View Poll Results: Which Western European nation has the highest standard of living?

Voters
66. You may not vote on this poll
  • France

    12 18.18%
  • UK

    29 43.94%
  • Germany

    25 37.88%
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 71

Thread: Living Standards in Western Europe

  1. #1
    New Member
    Join Date
    21 Jul 06
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4

    Living Standards in Western Europe

    I was wondering which of the big three Western European nations, Germany, Britain and France you guys believe to have the highest standard of living and quality of life. I've often wondered this and would like to know your opinions.

    I would be inclined to go with France as although the UK beats it by one place in the 2005 UN Human Development Index (combining life expectancy,GDP per capita and literacy) I believe it has a better healthcare, higher life expectancy and also has less crime and is generally a less violent society. In saying that German cities are frequently ranked amongst the best in the world when it comes to rating the most liveable cities.

    I realise it is difficult to come to a conclusive opinion on this but what do you think?

    Also how do you reckon your chosen nation compares to the US?
    Last edited by ChrissyBoy; 22 Jul 06, at 01:17.

  2. #2
    Regular
    Join Date
    19 Jul 06
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    32
    Living standard is relatively easy compared to the highly subjective "quality of life" unit.

    For living standard I would take a median income in the query populations. This would be fairly easy considering all three nations is easily translated into the Euro currency. Sum up their median purchasing power on goods and services, ability to buy health services, education, compare life expectancy, employment/unemployment etc. Keywords: house ownership/homelessness, cars, tv etc. I doubt you'll find big fluctuations between these countries.

    Quality of life is a very difficult unit. How do you measure happiness? According to WHO Norway is the best country in the world to live in, but Norwegians are not the happiest people in the world. IIRC an African country was rated higher than Norway in an official happiness meter. I can only agree to that as I firmly believe that wealth doesn't translate into happiness although it's an important unit.

    The term quality of life is almost as old as political science. Platon is considered the earliest "known" founder of political science and the term quality of life was first discussed by his "successor" Aristotle. What I'm trying to say is it's a very subjective and difficult question compared to living standard.

    Will be interesting to follow your reasoning in this topic.

  3. #3
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    21,348
    Definitely France, as long as you are not a car enthusiast.

    What can possibly beat France? Six weeks of paid holidays a year, not including time off for strikes.

    Cradle to grave health care, whether you work or not.

    Mild weather. A warm air of 30C/86F is considered a "heatwave." Come here and check out Nevada's summer. They'll pay to have 86F temperature in their homes.

    Top vacationing spot, especially for German troops.

    No immigration problems, unlike the US. Go to Paris and all you'll find are law abiding white Frenchmen going about their business.
    Last edited by gunnut; 25 Jul 06, at 23:50.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  4. #4
    Arzi Hukumat-e-Azad Hind Senior Contributor Tronic's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Dec 04
    Location
    Patiala, Punjab
    Posts
    2,924
    lol, white frenchmen are the only ones law abiding???

    errmm... and I guess some countries suite some people... for me, I would probably never leave India to live in another country but thats just myself.... and as for the highest standard of livings... I believe the Scandinivian countries are pretty high ranked in that area...
    Nabha Sparasham Deeptam
    -Touch The Sky With Glory

  5. #5
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    19 Aug 04
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,195

    Uk

    CB sir,

    I would have wished Lichtenstien and Monaco to have been included, but that said I voted UK. With severe reservations.
    Where's the bloody gin? An army marches on its liver, not its ruddy stomach.

  6. #6
    ila
    ila is offline
    New Member
    Join Date
    28 Jul 06
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by ChrissyBoy
    I was wondering which of the big three Western European nations, Germany, Britain and France you guys believe to have the highest standard of living and quality of life.
    I think Britian has the highest per capita GDP and while Germany has quite sharp income differentials due to East Germany.

    The proxy for happiness can be judged by two variables, namely purchasing power per capita and income inequality. Even for those republicans who hate income redistribution, some degree of income redistribution can increase happiness. Do any of you wonder how if Bill Gates would miss a hundred million (from his 60, 000 million) as much as youd love getting his hundred million?? Taking sum from the very rich and giving to the very poorest can boost overall happiness (by reducing happiness of the rich less than it increases happiness of the poor).

    The problem is that life expectancy can give very skewed results because nations can overinvest in health. (Cuba)

    Having said all the above, nothing beats level of economic growth. Nations with high levels of growth have happier people than those with lower levels.

  7. #7
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    21,348
    Quote Originally Posted by ila
    Do any of you wonder how if Bill Gates would miss a hundred million (from his 60, 000 million) as much as youd love getting his hundred million??
    Stealing is stealing. Doesn't matter if the owner ever missed his stolen property.

    Quote Originally Posted by ila
    Taking sum from the very rich and giving to the very poorest can boost overall happiness (by reducing happiness of the rich less than it increases happiness of the poor).
    That's the socialist view.

    The good of the many outweighs the good of the few.

    I'm all for income redistribution as long as it's VOLUNTARY on the part of the giver. Involuntary income redistribution is extortion.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  8. #8
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,042
    gunnut, I agree with you on the moral level, but as a description of reality, ila is right. Democratic governments usually work on utilitarian principles in order to be re-elected, and that means balancing happiness to ensure that potential voters with a lower income are made happy without making the ones with money too unhappy.

  9. #9
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    21,348
    Quote Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
    gunnut, I agree with you on the moral level, but as a description of reality, ila is right. Democratic governments usually work on utilitarian principles in order to be re-elected, and that means balancing happiness to ensure that potential voters with a lower income are made happy without making the ones with money too unhappy.
    Yes, but that doesn't make it right. But then again, is trying to provide a somewhat harmoneous and lawful society by depriving a small utility from a small portion of the society wrong?

    Economically, it's wrong.

    Property law wise, it's wrong.

    But to provide an somewhat orderly society so those who have a lot may continue to have a lot and those who have little can have a bit more, could be worth the trade off.

    Idealy, I would like to see those who have a lot give up some of their stuff willingly so we don't have to remove them by force. But then that's still extortion, in a way. The rich is basically buying protection from the mob.

    This is like "kindness." Can one really be selfless? The fact that he feels good by helping others is a reward in and of itself. If there's a reward, that's not selflessness...
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  10. #10
    Distant Deeps or Skies Senior Contributor HistoricalDavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Jul 05
    Location
    North London, UK
    Posts
    2,292
    Gunnut, he's making a statement of fact, but which is often used to justify utilitarian positions.

  11. #11
    Regular
    Join Date
    19 Jul 06
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    32
    gunnut: Who's to say what is right and what is wrong? This is a philosophical question if you ask me. You could for example say how did the rich get rich? By exploiting the poor or using their labour or overpricing consumer goods. Therefore they got a moral obligation to pay back their wrongly accumulated wealth.

    This isn't my personal opinion I'm only saying what the truth is depends on who you ask. Personally I think it's better to have more wealth to distribute even if some will get more than others (capitalism), than less total although evenly distributed (socialism/communism).

    And I think ila puts too much importance into wealth regarding the happiness unit. It's no doubt one of the most important, but there might be other important units as well. This is a difficult question but let me make an example to prove my point. Some countries might have a tradition where families take care of their elderly when they get old. Those elderly might be more happy than those who live their last days in a home for the aged relatively alone. There are many other non-materialistic units which come into play regarding happiness.

    There was just a new happiness report in the media a week ago. I will try to find it find out what units they used. What an interesting topic

  12. #12
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,042
    gunnut: Who's to say what is right and what is wrong? This is a philosophical question if you ask me. You could for example say how did the rich get rich? By exploiting the poor or using their labour or overpricing consumer goods. Therefore they got a moral obligation to pay back their wrongly accumulated wealth.
    One could say all that garbage, but one would be wrong to do so. If you own a factory, how is it exploitation to hire at market wages or sell at market prices? The factory belongs to you, you are under no obligation to provide jobs, therefore you have the right to pay whatever people are willing to accept (and that is where collective bargaining comes into play to balance things out for the workers). You are not keeping them in your factory at gun point. Similarly, the finished product belongs to you and you are under no obligation to give it to people at any price except the one you choose. "Overpriced" is something that can only be determined by the market. If it is overpriced it would not sell. If it sells it is selling because it is meeting market demand.

    Of course if you want to go really far back in time (or to the present day in some third world countries) you could argue that a significant amount of wealth was wrongly accumulated if it was gained through slave labour, military conquest, murder, etc. But if you run with that idea then you have the problem of sorting out the decendents of those who got their wealth from moral means and immoral means. This is impossible, and therefore some redistribution through things like taxation, free or discounted education, and/or affirmative action is theoretically reasonable even though it wouldn't be in a perfectly enforced free market situation.

  13. #13
    Regular
    Join Date
    19 Jul 06
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    32
    Found an interesting article about quality of life. Read it here .

    Looks like they've come to the same conclusion as I did. Money isn't everything. Social and cultural structures is also very important units. Interesting to see that they rate both France and Germany ahead of UK in QoL.

    Here's the methodology.

    Can't remember who said it but "social science isn't rocket science, it's much more complex. Anyone can calculate a trajectory in a vacuum".

    Why Irish eyes are smiling

    Where will be the best place to live in 2005? The World in 2005 turned to the Economist Intelligence Unit, which has devised a 2005 “quality of life” index for 111 countries. Result: Ireland comfortably tops the league. America, though the second-richest country (behind Luxembourg) in GDP per head, slips to 13th in quality of life. Britain languishes in 29th place.

    It has long been accepted that material well-being alone does not adequately measure quality of life. Money matters, of course, but surveys suggest that over the decades big increases in income have translated into only a modest rise in satisfaction. Although rising incomes and expanded individual choice are highly valued, some of the factors associated with modernisation—such as the breakdown of traditional institutions and the erosion of family values—in part offset its positive impact.

    But how to combine in a single, comparative statistic the factors believed to influence people’s happiness? There have been many attempts, none entirely successful: the factors selected, and the weights assigned to them, tend to be arbitrary. Subjective surveys of “life satisfaction” have been attracting growing interest—especially since the evidence is that people in different countries and cultures cite similar criteria for being contented—but getting comparable surveys across many countries is hard and there is too much margin for error for a truly objective quality-of-life index.

    So ours takes a new approach. We use life-satisfaction surveys (assembling the average scores for 74 countries) as a starting point for weighting the various factors that determine quality of life. A regression analysis suggests that as many as nine indicators have a significant influence, and can be turned into an equation explaining more than 80% of the variation in countries’ life-satisfaction scores. The main factor is income, but other things are also important: health, freedom, unemployment, family life, climate, political stability and security, gender equality, and family and community life. We feed the factors into the equation, measuring them using forecasts for 2005 where possible (in four cases) and latest data for slower-changing indicators, such as family life and political freedom. The resulting score, on a scale of one to ten, gives the quality-of-life index. A full explanation of the methodology and a full country ranking are available to download here.

    Ireland wins because it successfully combines the most desirable elements of the new (the fourth-highest GDP per head in the world in 2005, low unemployment, political liberties) with the preservation of certain cosy elements of the old, such as stable family and community life. Offsetting its poor climate and, by rich-country standards, gender inequality are a higher political stability and security. Even if GNP—not available for all countries, but in Ireland’s case significantly lower than GDP—is used to measure income, Ireland still wins.

    Britain, by contrast, mixes high income per head with high levels of social and family breakdown; it comes bottom among the 15 countries of the pre-enlargement European Union. America ranks above the EU-15 average. Italy performs well but Germany and France do not—belying the notion that big euro-zone nations compensate for their economic sluggishness with a better quality of life than America.

    China, for all the excitement over its development, still falls in the lower half of the league. Proud Russians will be disturbed to find themselves at the wrong end of the table. Bottom of the lot is Zimbabwe, where things have gone from bad to worse under Robert Mugabe.

    In 1986, in response to an early attempt to measure well-being across countries, The Times scoffed: “Can anyone really assess, in mathematical or other terms, the value of living in Britain?” Well, they can try—on the basis of what people around the world themselves say about life satisfaction. No doubt critics will poke holes in this index too. Except, of course, in Ireland.

  14. #14
    Global Moderator
    Devil's Advocate
    ArmchairGeneral's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 06
    Location
    Boston, MA.
    Posts
    4,634
    I read an interesting thing today, I think in the Atlantic Monthly. If Europe was a US state, it would be 47th in per capita GDP, ahead of West Virginia, Mississippi, and one other state. This is without including the Eastern European countries that were recently added. IIRC, France and UK have per capita GDPs comparable to Alabama.
    I enjoy being wrong too much to change my mind.

  15. #15
    New Member truecolor's Avatar
    Join Date
    05 Aug 06
    Location
    Moscow, Russia
    Posts
    10
    Where are Scandinavian countries in vote? They have highest standard of living in the Europe... and my respect
    I'm old soldier and I don't know the words of love.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Geographic Catalysts for Secularization in Western Europe
    By Ironduke in forum The Staff College
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 07 May 07,, 08:57
  2. A View from the Eye of the Storm
    By tim52 in forum International Economy
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 14 Feb 06,, 04:03
  3. A sick Europe
    By Leader in forum International Economy
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 19 Mar 05,, 07:23
  4. The Muslims are Coming! The Muslims are Coming!
    By Ironduke in forum International Economy
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 06 Jan 05,, 16:45
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 22 Jun 04,, 19:56

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •