I want to be a socialist

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Kropotkin
THe HDI is not more accurate, it's just different.

If you are saying that GDP measures standard of living, and as Agathon has mentioned, it doesn't very well, then different means better

[Kropotkin]

When you or anyone else comes up with a universal and objective way to calculate the weights for the HDI then I'd agree. As it is now and will be for more or less the rest of mankinds existance, no it's not better. It's different.

[Az]

Yes, I trust the HDI.

[Clear Skies]

Originally posted by Odin
Thats better then the crime resulting from poverty.

Social Darwinists.

Hey, I'm a socialist myself...or at least a social liberal. The crack was just so good I couldn't resist

And no-one's mentioned GDP at purchasing power parity...

[Urban Ranger]

GDP per capita is bad because a few mega-rich people at the top completely skews the picture. Using the median or even the mode gives a far better picture. But then, as it was pointed out, GDP itself is broken for a number of reasons.

[Felch]

Originally posted by Maniac
So IMHO GDP per capita says near nothing unless you can show me a box-and-whiskers plot with mean, mediaan (in Eng.?), quartiles (Eng?), standard deviation...

Median with one a, and quartile you spelled correctly. I think. It's been a few years since I used any of those terms back in high school.

[Felch]

Originally posted by Agathon
GDP is bad because things like the Exxon Valdez disaster increase it.

Over the short term yes. Over the long term it slows its growth. Everything has to be paid for after all.

[Dis]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The biggest change you'd have to make is to actually start caring about other human beings, Dissident.

well **** you too. you don't even know me *******

what makes you think I don't care about other human beings. I once made a thread that said I love you guys. I do care about other human beings.

As of now I have what you call tough love. I go by the philosphy that you can give a man a fish and he can eat for a day. But if you teach a man to fish he can eat for a lifetime.

but unlike some people, I am open minded and am willing to change my philosphy to something better. I don't turn a blind eye to what the other side has to say. I listen to their ideas, and consider the value of them.

[Dis]

lets put it this way. add up the assets of the average american, and the average scandinavian and compare the two.

Americans have lots of money to by cd's, dvd's dvd player and many crappy items for their homes. We have so much junk in our homes in our country we are forced to rent space in storage places. Our homes are bigger than they have every been in history. No more 2 or 3 room homes for us. many people have 4 and 5 room 2 story homes.

I'm not saying this is a good thing, that's not how I definse standard of living. But I think most people would agree that personal wealth has to account for standard of living.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Dissident
well **** you too. you don't even know me *******

I can only go by your threads and posts, and sometimes you're way out there on the screw the helpless branch. Maybe you're being a devil's advocate or maybe you think you're being funny, but many of your posts and threads are mean-spirited. Often time you seem like the kind of person to push someone down a flight of steps and then laugh at them for being so clumsy.

[Dis]

Well I would never push someone down the stairs and laugh at them.

Now if they fell down the stairs by themselves...well

I can't help it. I just have a twisted sense of humour. But I do not consider myself an evil person. And I do wish for the success of most people. I want the best for the citizens of the country I live in. Well I want the best for the people of the world, but our goverment has limitations on how it can affect people in other countries.

I would never expect someone who cannot work to starve to death and say tough luck. But I do believe people who can work should do so. It is the healthy thing to do. There is a positive feeling working and providing food and shelter for yourself or familiy. So consequently I support disabled benefits and unemployment benefits, but I shun against most forms of welfare (except in extreme cases).

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Dissident
lets put it this way. add up the assets of the average american, and the average scandinavian and compare the two.

Americans have lots of money to by cd's, dvd's dvd player and many crappy items for their homes. We have so much junk in our homes in our country we are forced to rent space in storage places. Our homes are bigger than they have every been in history. No more 2 or 3 room homes for us. many people have 4 and 5 room 2 story homes.

I'm not saying this is a good thing, that's not how I definse standard of living. But I think most people would agree that personal wealth has to account for standard of living.

I'm not so sure the Americans would come out ahead, if you factor in the average debt load. I'm not basing this on any facts necessarily, but you have to consider that the US is a very consumption-based and non-debt adverse society.

[Dis]

you may be right about the debt.

But look at it this way. Factor in what the average american take home after taxes and what the average Scandinavian takes home after taxes.

Actually you should figure out the gross income- as you have to include what their tax dollars are doing for them (health care etc)

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Dissident
I'm not saying this is a good thing, that's not how I definse standard of living. But I think most people would agree that personal wealth has to account for standard of living.

I am not sure getting lots of stuff increases standard of living. Up to a level, adding possessions does increase standard of living, but beyond that, probably won't do a thing. So what if you have 5 sets of stereo instead of 3?

Also, as I pointed out before, average doesn't work in a country such as the US where there's a huge gap between the top and the bottom. You just won't get a real picture. Use the median and the mode instead.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Dissident
you may be right about the debt.

But look at it this way. Factor in what the average american take home after taxes and what the average Scandinavian takes home after taxes.

Actually you should figure out the gross income- as you have to include what their tax dollars are doing for them (health care etc)

Money is a very poor method for determining standard of living. Moreover, using it as the standard betrays a very libertarian bias in your thinking. Not everyone measures their worthiness in cash on hand or salary.

I would prefer some kind of contentment measurement, but that's because I'd rather be happy than rich if I had to make the choice. If it turned out that Scandinavians oh the whole were much happier than Americans, I'd say they had a better standard of living.