Slumsville USA

[MARIS61]

In case you had any lingering, nostalgic delusions about what was once a great and proud country:

The Human Development Reports website summarizes this as "A composite index measuring deprivations in the three basic dimensions captured in the human development index — a long and healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living — and also capturing social exclusion." The formula for calculating it is:

HPI-2 =
P1: Probability at birth of not surviving to age 60 (times 100)
P2: Adults lacking functional literacy skills
P3: Population below income poverty line (50% of median adjusted household disposable income)
P4: Rate of long-term unemployment (lasting 12 months or more)
α: 3

The last report, 2007-2008, only has a ranking for 19 of the 22 countries with the highest Human Development Index. The ranking is as follows (with the country with the lowest amount of poverty at the top):

Ranking Country HPI-2 Probability at birth of not surviving to age 60 (%) People lacking functional literacy skills (%) Long-term unemployment (%) Population below 50% of median income (%)
1 Sweden 6.3 6.7 7.5 1.1 6.5
2 Norway 6.8 7.9 7.9 0.5 6.4
3 Netherlands 8.1 8.3 10.5 1.8 7.3
4 Finland 8.1 9.4 10.4 1.8 5.4
5 Denmark 8.2 10.3 9.6 0.8 5.6
6 Germany 10.3 8.6 14.4 5.8 8.4
7 Switzerland 10.7 7.2 15.9 1.5 7.6
8 Canada 10.9 8.1 14.6 0.5 11.4
9 Luxembourg 11.1 9.2 - 1.2 6.0
10 Austria 11.1 8.8 - 1.3 7.7
11 France 11.2 8.9 - 4.1 7.3
12 Japan 11.7 6.9 - 1.3 11.8
13 Australia 12.1 7.3 17.0 0.9 12.2
14 Belgium 12.4 9.3 18.4 4.6 8.0
15 Spain 12.5 7.7 - 2.2 14.2
16 United Kingdom 14.8 8.7 21.8 1.2 12.5
17 United States 15.4 11.6 20.0 0.4 17.0
18 Ireland 16.0 8.7 22.6 1.5 16.2
19 Italy 29.8 7.7 47.0 3.4 12.7

The countries ranked in the top 21 by HDI that are not on this list are Iceland and New Zealand.

Note that not all countries are included because data for the indicators are not always available. So positions could change if they were. Especially countries at the bottom could drop considerably if the list were extended. For specific values for other countries than the ones on the list, see source links below.

Indicators used are:

Probability at birth of not surviving to age 60 (% of cohort), 2000-2005. Varies from 7.1% for Japan to 11.8 for the USA. This is the indicator that is best known for all countries (including the ones not on the list). The USA has specific values associated with disease characteristics of poverty. Worse values start only at position 35 of the HDI, indicating that many countries could climb on an extended list based on this, knocking down lower ranked countries on the above list.
People lacking functional literacy skills (% of people scoring in the range called “Level 1” in the International Adult Literacy Survey, age 16-65, 1994-2003). Varies from 7.5% for Sweden to 47.0% for Italy. These figures are higher than most commonly cited illiteracy rates due to the choice of the literacy test.
Long-term unemployment (12 months or more, % of labour force), 2005. Varies from 0.4% for Norway to 5.0% for Germany. This indicator has by far the greatest variation, with a value as high as 9.3% at HDI position 37.
Population below 50% of median adjusted household disposable income (%), 1994-2002. Varies from 5.4% for Finland to 17% for the USA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Poverty_Index

Change is needed.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

What do all those countries on that list have in common?

 

[Buzz Killington]

Pretty damn good considering our GDP and population is probably bigger than all those countries combined.

 

[barfo]

Pretty damn good considering our GDP and population is probably bigger than all those countries combined.

a) you are wrong - our GDP is approximately 58% of the combined GDP of the other countries on that list, and just Japan, Germany, Italy and France combined have a larger population than the US; but
b) how is that relevant anyway?

barfo

 

[Buzz Killington]

a) you are wrong - our GDP is approximately 58% of the combined GDP of the other countries on that list, and just Japan, Germany, Italy and France combined have a larger population than the US; but
b) how is that relevant anyway?

barfo

Bigger countries, more problems. Larger divisions of wealth, more pollution, more industry, etc.

We produce more because we are a superpower and have a much larger population. Relatively speaking, to compare our quality of life to little shitbox countries where oil barons and wealthy industrialists go to hide out doesn't really mean much.

 

[Buzz Killington]

What do all those countries on that list have in common?

most of them are "white", not very diverse nations.

 

[GrandpaBlaze]

Probability at birth of not surviving to age 60
Long-term unemployment
Population below 50% of median adjusted household disposable income

Well this is easily resolved.

As the three factors are logically interrelated, we can address this issue easily.

Interrelation:
1. If you are unemployed, you don't have an income and hence, are probably below the disposable income level.
2. Being below the disposable income level often means inferior health care (hence, higher percentage of not surviving to 60).
3. If you have inferior health care, you may be less healthy making it more probable that you may be long-term unemployed.
4. Cycle back to #1.

Solution:
Find all those who are in poor health and ship them to a country with "free" health care.

Result:
With fewer people in poor health being unemployed, our employment rate rises, incomes rise and life expectancy rises.

[/tongue-in-cheek response]

Gramps...

 

[barfo]

Bigger countries, more problems. Larger divisions of wealth, more pollution, more industry, etc.

Then you would expect to see a correlation with size in that ranking, but eyeballing it, I don't see any.

We produce more because we are a superpower and have a much larger population. Relatively speaking, to compare our quality of life to little shitbox countries where oil barons and wealthy industrialists go to hide out doesn't really mean much.

If those are little shitbox countries, then I guess you think every other country on earth is a little shitbox country?

You don't have to say yes, it's rhetorical.

barfo

 

[Buzz Killington]

Then you would expect to see a correlation with size in that ranking, but eyeballing it, I don't see any.

If those are little shitbox countries, then I guess you think every other country on earth is a little shitbox country?

You don't have to say yes, it's rhetorical.

barfo

Then the correlation must because they are "white" countries, for the most part or a lack of "brown" people in the country. of course a few that are the exception.

 

[Buzz Killington]

The US being up that high despite having 3x the population of the next largest country (Japan) is pretty impressive though. And Japan, to me, is an anomoly as they have a very respectful and traditional culture. The US culture is pretty shitty and fucked up with a lack of respect and high crime rate, poor diet, and what not. For them to be ranked so high is really quite good.

 

[MARIS61]

The US being up that high despite having 3x the population of the next largest country (Japan) is pretty impressive though. And Japan, to me, is an anomoly as they have a very respectful and traditional culture. The US culture is pretty shitty and fucked up with a lack of respect and high crime rate, poor diet, and what not. For them to be ranked so high is really quite good.

There was a time a decade or so ago when we were near the top.

 

[barfo]

The US being up that high despite having 3x the population of the next largest country (Japan) is pretty impressive though. And Japan, to me, is an anomoly as they have a very respectful and traditional culture. The US culture is pretty shitty and fucked up with a lack of respect and high crime rate, poor diet, and what not. For them to be ranked so high is really quite good.

So basically you think this is a good ranking because it underestimates how shitty and fucked up we are?

barfo

 

[Buzz Killington]

There was a time a decade or so ago when we were near the top.

seems to me they take data from different times as their indicators? That's not really accurate.

*Probability at birth of not surviving to age 60 (% of cohort), 2000-2005. Varies from 7.1% for Japan to 11.8 for the USA. This is the indicator that is best known for all countries (including the ones not on the list). The USA has specific values associated with disease characteristics of poverty. Worse values start only at position 35 of the HDI, indicating that many countries could climb on an extended list based on this, knocking down lower ranked countries on the above list.

*People lacking functional literacy skills (% of people scoring in the range called “Level 1” in the International Adult Literacy Survey, age 16-65, 1994-2003). Varies from 7.5% for Sweden to 47.0% for Italy. These figures are higher than most commonly cited illiteracy rates due to the choice of the literacy test.

*Long-term unemployment (12 months or more, % of labour force), 2005. Varies from 0.4% for Norway to 5.0% for Germany. This indicator has by far the greatest variation, with a value as high as 9.3% at HDI position 37.

*Population below 50% of median adjusted household disposable income (%), 1994-2002. Varies from 5.4% for Finland to 17% for the USA.

 

[barfo]

Then the correlation must because they are "white" countries, for the most part or a lack of "brown" people in the country. of course a few that are the exception.

I guess if "white" and "big" are the only two possibilities, then if it isn't bigness it must be whiteness.

Something tells me there might be more variables, however.

barfo

 

[Buzz Killington]

So basically you think this is a good ranking because it underestimates how shitty and fucked up we are?

barfo

Yes.

I think its surprising we rank so high given how big we are and how fucked our country is in terms of food, overeating, overconsumption.

 

[Buzz Killington]

I guess if "white" and "big" are the only two possibilities, then if it isn't bigness it must be whiteness.

Something tells me there might be more variables, however.

barfo

Perhaps not. At a quick glance, they are mostly "white" countries. No african, asian (except Japan, but they're usually lighter skinned asians!) , middle eastern countries really.

 

[ABM]

Yes.

I think its surprising we rank so high given how big we are and how fucked our country is in terms of food, overeating, overconsumption.

Yet another argument for national health care.

 

[Buzz Killington]

Yet another argument for national health care.

or against. for such a huge behemoth, we're actually doing quite well!

 

[Buzz Killington]

Its like passing out free bread. You do it in North Dakota...everything is going to go smoothly and organized. Small state, small crowd, a general level of respect for mankind!

You do it in California- its going to be a clusterfuck because there are more poor, more people and people will just stomp on each other to get the bread.

 

[ABM]

..or against.

Hence, my winky.

 

[Buzz Killington]

ah. I'm more used to

 

[barfo]

Perhaps not. At a quick glance, they are mostly "white" countries. No african, asian (except Japan, but they're usually lighter skinned asians!) , middle eastern countries really.

Well, if they are all white, that can hardly explain the relative rankings *within* the list, can it?

barfo

 

[Buzz Killington]

Well, if they are all white, that can hardly explain the relative rankings *within* the list, can it?

barfo

there must be a third variable, based on wealthy industrialists and tax havens.

 

[barfo]

there must be a third variable, based on wealthy industrialists and tax havens.

I guess if you are saying the US is a tax haven full of wealthy industrialists, then that might explain it. Certainly Sweden and France and many of the other countries ahead of us don't fit that description.

barfo

 

[Buzz Killington]

or that whiteness is necessary but not sufficient.

 

[Buzz Killington]

What about skiing. Many of these countries have GREAT SKIING?

 

[Buzz Killington]

oh wait, the correlation is George W. Bush.

 

[barfo]

or that whiteness is necessary but not sufficient.

Necessary for what?

barfo

 

[Buzz Killington]

inclusion on the list, aside from the standard deviations!

 

[barfo]

What about skiing. Many of these countries have GREAT SKIING?

Finally. You were getting close with the whiteness, but I wasn't sure whether you were going to figure out that snow is white.

barfo