a lot of “for rent” posters everywhete) or “buy” (70 year “permission to use” or something) an apartment big enough for your kids to even live with you comfortably, cuz housing isn’t free, you have your ancestral home in your village and that’s all you got, also you probably need someone to take care of the kids like after school hours, like the kids grandparents or someone like that. Also crowded, polluted, hard to find income.
As someone born in China, I always just find it funny that ignorant westerners somehow think China is some socialist paradise, it ain’t even socialist lmao.
