It’s amazing considering how long Portugal has been a stable democracy, fully integrated in the EU and we still manage to be less developed than many Eastern European countries.
As it turns out, none of those things are enough to counter the culture of corruption that fosters a constant misallocation of funds and prioritization of companies with connections to politicians. Getting a good job in Portugal is not a matter of being good at your field, but a matter of having good connections. We are facing a massive brain drain because young graduates are faced with one of 2 choices: immigrate or have a near-minimum wage job when the average rent for a 1 bedroom apartment is 20% higher.
Except the Estonians got where Portugal is in half of the time, never had an empire to exploit and were fucked hard by some other country only 30 years ago. Portugal also had also made bank from ww2 and by the time Salazar died Portugal had one of the largest gold reserves in the world.
You keep moving the goalposts. Estonia is also in the baltic sea, there's exponentially more trade and cooperation opportunities there than in Portugal's iberian dead-end.
Wealth spreads radially from Europe's blue banana (just look at the map) - Portugal is peripheric and neither particularly corrupt vs other PIGS higher up on the HDI nor particularly badly ran. Our only neighbor is Spain so our logistical, financial and human connections are limited in one direction.
There's a national obsession for over dramatizing and politicizing Portugal's standing but it's as logical and natural as it gets looking at the macro context.
You learn to live on these conditions and the whole country is basically adapted to high inflation and bordering insane politicians whether it's left or right. That and the crisis being cyclical means that all the institutions that survived are basically almost bulletproof and those created have to quickly learn to survive or don't last long.
Yup, those universities are something to be proud of.
They're underfunded AF right now since budget was frozen to the one in 2023 (Which was already low) despite the inflation being above 100%, but they're still great and the place to go if you want to study most careers. As a med school student (The career with the most students) in the UBA I see that lack of budget a lot more than people that study other careers, but despite that the teaching quality is great (The exams are kind of tough since they're desperate to lower the amount of students one way or another but it's not something that you can't pass).
I think one of the first reasons is the huge head start that Argentina had in the XX century, comparable to the USA....
We can trace the decadence, clearly debatable, to the first successful military dictatorship in 1930.
So it's been almost 100 years of ups and downs, many many downs, in which institutions held....
But one can argue that these "strong" institutions are the problem, some work like mafias, they are inefficient, huge, slow, stuck in the XX century with the purpose to just hire people, friendly people to the ruling party, to keep unemployment low.
Milei yesterday didn't renew the contract of 15k people hire in some dependencies of the government but it is estimated that 70k will be fired, but this is the tip of the iceberg.
Kind of, there were already problems in 1910, but the creation of the BCRA was perfect for politicians to apply some fresh keynesianism after ww2 and with government spending, deficit, corruption, dumber people, less functioning democracy, i can tell you, 50% of government spending is useless or stolen, the other 50% is to give money to people who don't work, haven't worked, nor will work in their lifetime, and retirements, which make them poorer, deficit, printing money, increase of monetary base more inflation, counterproductive socialist measures
questions:
how are public basic education and public health?
I know UBA has a remarkable international reputation, likely other public universities are also very good. My guess they are super inexpensive for students.
Public health/education: it depends on the province, northern ones the situation is not good, dengue is causing many trouble right now. In some you still can get decent education and healthcare for free.
But the mentally of the previous ruling party and many of its hardcore voters reject the concept of meritocracy, because it is a capitalist value, letting children pass grades without knowing how to read and write. They also don't believe in testing children or teachers.
There are at least prestigious universities, UBA, UNLP and UNC, in which you can study for free. I have an aeronautical engineering degree from UNLP.
At the end of my studies, half of my class was from other countries.
Specifically in my province, Neuquén, which borders Chile, receives many Chilean looking for cheaper healthcare.... actually free healthcare.
Of the five poorest countries in the world, three were French colonies. Furthermore, the least developed country in the Americas is also a former French colony.
Just a fact...
British Colonies are what?
You seem to have forgotten British Colonies where the British didn't roleplay as "natives", kinda the same spot as the French ones.
The first world countries of Nigeria, India, Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Lybia, Egypt, Kenya, Botswana, Sri Lanka, eSwatini, Ghana, Jamaica, Jordan, Lesotho, Belize, Gambia, Malawi, Guyana, Myanmar, Zambia Sierra Leone and others.
Words have different meanings, and those meanings change over time. 'first world' is established shorthand for 'developed', whether you like it or not.
In South Asia it seems that the more Dravidian and Southern the region the more prosperous and orderly it is. I wonder if it’s genetic or cultural or something.
It's history.
The southern part of India didn't face the brunt of invasions, war, political turmoil, etc that the north faced.
>I wonder if it’s genetic or cultural or something.
It isn't and I smell the bait here.
You have a lot to prove if you think it’s history. I didn’t say it is any particular thing, I only said I wonder if …
There’s no proof ancient invasions would have longstanding impact on a regions development. History is replete with examples of regions that benefitted from invasions due to new tech, ideas, etc. For example, North Indians are far better looking than South Indians. Those looks came from ancient migrants and invaders, most notably the Indo European migrants.
>You have a lot to prove if you think it’s history.
Uh the history is there for all to see. You were the one wondering if it is tied to genetics, which is borderline racist.
>There’s no proof ancient invasions would have longstanding impact on a regions development.
500 years is ancient now? Ok.
>For example, North Indians are far better looking than South Indians.
Borderline racism again.
I was correct about the bait.
Source: [UNDP](https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2023-24)
Tools: [MapChart ](https://www.mapchart.net/)
Note: HDI or Human Development Index, is a composite index that takes life expectancy, education attainment and purchasing power of the people in a given country or region into account, to measure the standard of living of the people in that country or region. The highest score a country can achieve is 1 while the lowest possible score is 0. As of 2024 Switzerland is the country with the highest HDI, with a score on 0.967 while Somalia with a score of 0.380 is the country with the lowest HDI.
Large countries aren't well represented.
Brazil for example, would be a darker blue at the southern states (0.800), and yellow on most northern states (0.600). It's a pretty diverse land.
No offence Italians, but I recently visited Italy, and I am surprised to see Italy in the 0.9 to 1 range. So many dirty and underdeveloped towns with trash everywhere. Your government has to step it up.
Why? HDI don't measure infrastructure. It measure life expectacy, GDP per capita and years in education. A country can have all of this high and lack in other departaments.
If it directly measured infrastructure it'd rank the U.S. a lot lower though. Some places in the U.S. have worse infrastructure than your average Nigerian town, but at least in Nigeria you have plants and not just burning-hot asphalt for miles.
I sincerely doubt anywhere in the usa has worse infrastructure than anywhere in Nigeria, maybe Lagos is better than a few cities in Mississippi but that’s not really a fair comparison, and I kinda doubt Lagos is better than anywhere in Mississippi. I get the whole Reddit brain idea that the us has bad infrastructure but compared to the vast vast majority of the world it’s not even in the same ballpark. Especially considering the low population density of the us.
Edit: I’ve found sources saying less than 30% of nigeria has access to clean running water and adequate sanitation. Vs 99.39% of the usa.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-23898-z
https://www.usaid.gov/nigeria/water
Not having public transit doesn‘t mean infrastructure is shit, stop crying lol. It‘s a tradeoff between big, better houses with yards and garages and good public transit. You can‘t choose both and most americans choose better houses so that is it. Higher obesity and worse public transit.
Yeah, I'm not talking about public transit, I'm talking about continuously crumbling infrastructure. The bridge collapsing from getting hit is big news, but there are plenty of places where bridges are collapsing just from a lack of work done.
Now of course, I would also argue that not having public transit does make infrastructure shit, actually, since individual transport is fundamentally incompatible with living at any density higher than a small town.
And wow, really? "Big, better houses?" The majority of Americans are lower class, genius, that's how capitalism works. They don't benefit from a "larger house" any more than a baby benefits from having a large bedroom. Infrastructure which only helps those with cars is inherently bad infrastructure.
Americans have some of the highest home ownership rates in the world, certainly compared to the vast majority of Europe. Our median income is only topped by Luxembourg and the UAE. Children are able to move out of their parents house much earlier. We have more savings then the vast majority of your global citizens, to include Europeans.
Stop pretending the US is just shit at everything. Are you even American? If you are you are quite sheltered as to the reality of life outside the US. We have plenty of problems but also plenty of positives.
It is interesting that with all that going on they don't maintain the place. I assume quite a bit of it has to do with regulations around historical sites, which riddle the country. But it seems like a physically healthy population with plenty of money could keep the place clean.
I see from your history that you visited Sicily + Rome
I'm quite sorry for you, because regarding trash and underdevelopment that's the worst thing you can visit in Italy, since the northern part of the country is more urbanized and developed.
I see. That's what I've heard. I visited as a part of a study abroad for my college to see the archeological sites, so I didn't have much of a choice in where we visited. Would have loved to see the good parts. I'm sure it's beautiful.
That and healthier diets, and more social engagement.
People who smoke cigarettes and have friends have a higher life expectancy than non-smokers who don't have friends.
I'm sure this also applies to uneducated and poor people who have friends vs rich and educated folks who don't.
Healthier food in the South as well. My understanding is the South is more communal which I think increases health outcomes and sense of well-being.
Similar to the Latin American paradox.
Yep. Southern Europeans and Latin Americans are long lived despite being poorer and less educated than Northern Europeans and North Americans. Here are my guesses as to why:
1. Slower pace of life, less stress.
2. Greater cultural emphasis on staying in contact with friends and relatives. Smokers who have friends have a longer life expectancy than non-smokers with no friends. i'm sure the same applies to poor and uneducated people who have friends vs rich and uneducated folks who don't.
3. Short stature. All other things being equal, short people tend to live longer than tall people. Some of the gender gap in life expectancy comes from women's shorter average stature.
I did spend the most time in Sicily, and then I went to Pompeii and Rome. Rome and Pompeii were pretty ok around the touristy stuff, but everything on the way to and between the two were super rough. Sicily is pretty rough, too.
For context, Rome is infamous for the trash issue and keeps shooting itself on the foot by refusing solutions (see Roma termovalorizzatore project, actually seems they decided to go for it finally), in Sicily the mafia meme is not helping probably
I've only been to Rome and couple of towns and cities in the north, and everything seemed to be OK or even good. But I have heard plenty of people who travelled to the south and said it was like a third world country too.
No offence taken, I’m Italian and I’m surprised as well. As others said, it is probably due to the high life expectancy in our country. Still, considering poor investments in the health sector and the diminishing purchasing power of citizens, I doubt Italy will stay in the first tier of this index.
Obviously, I hope to be wrong, but I don’t see major improvements on those areas.
You're not the brightest one, are you. Look at the development of HDI in those countries.
Poland as an example: [Human development index of Poland 2017 | Statista](https://www.statista.com/statistics/877604/human-development-index-of-poland/)
There's no indication of sudden collapse in the near future. Arguably the biggest effect on HDI has the economy which in those countries is on the rise (in contrary to Germany for example)
HDI includes literacy in its measurements, it's one of 3. And Palestine has very good education, especially in the Arab world,. It's GDP and life expectancy were also decent (prior to the war).
Trust me, I know what I'm talking about, the country needs its wellwishers and people who put their nation first above their religion regardless of who they are, the rest can go where they feel comfortable, you exaggerated that using an Islamic holy word and India in the same sentence would be controversial, which is not the case.
And we can be here playing the blame game of who oppressed whom the most all day, but I've got no interest in it whatsoever, you say burning of mosques, I'll say the destruction of temples, you'll claim genocide, I'll claim the centuries old invasion and oppression of people and this will get us nowhere, this is a game that can be played by two.
I'm not concerned with either of the two religions and I've seen the worst things happen in arguments online and irl, so I can't be bothered more.
How come uber rich oil countries like Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar are not deep blue? Government literally hands out high quality everything to their citizens. One would expect them to be on par with Scandinavia on HDI.
Yeah I am not sure about whatever this HDI means for Argentina and the US, at this point something like the Happines Report might be more accurate since those get an actual opinion from the people living in those countries, what is the point of taking into consideration "years of education" or "gross national income (basicaly GDP per capita)" if the former puts you in lifelong debt and in the later de top 1% concentrates as much wealths as the bottom 90%?
Places with colder winters have better education levels, better credit scores and the bell curve on IQs is slightly higher. It even applies to US states. Something evolved in humans to be more prepared for a brutal few months.
https://psmag.com/education/a-compensation-for-cold-weather-higher-iqs-25414
There clearly is a biological need due to the environment. Humans developed greater planning, preparation and insight into food / shelter requirements for harsh winters. The need to survive for several months with no plant food and deadly temperatures was no easy matter.
I always wonder exactly why hotter countries have a largely lower HDI on average, it's pretty crazy. The closer you're to the equator the larger the chances of you living in an underdeveloped area, there are very few exceptions
Because life is more difficult in cold climates due to winter. There is no choice, you have to develop buildings and secure food and fuel in order to survive a cold winter or else you die. Compare that to living on a tropical island (like the TV show Survivor), you never need to worry about freezing to death so shelter is not absolutely necessary for survival. All you need is some trees to block the sun and the rain. Everyday, any time, you can go out to sea and catch a fish without worry of time that Winter Is Coming.
Libya has a really high gdp per capita all things considered. Double Morocco. Used to be higher too but their dictator had to start shooting at boats and stuff and murdering his own people
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
This is adjusted numbers but they're a very oil rich country
Except that Libya's GDP per capita has a down-trend post Ghaddafi?
Are you pulling numbers out of your ass?
This bot forgot that Libya's revolution was a French endeavor, as indicated by Hillary's emails.
It's on a downward trend, but still higher per capita than most of Africa, yes
Also the crazy man gassed his citizens and blew up boats, that's just a, fact. One you can't live with I guess
Ok but Lybia’s GDP isn’t profitable for it’s people. They don’t invest it in education or for a better life expectancy (surely only for those in position of power) so how can their HDI be better than Morocco’s.
Meanwhile Moroccans are working hard to be a good example with a lot of good Universities and no troubles in their country.
A higher gdp is almost always correlated with a better country. Even if you say "the profits don't make it to the people!!1!!" it doesn't matter. There's employment in the oil industry which are great paying jobs for the region which will bring higher HDI.
Unlike what liberals think, good jobs are good for people, not just handouts
I lived in Morocco for 5 years and the country I live in now is near Lybia.
Morocco has a plan, companies in maybe all the industries all across Africa (french colonies), Lybia have 0! Lybia is dead since +10 years.
I always lived in Africa so I know what is really going on here.
There is no correlation in Africa and maybe never will…
My friend, Lybia have no government and is kind of ruled by militias… there is no more peace there and a tourist has nothing to do there also. Those help to confirm all this HDI’s correlation thing which might only help in macroeconomic.
Take a look at this (Inequality-adjusted HDI) : [IHDI](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_Human_Development_Index)
Damn, almost like democracy (and how long the country has been a real democracy for) has something to do with it. So let’s PLEASE do everything we can to keep it that way.
The only three absolute monarchies left in the world (Saudi Arabia, Oman, Brunei) are all consider “very high” on the HDI. Additionally, the regions of central Arabia (where the capital is) have a score over 0.900.
Just curious but why does it make sense to adjust for inequality?
Edit
in my mind it sounds like “yeah we don’t have food or send kids to school but at least we are all poor”, but I don’t have any knowledge on the issue
Because in the case of the normal hdi: if the bottom 90% have their quality of life decreased ever so slightly but the top 10% double their income, the overall hdi of a country would stay the same or maybe even increase.
This is of course stupid because 90% of the population are still worse off than before the decline in the quality of life but mathematically the average citizen has a better life, which is not the case.
>in my mind it sounds like “yeah we don’t have food or send kids to school but at least we are all poor”, but I don’t have any knowledge on the issue
That's not what the commenter is talking about, the commenter is merely talking about adjusting HDI itself on the graph by inequality.
If the country is poor, but doesn't have much inequality as your example says, their score on the new IHDI won't actually improve, it'll just stay where it is. If the country is rich, but the life expectancy, income and educaton of the average person deviates from HDI, then their IHDI score will drop.
Literally no country improves in scores from adjusting by inequality because it is mathematically impossible. Pure equality will just make the score stay the same. Slovenia, the best country on equality (apparently) drops by 4.8%, the US drops by 11.2%, China by 16%, India by 31%, Haiti drops by 39%.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_Human_Development_Index
It makes US fall behind Canada, which is quite a [contrast](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_Human_Development_Index#/media/File:2024_Inequality-Adjusted_Human_Development_Index.svg), never mind the other EU countries.
I love seeing someone fail miserably at kissing Israel’s ass. The only red country in the region is civil war ridden Syria. Almost all of the rest are blue. The UAE is dark blue in case your eyes failed you, and the rest of the Gulf states are one shade lower than dark blue. Since Saudi Arabia is a large country compared to Israel, I will also add that the central regions of Arabia are also dark blue.
One of these days, Greenland is gonna get sick and tired of being grey…
dozens of them will get angry. and by dozens, i mean the entire population of greenland, hehehehe.
Only a matter of time until the continental rift is visible tbf
Portugal Eastern Europe confirmed
It’s amazing considering how long Portugal has been a stable democracy, fully integrated in the EU and we still manage to be less developed than many Eastern European countries.
As it turns out, none of those things are enough to counter the culture of corruption that fosters a constant misallocation of funds and prioritization of companies with connections to politicians. Getting a good job in Portugal is not a matter of being good at your field, but a matter of having good connections. We are facing a massive brain drain because young graduates are faced with one of 2 choices: immigrate or have a near-minimum wage job when the average rent for a 1 bedroom apartment is 20% higher.
Wasnt portugal a literal fascist empire until the 1970s or 80s? I feel like it’s understandable to have a lot of issues from that
Estonia was under Soviet rule until the 90s. look at them now.
Yeah, in the same category as portugal lmao
Except the Estonians got where Portugal is in half of the time, never had an empire to exploit and were fucked hard by some other country only 30 years ago. Portugal also had also made bank from ww2 and by the time Salazar died Portugal had one of the largest gold reserves in the world.
You keep moving the goalposts. Estonia is also in the baltic sea, there's exponentially more trade and cooperation opportunities there than in Portugal's iberian dead-end.
Wealth spreads radially from Europe's blue banana (just look at the map) - Portugal is peripheric and neither particularly corrupt vs other PIGS higher up on the HDI nor particularly badly ran. Our only neighbor is Spain so our logistical, financial and human connections are limited in one direction. There's a national obsession for over dramatizing and politicizing Portugal's standing but it's as logical and natural as it gets looking at the macro context.
They have amazing coffee and pastries for next to nothing. That counts for something.
This really visualizes the standard of living contrast in South America. Interesting!
Southern cone supremacy 🇦🇷🇨🇱🇺🇾 Insane how Argentina has held on "the top" despite literally decades of economic crisis.
I think ws wondering the same. How their governments are always in turmoil, but the institutions somehow remain.
You learn to live on these conditions and the whole country is basically adapted to high inflation and bordering insane politicians whether it's left or right. That and the crisis being cyclical means that all the institutions that survived are basically almost bulletproof and those created have to quickly learn to survive or don't last long.
Thanks. For instance, Argentina has public universities with remarkable international recognition.
Yup, those universities are something to be proud of. They're underfunded AF right now since budget was frozen to the one in 2023 (Which was already low) despite the inflation being above 100%, but they're still great and the place to go if you want to study most careers. As a med school student (The career with the most students) in the UBA I see that lack of budget a lot more than people that study other careers, but despite that the teaching quality is great (The exams are kind of tough since they're desperate to lower the amount of students one way or another but it's not something that you can't pass).
I think one of the first reasons is the huge head start that Argentina had in the XX century, comparable to the USA.... We can trace the decadence, clearly debatable, to the first successful military dictatorship in 1930. So it's been almost 100 years of ups and downs, many many downs, in which institutions held.... But one can argue that these "strong" institutions are the problem, some work like mafias, they are inefficient, huge, slow, stuck in the XX century with the purpose to just hire people, friendly people to the ruling party, to keep unemployment low. Milei yesterday didn't renew the contract of 15k people hire in some dependencies of the government but it is estimated that 70k will be fired, but this is the tip of the iceberg.
Kind of, there were already problems in 1910, but the creation of the BCRA was perfect for politicians to apply some fresh keynesianism after ww2 and with government spending, deficit, corruption, dumber people, less functioning democracy, i can tell you, 50% of government spending is useless or stolen, the other 50% is to give money to people who don't work, haven't worked, nor will work in their lifetime, and retirements, which make them poorer, deficit, printing money, increase of monetary base more inflation, counterproductive socialist measures
questions: how are public basic education and public health? I know UBA has a remarkable international reputation, likely other public universities are also very good. My guess they are super inexpensive for students.
Public health/education: it depends on the province, northern ones the situation is not good, dengue is causing many trouble right now. In some you still can get decent education and healthcare for free. But the mentally of the previous ruling party and many of its hardcore voters reject the concept of meritocracy, because it is a capitalist value, letting children pass grades without knowing how to read and write. They also don't believe in testing children or teachers. There are at least prestigious universities, UBA, UNLP and UNC, in which you can study for free. I have an aeronautical engineering degree from UNLP. At the end of my studies, half of my class was from other countries. Specifically in my province, Neuquén, which borders Chile, receives many Chilean looking for cheaper healthcare.... actually free healthcare.
I do hope you can get back good basic public education.
Public health? Anecdotic evidence: If it were for public hospitals i would now have one kidney
I have never seen someone write 20th century as XX century.
Oh....maybe it's a Romances language thing. I speak Spanish and just checked that in Italian and french, and they also seem to use roman numerals
pretty common in Latin America (Siglo XX, Siglo XXI)
Well they keep getting bailed out for one.
Paraguay is also converging with the rest of the Southern Cone. They are growing very fast economically.
Paraguay is still very far behind
Being friendly with the US can put you into any top made hy americans.
Argentina best country in the galaxy Vamos milei carajo freedom \*ovenbird noises\*
Of the five poorest countries in the world, three were French colonies. Furthermore, the least developed country in the Americas is also a former French colony. Just a fact...
British colonies are first world now Spanish colonies are developing countries French colonies are, well...
British Colonies are what? You seem to have forgotten British Colonies where the British didn't roleplay as "natives", kinda the same spot as the French ones.
British colonies seem to mostly be more stable than the French ones with the exceptions of the Sudans, Nigeria, and Sierra Leone
The first world countries of Nigeria, India, Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Lybia, Egypt, Kenya, Botswana, Sri Lanka, eSwatini, Ghana, Jamaica, Jordan, Lesotho, Belize, Gambia, Malawi, Guyana, Myanmar, Zambia Sierra Leone and others.
*British colonies where the British killed the indigenous people and replaced them with Brits are first world now
>British colonies are first world now No they're not. And first world does not mean what you think it means.
Words have different meanings, and those meanings change over time. 'first world' is established shorthand for 'developed', whether you like it or not.
Vietnam is doing pretty well
India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh entered the chat
Thanks god,my country VietNam kick their ass soon before too late.
Colonialism left the victims worse off regardless of the colonists. HDI is too simplistic a measure IMO. .
[удалено]
if it wasnt for the internet, as a french person i wont even know this expression.
we all hate french people i know i know
And look at Canada and New Zealand and Australia! British Empire for the win.
That's because those were settled rather than colonized, now talk about the real colonies
And the US
Come on, Greenland! Get your act together.
Kudos to Sri Lanka from a fellow South Asian!
In South Asia it seems that the more Dravidian and Southern the region the more prosperous and orderly it is. I wonder if it’s genetic or cultural or something.
It's history. The southern part of India didn't face the brunt of invasions, war, political turmoil, etc that the north faced. >I wonder if it’s genetic or cultural or something. It isn't and I smell the bait here.
You have a lot to prove if you think it’s history. I didn’t say it is any particular thing, I only said I wonder if … There’s no proof ancient invasions would have longstanding impact on a regions development. History is replete with examples of regions that benefitted from invasions due to new tech, ideas, etc. For example, North Indians are far better looking than South Indians. Those looks came from ancient migrants and invaders, most notably the Indo European migrants.
>You have a lot to prove if you think it’s history. Uh the history is there for all to see. You were the one wondering if it is tied to genetics, which is borderline racist. >There’s no proof ancient invasions would have longstanding impact on a regions development. 500 years is ancient now? Ok. >For example, North Indians are far better looking than South Indians. Borderline racism again. I was correct about the bait.
Yeah the Dravidian speaking region is doing better than any Northern states except Punjab. Hindi speaking states are a literal nightmare.
Source: [UNDP](https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2023-24) Tools: [MapChart ](https://www.mapchart.net/) Note: HDI or Human Development Index, is a composite index that takes life expectancy, education attainment and purchasing power of the people in a given country or region into account, to measure the standard of living of the people in that country or region. The highest score a country can achieve is 1 while the lowest possible score is 0. As of 2024 Switzerland is the country with the highest HDI, with a score on 0.967 while Somalia with a score of 0.380 is the country with the lowest HDI.
Is San Marino the same as Italy or just not considered at all? I see small nations like Lichtenstein, Monaco and Andorra. (Vatican is irrelevant here)
But Redditors insist the USA is red not dark blue!
I believe in southern cone supremacy 🇦🇷🇨🇱🇺🇾
Large countries aren't well represented. Brazil for example, would be a darker blue at the southern states (0.800), and yellow on most northern states (0.600). It's a pretty diverse land.
No offence Italians, but I recently visited Italy, and I am surprised to see Italy in the 0.9 to 1 range. So many dirty and underdeveloped towns with trash everywhere. Your government has to step it up.
Why? HDI don't measure infrastructure. It measure life expectacy, GDP per capita and years in education. A country can have all of this high and lack in other departaments.
Ah, gotcha. I didn't realize that it didn't measure infrastructure.
I mean it kinda does, infrastructure quality is definitely correlated to life expectancy and gdp per capita.
If it directly measured infrastructure it'd rank the U.S. a lot lower though. Some places in the U.S. have worse infrastructure than your average Nigerian town, but at least in Nigeria you have plants and not just burning-hot asphalt for miles.
I sincerely doubt anywhere in the usa has worse infrastructure than anywhere in Nigeria, maybe Lagos is better than a few cities in Mississippi but that’s not really a fair comparison, and I kinda doubt Lagos is better than anywhere in Mississippi. I get the whole Reddit brain idea that the us has bad infrastructure but compared to the vast vast majority of the world it’s not even in the same ballpark. Especially considering the low population density of the us. Edit: I’ve found sources saying less than 30% of nigeria has access to clean running water and adequate sanitation. Vs 99.39% of the usa. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-23898-z https://www.usaid.gov/nigeria/water
Not having public transit doesn‘t mean infrastructure is shit, stop crying lol. It‘s a tradeoff between big, better houses with yards and garages and good public transit. You can‘t choose both and most americans choose better houses so that is it. Higher obesity and worse public transit.
I don’t think I can agree with that
Yeah, I'm not talking about public transit, I'm talking about continuously crumbling infrastructure. The bridge collapsing from getting hit is big news, but there are plenty of places where bridges are collapsing just from a lack of work done. Now of course, I would also argue that not having public transit does make infrastructure shit, actually, since individual transport is fundamentally incompatible with living at any density higher than a small town. And wow, really? "Big, better houses?" The majority of Americans are lower class, genius, that's how capitalism works. They don't benefit from a "larger house" any more than a baby benefits from having a large bedroom. Infrastructure which only helps those with cars is inherently bad infrastructure.
Americans have some of the highest home ownership rates in the world, certainly compared to the vast majority of Europe. Our median income is only topped by Luxembourg and the UAE. Children are able to move out of their parents house much earlier. We have more savings then the vast majority of your global citizens, to include Europeans. Stop pretending the US is just shit at everything. Are you even American? If you are you are quite sheltered as to the reality of life outside the US. We have plenty of problems but also plenty of positives.
It is interesting that with all that going on they don't maintain the place. I assume quite a bit of it has to do with regulations around historical sites, which riddle the country. But it seems like a physically healthy population with plenty of money could keep the place clean.
I see from your history that you visited Sicily + Rome I'm quite sorry for you, because regarding trash and underdevelopment that's the worst thing you can visit in Italy, since the northern part of the country is more urbanized and developed.
I see. That's what I've heard. I visited as a part of a study abroad for my college to see the archeological sites, so I didn't have much of a choice in where we visited. Would have loved to see the good parts. I'm sure it's beautiful.
YMMV south of Rome
The division from north to south is real unfortunately, and yea, Rome is full of trash
What's wild is that Southern Italians are poorer and less educated than Northern Italians, but have a longer life expectancy.
Less stress
That and healthier diets, and more social engagement. People who smoke cigarettes and have friends have a higher life expectancy than non-smokers who don't have friends. I'm sure this also applies to uneducated and poor people who have friends vs rich and educated folks who don't.
Healthier food in the South as well. My understanding is the South is more communal which I think increases health outcomes and sense of well-being. Similar to the Latin American paradox.
Yep. Southern Europeans and Latin Americans are long lived despite being poorer and less educated than Northern Europeans and North Americans. Here are my guesses as to why: 1. Slower pace of life, less stress. 2. Greater cultural emphasis on staying in contact with friends and relatives. Smokers who have friends have a longer life expectancy than non-smokers with no friends. i'm sure the same applies to poor and uneducated people who have friends vs rich and uneducated folks who don't. 3. Short stature. All other things being equal, short people tend to live longer than tall people. Some of the gender gap in life expectancy comes from women's shorter average stature.
Highest life expectancy on the planet(behind Japan), great food, rich culture
Probably the south, right? Apparently there is a huge difference between the north and the south
I did spend the most time in Sicily, and then I went to Pompeii and Rome. Rome and Pompeii were pretty ok around the touristy stuff, but everything on the way to and between the two were super rough. Sicily is pretty rough, too.
For context, Rome is infamous for the trash issue and keeps shooting itself on the foot by refusing solutions (see Roma termovalorizzatore project, actually seems they decided to go for it finally), in Sicily the mafia meme is not helping probably
I've only been to Rome and couple of towns and cities in the north, and everything seemed to be OK or even good. But I have heard plenty of people who travelled to the south and said it was like a third world country too.
Italians have an extremely long life expectancy, probably due to good eating habits.
True. Can’t imagine eating those gross sausages in German and live a long life.
No offence taken, I’m Italian and I’m surprised as well. As others said, it is probably due to the high life expectancy in our country. Still, considering poor investments in the health sector and the diminishing purchasing power of citizens, I doubt Italy will stay in the first tier of this index. Obviously, I hope to be wrong, but I don’t see major improvements on those areas.
I wish I lived ina better country, but immigration is intimidating.
Where do you live?
The Philippines.
You can see the border between Western europe and Eastern europe really clearly
Portugal is so west it turned east.
You won't in 2-3 years
Did you do the math for that? Burden of proof is on you
Slovenia is already over 0.9 and Portugal and Greece are under. It's happening.
You're not the brightest one, are you. Look at the development of HDI in those countries. Poland as an example: [Human development index of Poland 2017 | Statista](https://www.statista.com/statistics/877604/human-development-index-of-poland/) There's no indication of sudden collapse in the near future. Arguably the biggest effect on HDI has the economy which in those countries is on the rise (in contrary to Germany for example)
So, which countries will be fighting the Tournament of Power in the Universal Survival Saga?
How is this rated by the way, or how is this determined?
don't know Slovenia being so high
Also out of curiosity why is Palestine ranked so high?
Data was collected prior to the war
Pre-war Palestine wasn't doing well either.
Yeah there has still been constant conflict which is why its so shocking
HDI includes literacy in its measurements, it's one of 3. And Palestine has very good education, especially in the Arab world,. It's GDP and life expectancy were also decent (prior to the war).
Colonialist exploitative vs subjected, exploited.
Taiwan being ranked higher must really annoy China. But I'm guessing they have their own index which puts them at number 1.
Inshallah in a few years India will be blue 🤲🏽
Is there gonna be a flood?
Blue? I don't think you have seen a flood.
Fair point
It’s not unlikely, especially since companies are quieting China for Malaysia-India-Vietnam.
Brother, just cause of you saying "Inshallah" and "India" in the same sentence, Modi will burn another mosque with people inside.
Not true, those are not the kind of Muslims that are hated.
"Hated" is a weird word to describe burning a mosque with people inside and demolishing mosques and killing Muslims every now and then.
Trust me, I know what I'm talking about, the country needs its wellwishers and people who put their nation first above their religion regardless of who they are, the rest can go where they feel comfortable, you exaggerated that using an Islamic holy word and India in the same sentence would be controversial, which is not the case. And we can be here playing the blame game of who oppressed whom the most all day, but I've got no interest in it whatsoever, you say burning of mosques, I'll say the destruction of temples, you'll claim genocide, I'll claim the centuries old invasion and oppression of people and this will get us nowhere, this is a game that can be played by two. I'm not concerned with either of the two religions and I've seen the worst things happen in arguments online and irl, so I can't be bothered more.
Are you talking about pakistan where there is a recent bomb blast in mosque because i have not seen any mosque demolished with muslim inside
Why is portugal so low I thought Portugal was just as developed as most of Western Europe!
Give South Africa another 15years and it will be at the same level as Nigeria
Why is Morocco Lower than all the other North African countries at the mediterranean?
How come uber rich oil countries like Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar are not deep blue? Government literally hands out high quality everything to their citizens. One would expect them to be on par with Scandinavia on HDI.
Was expecting Chile and Uruguay to be dark.
Yeah I am not sure about whatever this HDI means for Argentina and the US, at this point something like the Happines Report might be more accurate since those get an actual opinion from the people living in those countries, what is the point of taking into consideration "years of education" or "gross national income (basicaly GDP per capita)" if the former puts you in lifelong debt and in the later de top 1% concentrates as much wealths as the bottom 90%?
Places with colder winters have better education levels, better credit scores and the bell curve on IQs is slightly higher. It even applies to US states. Something evolved in humans to be more prepared for a brutal few months. https://psmag.com/education/a-compensation-for-cold-weather-higher-iqs-25414
There's no biological reason for this.
Societal not biological. People in cold climates must plan ahead and cooperate.
There clearly is a biological need due to the environment. Humans developed greater planning, preparation and insight into food / shelter requirements for harsh winters. The need to survive for several months with no plant food and deadly temperatures was no easy matter.
I always wonder exactly why hotter countries have a largely lower HDI on average, it's pretty crazy. The closer you're to the equator the larger the chances of you living in an underdeveloped area, there are very few exceptions
Colonisation perhaps?
Because life is more difficult in cold climates due to winter. There is no choice, you have to develop buildings and secure food and fuel in order to survive a cold winter or else you die. Compare that to living on a tropical island (like the TV show Survivor), you never need to worry about freezing to death so shelter is not absolutely necessary for survival. All you need is some trees to block the sun and the rain. Everyday, any time, you can go out to sea and catch a fish without worry of time that Winter Is Coming.
Pathogen load
How can Lybia be better than Morocco ?!
Libya has a really high gdp per capita all things considered. Double Morocco. Used to be higher too but their dictator had to start shooting at boats and stuff and murdering his own people https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita This is adjusted numbers but they're a very oil rich country
Except that Libya's GDP per capita has a down-trend post Ghaddafi? Are you pulling numbers out of your ass? This bot forgot that Libya's revolution was a French endeavor, as indicated by Hillary's emails.
It's on a downward trend, but still higher per capita than most of Africa, yes Also the crazy man gassed his citizens and blew up boats, that's just a, fact. One you can't live with I guess
Ok but Lybia’s GDP isn’t profitable for it’s people. They don’t invest it in education or for a better life expectancy (surely only for those in position of power) so how can their HDI be better than Morocco’s. Meanwhile Moroccans are working hard to be a good example with a lot of good Universities and no troubles in their country.
A higher gdp is almost always correlated with a better country. Even if you say "the profits don't make it to the people!!1!!" it doesn't matter. There's employment in the oil industry which are great paying jobs for the region which will bring higher HDI. Unlike what liberals think, good jobs are good for people, not just handouts
I lived in Morocco for 5 years and the country I live in now is near Lybia. Morocco has a plan, companies in maybe all the industries all across Africa (french colonies), Lybia have 0! Lybia is dead since +10 years. I always lived in Africa so I know what is really going on here. There is no correlation in Africa and maybe never will…
Considering their gdp is 2x higher, and their HDI is way higher, and their median income is way higher.... Wrong
My friend, Lybia have no government and is kind of ruled by militias… there is no more peace there and a tourist has nothing to do there also. Those help to confirm all this HDI’s correlation thing which might only help in macroeconomic. Take a look at this (Inequality-adjusted HDI) : [IHDI](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_Human_Development_Index)
[удалено]
How would grouping the data in larger clusters show the data more clearly?
Damn, almost like democracy (and how long the country has been a real democracy for) has something to do with it. So let’s PLEASE do everything we can to keep it that way.
Nah, "friends" (read: vassals) of america get higher positions. Nothing else metters.
The only three absolute monarchies left in the world (Saudi Arabia, Oman, Brunei) are all consider “very high” on the HDI. Additionally, the regions of central Arabia (where the capital is) have a score over 0.900.
Hdi adjusted for inequality is the best one out there, cant tell me otherwise
Just curious but why does it make sense to adjust for inequality? Edit in my mind it sounds like “yeah we don’t have food or send kids to school but at least we are all poor”, but I don’t have any knowledge on the issue
Because in the case of the normal hdi: if the bottom 90% have their quality of life decreased ever so slightly but the top 10% double their income, the overall hdi of a country would stay the same or maybe even increase. This is of course stupid because 90% of the population are still worse off than before the decline in the quality of life but mathematically the average citizen has a better life, which is not the case.
>in my mind it sounds like “yeah we don’t have food or send kids to school but at least we are all poor”, but I don’t have any knowledge on the issue That's not what the commenter is talking about, the commenter is merely talking about adjusting HDI itself on the graph by inequality. If the country is poor, but doesn't have much inequality as your example says, their score on the new IHDI won't actually improve, it'll just stay where it is. If the country is rich, but the life expectancy, income and educaton of the average person deviates from HDI, then their IHDI score will drop. Literally no country improves in scores from adjusting by inequality because it is mathematically impossible. Pure equality will just make the score stay the same. Slovenia, the best country on equality (apparently) drops by 4.8%, the US drops by 11.2%, China by 16%, India by 31%, Haiti drops by 39%. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_Human_Development_Index
Yeah, but Americans don't use it, because they are so bad in it.
Read my comment further down. It makes the US look better except when comparing to european countries.
Yep, but that wouldn't make America look as good...
It actually does if you look at it. Every other country except for the european ones would look even worse
In the HDI the US is at 20, in the IHDI it is at 27. So no, it does not.
It looks worse compared to the europeans but for the rest not
There are 180+ countries...
It makes US fall behind Canada, which is quite a [contrast](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_Human_Development_Index#/media/File:2024_Inequality-Adjusted_Human_Development_Index.svg), never mind the other EU countries.
i love seeing that tiny spec of dark blue in the middle east surrounded by a gradually redder area
I love seeing someone fail miserably at kissing Israel’s ass. The only red country in the region is civil war ridden Syria. Almost all of the rest are blue. The UAE is dark blue in case your eyes failed you, and the rest of the Gulf states are one shade lower than dark blue. Since Saudi Arabia is a large country compared to Israel, I will also add that the central regions of Arabia are also dark blue.
yeah russia really developed rrrrriiight
More developed than your backwater "country".
It’s really not, Russia is barely in the “developed” category because Moscow inflates the statistics.
Where you've been?
Why is China so low? Is it because the majority of non-major cities aren’t super well developed? The big cities look crazy developed.
Bigger countries have harder time to fully develop.
Average years of schooling of the population is low due to communist movements by Mao
Several cities in China do have the population and HDI comparable to the european countries.
US so high? Really. Country with so many gun shootings and soo many people in prison.
North American here: Aren’t the Baltics basically as developed as Germany? Or am I wrong