OtherGround Forums "Socialist" countries dominate quality of life

Edited: 8 days ago
8/18/09
Posts: 1324
Le Shat V2 -
My cat is cuter than your cat - 

It's funny how much people get triggered by a study's findings. This forum is full of guys who shout about snowflakes and cry babies and getting triggered, and yet just posting the study results sends everyone into a tizzy. 


Goodness you parrots are stupid.

"Triggered" is when liberals say words, phrases and concepts are so offensive that they should be banned and not allowed in "safe spaces". Before it was just liberal campuses, now your politicians are doing the same in saying Trump should not be allowed to have rallies, Fox News should not be on the air, and conservative speaker should be banned from social media.


Having an open debate about the merits of a study and the principles of those standards is what reasonable adults do when their philosophies are diametrically opposed.

I think even a simple minded sheeple like you can understand that. (I really don't, you'll just keep wallowing in ignorance)

Le Shat

lol, you are trying way too hard.

I love that you are so blinded by team politics that you think one side owns a term against the other side.

"Triggered is only a thing liberals do!!!!"

man, you guys are funny.

8 days ago
11/20/13
Posts: 8574
Sandy Pantz -
ksacs revenge - 
Sandy Pantz -
ksacs revenge - 
Sandy Pantz -
Ill Portents - 
Ill Portents - 
Sandy Pantz -
Ill Portents -
Sandy Pantz - 
Ill Portents - 
Sandy Pantz - 
Ill Portents - 
Al Cappucino - 
Ill Portents -
Steve4192 - 
Thats fukin illegal - 

so basically what they are trying to say is quality of life is better in cold climate, predominantly white, socialist country's 


Size matters too.

It's easier to finance all those public programs when you don't have to provide them to hundreds of millions of citizens. The top nine countries on that list COMBINED have a smaller population than the United States. Germany at #10 is the one with a population in excess of 25 million.

It also helps that Uncle Sam subsidizes all of their national defense. They can all live in peace and sleep well at night because they know that if the worst happens and someone tries to violate their national sovereignty, Big Bro 'Murica will swoop in to save them.

Is this one of those situations where you DON'T want to talk about "per capita"?

 

Is this one of those situations where you DON'T want to acknowledge his entire post?


The first half of his post, the answer is "per capita". The U.S. has a higher GDP per capita than all but two of those countries, therefore despite the population size, should be more able to pay more per citizen on those things than almost any of those countries can.

The second half of his post, yawn. Nobody is forcing the U.S. to spend an absurd amount on our military, or to (as has happened in the latest budget) increase it beyond what even the Pentagon said they needed.

Hope this helps.

Now maybe you can explain why you guys fucking LOVE to talk about per capita when it comes to, say, black crime, but mysteriously switched to focusing only on absolute numbers in this case. Because I'm really curious.


If Trump cut the military budget, retards like you would say it's evidence that he is a Russian stooge, just like when he criticized NATO.

So he's not doing it because he's afraid Democrats will criticize him? lol

 


No, I'm saying you're retarded.

Hope this helps, retard

Yet you're the one saying we can't have the quality of life those countries do because we are opting to use all our money to protect them militarily, instead of raising the quality of life of our own citizens.

And you Trumptards are okay with this? What happened to America First?

Except I didn't say that.  You're making that up because you're dishonest.  And retarded.

 

Hope this helps.

Okay. My bad. I'm deeply sorry if I misunderstood what point you were trying to make. 

So, what is the reason that we make more money per capita than those other countries yet our citizens have a lower quality of life by virtually every metric you can think of? 


Sandy? You there?


I don't have a lower quality of life than the citizens of any of those countries, so the question is as idiotic as the OP. I wouldn't choose a single one of those nations over the USA and apparently neither would you, or else you would leave. So the real question is, despite your ability to leave, why do you choose to stay in a place that you believe provides you with a lower quality of life? Masochism?

It's really too bad you guys didn't leave back when Obama was "destroying" the country. I mean, why did you stay? That's pretty stupid, right?


When did I ever say citizens in other countries had better quality of lives under Obama?

I guess you had nowhere else to go.


Correct, the USA was still better than every other country. Glad to see you finally smartening up.

Smarten up? I had to take an idiot's view to even reach your level.

8 days ago
4/24/07
Posts: 39474

OP is obviously a white supremacist. He just said that predominantly white countries are better than less white countries. What a fucking racist. 

8 days ago
8/7/19
Posts: 43
My cat is cuter than your cat - 
Le Shat V2 -
My cat is cuter than your cat - 

It's funny how much people get triggered by a study's findings. This forum is full of guys who shout about snowflakes and cry babies and getting triggered, and yet just posting the study results sends everyone into a tizzy. 


Goodness you parrots are stupid.

"Triggered" is when liberals say words, phrases and concepts are so offensive that they should be banned and not allowed in "safe spaces". Before it was just liberal campuses, now your politicians are doing the same in saying Trump should not be allowed to have rallies, Fox News should not be on the air, and conservative speaker should be banned from social media.


Having an open debate about the merits of a study and the principles of those standards is what reasonable adults do when their philosophies are diametrically opposed.

I think even a simple minded sheeple like you can understand that. (I really don't, you'll just keep wallowing in ignorance)

Le Shat

lol, you are trying way too hard.

I love that you are so blinded by team politics that you think one side owns a term against the other side.

"Triggered is only a thing liberals do!!!!"

man, you guys are funny.


I simply gave the factual history of how the word came into our current political vernacular. Your inability to acknowledge the truth is irrelevant.

Thank you for attempting a coherent thought.

Le Shat
8 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 49263
Ill Portents -
rubbermonkey -
Le Shat V2 -
Ill Portents - 
Al Cappucino -

I find it retarded that people who have suceeded in the greatest country/economy/freeest country in the history of the world, want to change it so badly.

OP obviously has reaped the benefits of our economy as he has been able to post every 15 minutes of his workday, every day, for years.

 

 

Is this one of those situations where you DON'T want to acknowledge my entire post?

If our country is making more money per capita than almost all of those countries but our citizens still have a lower quality of life than theirs...shouldn't something change? 

Do you believe in improvement?


Yes and to have improvement you would follow philosophies and policies that have a proven track record of actually improving people's lives.

These would be western values and free market policies.
You would lower the tax burden, grant educational freedom, provide incentives for entrepreneurs and business as a whole to grow, etc...


You would not follow socialist policies that have been a complete failure. You would not allow a centrally planned economy as that is a proven failure, nor would you burden your citizens with regressive tax policies, you would not force them into failing public schools, you would not make creating a business a bureaucratic nightmare, you would not limit free speech or personal liberty.


In short you have one philosophy that is a proven success in practice. On the other hand you have a philosophy that is a proven failure in practice. However liberals like to compare the actual practice of the first with the philosophy of the latter.

They know that their ideas have failed, but they are too emotionally invested to admit it. If they did then they would have to admit that their world view and personal failings are their own, not societies, and they are simply too weak to face the truth. Thus people screaming in the streets, attacking others, hiding behind false claims of racism, sexism, etc... It's all a front to keep themselves safe from reality.

Hopefully this helps you come out from the dark despair of liberalism and join us in the warm, enlightened light of liberty.

Le Shat

Ho-Le shat!!!!!

 

Ill portents/Orcus just got nuked! No coming back from that. 

BOOOOOM

Except that the countries with both higher and lower GDPs per capita than the U.S. that have higher quality of life than the U.S. by every metric, have the same "socialist" policies and programs that some Dems are pushing for. 

So are we going to ignore that those countries have other differences that allow them to rank higher (for now). Or that they were founded on capitalism, and after building up began to shift towards socialism, which has been bringing their countries down so they have begun to make shifts to lessen their socialistic policies. Or that the people from those countries who move to the US measure happier than the people who stayed in those countries.

 

There's a good book called Debunking Utopia which I recommend to anyone interested in looking into those Nordic countries and comparing them amongst themselves (past and present) and the US

8 days ago
12/10/09
Posts: 15062

I have OP on ignore, but let me guess; list contains a bunch of non-socialist countries like Sweden?

8 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 813

Anyone else ever notice that leftists define their "reality" based on "surveys" and "polls" and "studies." 

They present pseudo-intellectual information like this, with their noses in the air, as if it is actual reality. 

This isn't science. It isn't reality. In the countries on this list, you can be arrested for what you post on the internet. Your freedom is significantly curtailed. They don't have the population, GDP, or the racial diversity that exists in the United States.

Anyone can select a cherry picked list of criteria, and then claim that these are the criteria that define "quality of life." 

You are falling into the trap by accepting the premise.

 

Oh, and let's play a game, and since biased lists like this are so reflective or reality... where does the U.S. fit on this, if you exclude Blacks from the dataset. 

 

Try it, and be amazed. Oh wait, let me guess.... THAZ RAZIZ. 

8 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 8864
OP doesn't know what socialism is or what countries are/aren't socialist.
8 days ago
10/14/02
Posts: 4201
misleading as all of these are capitalistic countries
but they do have more socialistic policies then usa

which also has some
all that being said

its dumb to deny that they benefit from america protecting them
but its also dumb to deny that america has parts of it that look
almost 3rd world like.

this proviety is the reason people elected trump
to .....make america great again

the saying is there for a reason

and lets not forget leaders also have different views on things
like the leader of denmark said we are a free market society

and on the other hand
trump's bail out of farmers is a pretty socialist thing to do

so its all mixed up in reality
8 days ago
1/9/19
Posts: 1778

LOL @ "only USA has immigrants"

 

ALL those FIRST WORLD NATIONS have immigrants yet they ALL OUTPERFORMED USA on Quality of Life.

 

well I have been telling everyone that a HEALTHY BALANCE of Capitalism/Socialism leads to a BIG WIN quality of life!

8 days ago
1/24/16
Posts: 1213

OP keep up the good work. 

8 days ago
1/12/11
Posts: 15904
My cat is cuter than your cat -

It's funny how much people get triggered by a study's findings. This forum is full of guys who shout about snowflakes and cry babies and getting triggered, and yet just posting the study results sends everyone into a tizzy. 

It's not the study. It is the OP.

 

If someone right leaning had posted this, the conversation would have gone much different. I dare say, maybe even discussions about the metrics, where the U.S. could improve. There would still be arguing about any list that doesn't show the country that the greatest number of immigrants in the world want to go to in the top 3 but it would be a vastly different discussion. 

 

Instead, OP with his clear and obvious history, posts this and those same people that would have a healthy discussion see the intent in what he is doing and go on the attack.

 

Edited: 8 days ago
1/17/03
Posts: 15076

Scandinavian countries dont consider themselves socialists

8 days ago
12/6/16
Posts: 3932
Erik Apple -

Scandinavian countries dont consider themselves socialists

Sorry Bernie Bros But Nordic Countries Are Not Socialist

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/07/08/sorry-bernie-bros-but-nordic-countries-are-not-socialist/#2dcb476e74ad

 

 

Edited: 8 days ago
12/6/16
Posts: 3933

 

SWEDISH EX-PRIME MINISTER REBUKES BERNIE: SOCIALISM ONLY DESTROYS

https://mises.org/power-market/swedish-ex-prime-minister-rebukes-bernie-socialism-only-destroys

 

I sometimes think Orcus is controlled opposition because threads like these only serve to show how stupid the left's talking points are.

 

In addition, I think most American's would think the fact that you could be fined/arrested for offensive language in most of those countries on the list makes them less than desirable to live in.

They also go against the idea of multiculturalism as most of the wealth and high standards of living that were created in these countries were done so when they had extremely homogenous populations.

 

Most importantly, take away US military hegemony and do you think these countries would have the extra funds to spend on welfare programs?  I mean Sweden has historically been at war with Russia, but right now all of those countries safety and economic interests are literally guaranteed by the US military, essentially giving them a huge subsidy.

8 days ago
10/22/14
Posts: 5269
Erik Apple -

Scandinavian countries dont consider themselves socialists

Canada is even less socialist than they are. Canada is more capitalist than the majority of countries on earth. 

8 days ago
10/22/14
Posts: 5270
CharlesMartel -

 

SWEDISH EX-PRIME MINISTER REBUKES BERNIE: SOCIALISM ONLY DESTROYS

https://mises.org/power-market/swedish-ex-prime-minister-rebukes-bernie-socialism-only-destroys

 

I sometimes think Orcus is controlled opposition because threads like these only serve to show how stupid the left's talking points are.

 

In addition, I think most American's would think the fact that you could be fined/arrested for offensive language in most of those countries on the list makes them less than desirable to live in.

They also go against the idea of multiculturalism as most of the wealth and high standards of living that were created in these countries were done so when they had extremely homogenous populations.

 

Most importantly, take away US military hegemony and do you think these countries would have the extra funds to spend on welfare programs?  I mean Sweden has historically been at war with Russia, but right now all of those countries safety and economic interests are literally guaranteed by the US military, essentially giving them a huge subsidy.

Remove USA and russia will not attack Nato. 

Edited: 8 days ago
12/6/16
Posts: 3934
Jayn200 -
CharlesMartel -

 

SWEDISH EX-PRIME MINISTER REBUKES BERNIE: SOCIALISM ONLY DESTROYS

https://mises.org/power-market/swedish-ex-prime-minister-rebukes-bernie-socialism-only-destroys

 

I sometimes think Orcus is controlled opposition because threads like these only serve to show how stupid the left's talking points are.

 

In addition, I think most American's would think the fact that you could be fined/arrested for offensive language in most of those countries on the list makes them less than desirable to live in.

They also go against the idea of multiculturalism as most of the wealth and high standards of living that were created in these countries were done so when they had extremely homogenous populations.

 

Most importantly, take away US military hegemony and do you think these countries would have the extra funds to spend on welfare programs?  I mean Sweden has historically been at war with Russia, but right now all of those countries safety and economic interests are literally guaranteed by the US military, essentially giving them a huge subsidy.

Remove USA and russia will not attack Nato. 

Is this a serious post?  This is like saying remove South Korea and North Korea will not attack South Korea.

Of course Russia would not attack Nato if the USA was removed because Nato would not exist.

You have to be really historically and economically blind to think Russia wouldn't attack.  Why is Russia in Ukraine? Why is it threatening the Baltic countries?

Why did all these wars happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_between_Russia_and_Sweden ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Finnish_wars ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Polish_War

 

The only reason Russia isn't asserting influence in those reasons is US protection.

 

 

8 days ago
10/22/14
Posts: 5271
CharlesMartel -
Jayn200 -
CharlesMartel -

 

SWEDISH EX-PRIME MINISTER REBUKES BERNIE: SOCIALISM ONLY DESTROYS

https://mises.org/power-market/swedish-ex-prime-minister-rebukes-bernie-socialism-only-destroys

 

I sometimes think Orcus is controlled opposition because threads like these only serve to show how stupid the left's talking points are.

 

In addition, I think most American's would think the fact that you could be fined/arrested for offensive language in most of those countries on the list makes them less than desirable to live in.

They also go against the idea of multiculturalism as most of the wealth and high standards of living that were created in these countries were done so when they had extremely homogenous populations.

 

Most importantly, take away US military hegemony and do you think these countries would have the extra funds to spend on welfare programs?  I mean Sweden has historically been at war with Russia, but right now all of those countries safety and economic interests are literally guaranteed by the US military, essentially giving them a huge subsidy.

Remove USA and russia will not attack Nato. 

Is this a serious post?  This is like saying remove South Korea and North Korea will not attack South Korea.

Of course Russia would not attack Nato if the USA was removed because Nato would not exist.

You have to be really historically and economically blind to think Russia wouldn't attack.  Why is Russia in Ukraine? Why is it threatening the Baltic countries?

Why did all these wars happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_between_Russia_and_Sweden ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Finnish_wars ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Polish_War

 

The only reason Russia isn't asserting influence in those reasons is US protection.

 

 

I didn't know ukraine was in nato.

Nato countries excluding USA spend a combined 4-5 times what Russia does on military spending. They have more of virtually every kind of military resource as well. 

Why do you think Russia would attack Nato ( minus usa)?

 

Edited: 8 days ago
1/23/19
Posts: 20

it won’t get any better under Trump. You have to admit though It was the same quality of life under Obama, you guys had your shot. Name one thing he accomplished to improve quality of life here? Obamacare was a joke and complete failure. I had it, it sucked. 

8 days ago
12/6/16
Posts: 3936
Jayn200 -
CharlesMartel -
Jayn200 -
CharlesMartel -

 

SWEDISH EX-PRIME MINISTER REBUKES BERNIE: SOCIALISM ONLY DESTROYS

https://mises.org/power-market/swedish-ex-prime-minister-rebukes-bernie-socialism-only-destroys

 

I sometimes think Orcus is controlled opposition because threads like these only serve to show how stupid the left's talking points are.

 

In addition, I think most American's would think the fact that you could be fined/arrested for offensive language in most of those countries on the list makes them less than desirable to live in.

They also go against the idea of multiculturalism as most of the wealth and high standards of living that were created in these countries were done so when they had extremely homogenous populations.

 

Most importantly, take away US military hegemony and do you think these countries would have the extra funds to spend on welfare programs?  I mean Sweden has historically been at war with Russia, but right now all of those countries safety and economic interests are literally guaranteed by the US military, essentially giving them a huge subsidy.

Remove USA and russia will not attack Nato. 

Is this a serious post?  This is like saying remove South Korea and North Korea will not attack South Korea.

Of course Russia would not attack Nato if the USA was removed because Nato would not exist.

You have to be really historically and economically blind to think Russia wouldn't attack.  Why is Russia in Ukraine? Why is it threatening the Baltic countries?

Why did all these wars happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_between_Russia_and_Sweden ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Finnish_wars ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Polish_War

 

The only reason Russia isn't asserting influence in those reasons is US protection.

 

 

I didn't know ukraine was in nato.

Nato countries excluding USA spend a combined 4-5 times what Russia does on military spending. They have more of virtually every kind of military resource as well. 

Why do you think Russia would attack Nato ( minus usa)?

 

Did you think through your post?

Of course Ukraine isn't in NATO, that's why Russia is all up in their ass.

Did you ask yourself why Russia is in Ukraine? Or why Russia engaged in all the wars I previously posted?

Russia seeks to assert economic influence and strengthen their military position.  They needed ports, so they invaded Crimea. They don't produce anything of value so most of their economy is based upon natural resources (which those countries have) and pipelines (which would go through those countries).

8 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 81184
"Sweden - Up 1 from # 3 in 2018"

With maybe just a tad more rape Sweden can move up another spot next year!

8 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 1770

The US system allows for a financially successful person to retain more of their own individual wealth.  It's easy, however, for people to fall through the cracks, as there are minimal safety nets. As a consequence, the rich are getting richer and the poor stay poor. Look at the increase in total wealth held by the top 1% of the population over time as a readout. 

The question is how many social safety nets are required to facilitate an optimal society. If you go too far with a punitive taxation system, then there's no incentive to be entrepreneurial.

 

8 days ago
12/6/16
Posts: 3937

Also, everyone should know what type of thread this is:

https://www.mixedmartialarts.com/forums/OtherGround/Share-Blue-media-leak-epstein:2785594?pc=83

8 days ago
2/4/06
Posts: 13749
Ill Portents -
The 2019 Best Countries rankings, formed in partnership with BAV Group, a unit of global marketing communications company VMLY&R, and the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, are based on a study that surveyed more than 20,000 global citizens from four regions to assess perceptions of 80 countries on 75 different metrics. The Quality of Life subranking is based on an equally weighted average of scores from nine country attributes that relate to quality of life in a country: affordable, a good job market, economically stable, family friendly, income equality, politically stable, safe, well-developed public education system and well-developed public health system. The Quality of Life subranking score had a 17 percent weight in the overall Best Countries ranking.
 
 
1. Canada - No change for past 4 years
2. Sweden - Up 1 from # 3 in 2018
3. Denmark - Down 1 from # 2 in 2018
4. Norway - No change from 2018
5. Switzerland - Up 1 from # 6 in 2018
6. Finland - Up 1 from # 7 in 2018
7. Australia - Down 2 from # 5 in 2018
8. Netherlands - No change from 2018
9. New Zealand - No change from 2018
10. Germany - No change from 2018
 
 For the fourth consecutive year, Canada ranks No. 1 overall for providing a good quality of life. Survey respondents view the North American country as No. 1 for both being politically stable and having a well-developed public education system, and No. 2 for having a good job market, a perception supported by independent research. The North American country is seen as possessing the fifth best well-developed public health care system. In fact, Canada is rated in the top 10 in all but one of the nine attributes, affordability, where Asian countries dominate.
 
 
For the second year in a row, the United States ranks No. 17 overall by survey respondents for providing a good quality of life. Its highest ranking is for its job market, where it ranks first. Its lowest ranking came in affordability, where survey responses placed it No. 56.

Hey stalwart