[at-l] On Topic Quote

[Malcolm Fuller <mfuller@somtel.com> (Malcolm Fuller)]

>> Fair enough, that was a poor choice of phrase. When I lived
>> in Canada, I used to argue the very same point to the Maple-
>> leafed Sneetches whenever they equated a top spot on the
>> UN's Human Development Index listing with being "the best
>> place in the world to live."

> Lived in Canada for eith years.  Toronto is one of the most
> expensive cities in North America yet the average salary in
> Toronto is les than $39K.  Try living in Manhatten for $39K.
> Yet Canada ranks second in the world for quality of life
> (After Scandinavia).

Actually, Canada is ranked third this year.

Quick, tell me the criteria upon which the Human Development
Index (the source of this "quality of life" rating nonsense)
is based. Never mind, I have it right here:

 o  Life expectancy at birth
 o  Adult literacy rate
 o  Gross educational enrollment ratio (primary, secondary
    and tertiary schooling)
 o  Gross Domestic Product per capita, in PPP-USD

...and nothing else. The HDI totally ignores (for obvious
reasons) such things as individual liberty and social tolerance,
and also does not include population density, tax burden,
freedom of trade, crime rates and environmental quality --
criteria that most people consider at least as important in
evaluating a region's quality of life.

Contrary to what is implied by public service announcements
and the media, the United Nations has never referred to
the HDI as a measure of quality of life. That is strictly
a Canadian misrepresentation.

> Quality of life does not equal wealth nor material possesions.

I didn't say that it was. Ultimately, it all depends on
what individuals value in life.

-MF