3 ms·
That metric probably doesn't factor in cost of living, cost of education, cost of healthcare, etc. The US isn't particularly young. But regardless, I didn't mea
by olalonde 4y ago
That metric probably doesn't factor in cost of living, cost of education, cost of healthcare, etc. The US isn't particularly young. But regardless, I didn't mean that the US was not a good place to live. It does extremely well on most metrics. My point was that there are many countries, including ones that are tiny in comparison (definitely not "top dog"), that enjoy comparable standards of living. The US could retain its high standards of living without being the "top dog".
- ChrisLomont 4y ago>That metric probably doesn't factor in cost of living, cost of education, cost of healthcare, etc. Ito does, it's PPP adjusted. Just look it up instead of projecting flaws to obtain a result you desire. >My point was that there are many countries, including ones that are tiny in comparison (definitely not "top dog"), that enjoy a comparable standards of living. I agree completely. All the top countries would be good places to live, with tradeoffs here and there. But for most of the world, the US is a terrific alternative to where they are, at least if one wants to raise their standard of living.
- olalonde 4y agoThe US does indeed do better than most of the world. I just don't think it's fair to credit its success to its status as a "top dog" or superpower. In my opinion, the vast majority of the credit goes elsewhere, e.g. its (largely) free enterprise system, capacity to attract foreign talent, top universities, culture, etc.