The Economist Top Places To Live 2005

[HughG]

Might be a bit old news, but nonetheless gets you thinking about our country.

http://www.economist.com/images/worldin2005/qualitytable.gif

[ProfessorChaos]

shame that canada is dropping in the rankings....used to be in the top 5 iirc.

[blizzah]

Ireland?

[kilarney]

Ireland?

Does it include Northern Ireland? If it did the IRA would've brought it down a bit :|

[coopaloop]

It's still #1 to me!!!

[wanted]

lots of European countries.

[kilarney]

lots of European countries.

Whats their secret? European Union benefits?

[aquariaguy]

Canada could've been #1 if it were not for ALL our land. I think we own too much, without sufficient population to handle it.

[ttt]

the u.s. is no. 13.. :idea:

[J1M]

Look at that, we dropped one ranking for every year in a row that the Lieberals have been in power.

[roguechameleon]

Look at that, we dropped one ranking for every year in a row that the Lieberals have been in power.

Nice logic.... we've also dropped inversely proportionally to the price of gas!

[trini]

Not a very good list.
italy ahead of Denmark and singapore........Ha!

[devious9191]

http://www.economist.com/theworldin/international/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3372495&d=2005

is the link for the story.

[blizzah]

lots of European countries.

Because Asia and Africa aren't making any top lists soon and NA only really has 2 countries.

[Samir]

I call bullsh_t!!! Slovenia ahead of Britain!!!


Europe is much more socialist than here. This has led to policy that has emphasized short-term benefits at the expense of massive debts. All those benefits the aging population gets are coming off the backs of a workforce that is shrinking in proportion faster than Canada's.

When their interest rates rise accordingly "to adjust" and the demographic shock kicks in, their day of reckoning will come. Then Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the US and Japan will be BACK.

[fakishan]

I call bullsh_t!!! Slovenia ahead of Britain!!!


Europe is much more socialist than here. This has led to policy that has emphasized short-term benefits at the expense of massive debts. All those benefits the aging population gets are coming off the backs of a workforce that is shrinking in proportion faster than Canada's.

When their interest rates rise accordingly "to adjust" and the demographic shock kicks in, their day of reckoning will come. Then Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the US and Japan will be BACK.

intresting...

[poedua]

The UN thinks differently...

Most and Least Livable Countries: UN Human Development Index, 2004

The Human Development Index (HDI), published annually by the UN, ranks nations according to their citizens' quality of life rather than strictly by a nation's traditional economic figures. The criteria for calculating rankings include life expectancy, educational attainment, and adjusted real income.

“Most Livable” Countries, 2004

1. Norway
2. Sweden
3. Australia
4. Canada
5. Netherlands
6. Belgium
7. Iceland
8. United States
9. Japan
10. Ireland
11. Switzerland
12. United Kingdom
13. Finland
14. Austria
15. Luxembourg
16. France
17. Denmark
18. New Zealand
19. Germany
20. Spain



Also what's the Economist think the best city in the world to live in ??????

The Economist looked at 12 factors including housing, education, recreational activities and climate, rating every city on a five-point scale in each category, with five indicating extreme hardship



1. (tie) Melbourne, Australia

1. Vancouver, Canada

3. Perth, Australia

4. (tie) Vienna, Austria

4. Toronto, Canada

4. Geneva, Switzerland

4. Zurich, Switzerland

8. (tie) Adelaide, Australia

8. Brisbane, Australia

8. Sydney,Australia

8. Copenhagen, Denmark

8. Dusseldorf, Germany

8. Frankfurt, Germany

8. Oslo, Norway

8. Montreal, Canada

16. (tie) Calgary, Canada

16. Helsinki, Finland

16. Stockholm, Sweden

19. (tie) Berlin, Germany

19. Amsterdam, Netherlands

[J1M]

I'm pretty sure that our UN ranking is rather inflated due to the fact that Canada accepts 110% of "refugees" from other countries.

[Sgt_Strider]

I'm pretty sure that our UN ranking is rather inflated due to the fact that Canada accepts 110% of "refugees" from other countries.

lol I find it funny when I read BS like this.

[felix]

I still think US, Canada, Japan are at the top for the media freaks and net geeks (most popular music artists and TV shows/movies come from US, newest and hottest technologies come from Japan, most online stores and offers aren't available outside of the US & Canada, and US dollar is the standard on the internet).

No clue how they came up with those rankings.

[iNFiNiTe]

canada still has high HDI ranking... the reason why Canada fell to midteens is probably due to unstable government, trade issues with US, and of course, failing social services system.

[frogger]

I wouldn't want to live long term in counties that are dark almost 24 hours in winter. Its bad enough here.

[mbg]

Look at that, we dropped one ranking for every year in a row that the Lieberals have been in power.

And global warming has increased in direct relation to the decrease in the number of pirates in the world.

[George W. Bush]

All Nordic countries are in the top! Good for them!

I have no idea whether there is a relationship between this and the fact that these countries have the fewest immigrants.

Canada and US are full of immigrants and certainly the effects of migration will always reduce the living conditions in any country. More crime, more problems as immigrants tend to abuse and use the resources of the country for their own needs.

I applaud all Nordic countries!

[fakishan]

All Nordic countries are in the top! Good for them!

I have no idea whether there is a relationship between this and the fact that these countries have the fewest immigrants.

Canada and US are full of immigrants and certainly the effects of migration will always reduce the living conditions in any country. More crime, more problems as immigrants tend to abuse and use the resources of the country for their own needs.

I applaud all Nordic countries!

that is retarted & xenophobic thinking.

In comparison with other European countries the number of foreigners taking Swiss nationality is quite low, although one in every 10 adults holding Swiss citizenship in 2001 had acquired it through naturalisation. The proportion of foreigners in the resident population is high, standing at 20.6% in 2004, although they are extremely unevenly spread. The proportion of foreigners is particularly high among children: the 2000 census showed that overall 25.8% of children under 6 years old did not have Swiss nationality. In the five biggest cities 45% of children in this age range were not Swiss. About one fifth of the children born in Switzerland have at least one foreign parent.

[brwnhaggler]

Such backward thinking. There is absolutely no basis on which to make this argument. You really need to get in touch with reality.

All Nordic countries are in the top! Good for them!

I have no idea whether there is a relationship between this and the fact that these countries have the fewest immigrants.

Canada and US are full of immigrants and certainly the effects of migration will always reduce the living conditions in any country. More crime, more problems as immigrants tend to abuse and use the resources of the country for their own needs.

I applaud all Nordic countries!

[poedua]

Such backward thinking. There is absolutely no basis on which to make this argument. You really need to get in touch with reality.

These are the top 5 counties for foreign inflow ( immigration ) as thousands of people per million population per OECD


1.Luxembourg................23.01

2. Switzerland............... 11.7

3. New Zealand................9.7

4. Australia....................8.1

5. Germany....................7.8

12. Sweden....................4.7


These same countries by The Ecomomist and UN Rank


1.Luxembourg............. ..4 15

2. Switzerland............ ..2 11

3. New Zealand.............15 18

4. Australia................. 6 3

5. Germany...................26 19

12. Sweden..................5 2


With the exception of Austalia the relationship between immigration and rank is inverse in the case of the UN, opposite to Ecomomist - who knows what that means.

That's the trouble with Stats

[George W. Bush]

that is retarted & xenophobic thinking.

I am wondering whether immigration may be a factor in this. No idea.

And yes, GWB is tha man no one wants to be! :cheesygri

http://bitumen.cyber-poll.hu/pic/bush-monkey.jpg

[poedua]

re : " I am wondering whether immigration may be a factor in this. No idea "

Stop insulting the monkeys

[IceMan77]

How can the US be ahead of Canada? That's ridiculous...

[devious9191]

How can the US be ahead of Canada? That's ridiculous...

Higher incomes, better healthcare, national security, better schools (for those that can afford them anyways..). The list goes on.

[poedua]

How can the US be ahead of Canada? That's ridiculous...

Basically it's a tie with the U.S. - their score is only more by .02.

What are your reasons for saying it's ridiculous ?

[Sgt_Strider]

Higher incomes, better healthcare, national security, better schools (for those that can afford them anyways..). The list goes on.

Better healthcare? I have my doubts in that claim.

[devious9191]

Better healthcare? I have my doubts in that claim.

If you can afford it or have insurance it is *far better (and probably the best system in the world). They have access to technology that we don't.. their doctors are better educated than ours, and they actually have enough hospitals and physicians to almost eliminate wait times in most states.

Edit: This might be kind of relevant. Where I work, we are heavily involved in the Terry Fox Run coming up, and had some speakers in today. One of the speakers was a 12 year old with bone marrow cancer. He has his surgery done in NY, and when they removed his leg, they actually put his foot where his knee was, and the prosthetic below. This gives him a '2 jointed' knee, rather than a 1 joint like most prosthetics. At the time, this wasn't available in Canada (not sure about now).

[HughG]

that bush comparisons are so true.

[poedua]

If you can afford it or have insurance it is *far better (and probably the best system in the world). They have access to technology that we don't.. their doctors are better educated than ours, and they actually have enough hospitals and physicians to almost eliminate wait times in most states.

.

Canada certainly could improve it's health care. Some food for thought.

According to the World Health Organization, the best performing countries in terms of health care are France, Japan, Sweden, and Australia. These countries all spend less than Canada.

Canada ranks 30th in the world, with the U.S. ranking 38th

They do have user fees and private alternatives that's been rejected by politicians as inconsistent with the Candian model of health care. And, the top-performing countries have private, for-profit health-care services, has also been rejected.



Good point on doctors and technology.

Canada fields 1.8 doctors per 1,000 inhabitants, which places it 17th on a list of 20 countries with universal access (the list does not include the US). To leap into first place, Canada would need to add 48,000 doctors to its current roster of 57,000.

Canada lags even further behind in access to high-tech equipment, including machines used for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed axial tomography (CAT) scans. We have so few of these MRI scanners that now Canada per capita has as many MRI scanners as Colombia and Mexico. This shortage affects wait time for diagnostic assessments, which in some provinces can run well over three months.

How does the U.S. stack up in terms of technology compared to Canada ?

On a per capita basis, the United States has eight times as many magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) units - which use magnetism instead of x-rays - as Canada.

The United States has seven times as many radiation therapy units (to treat cancer) per person.

The United States also has about six times as many lithotripsy units (to destroy kidney stones and gallstones with sound waves) per person.

And, per capita, the United States has about three times as many open-heart surgery units and cardiac catheterization units (for the treatment of heart disease).

Canada's health care clearly better than the U.S. ?

Tough call.

[Martinga]

Argentina= 40 PROPS FOR ARGENTINA!!!!


LONG LIVE ARGENTINA
LONG LIVE CANADA

[devious9191]

Canada certainly could improve it's health care. Some food for thought.

According to the World Health Organization, the best performing countries in terms of health care are France, Japan, Sweden, and Australia. These countries all spend less than Canada.

Canada ranks 30th in the world, with the U.S. ranking 38th

That's a good point. It should be noted that all of those countries have public healthcare systems, which I would think factors heavily into this rating system. Personally, if I'm a working middle class adult, I'd prefer to get sick in the US than anywhere else. Do you disagree?

The US is definitely going to fall short in some sort of ranking list, as they have the highest per capita spending on health care, and no public system.. but at the end of the day, it's hard to say that they don't offer the best medical treatment in the world for those that are insured, or can afford it.

[IceMan77]

Higher incomes, better healthcare, national security, better schools (for those that can afford them anyways..). The list goes on.

Basically it's a tie with the U.S. - their score is only more by .02.

What are your reasons for saying it's ridiculous ?

I say that because in terms of crime, pollution, and total quality of life it's better here. Sure you might have better opportunities in the US and better healthcare, but that's only for those that can afford it. We might not have the best healthcare in the world, but at least almost anybody can get access to it.

[devious9191]

I say that because in terms of crime, pollution, and total quality of life it's better here. Sure you might have better opportunities in the US and better healthcare, but that's only for those that can afford it. We might not have the best healthcare in the world, but at least almost anybody can get access to it.

I agree with you to a certain extent. I do believe that Canada is probably a better environment for immigrants, as well as those that require social assistance. However, for the majority of people that are just trying to support a family and put in an honest day's work, I think that the US is a better environment.

However, when it came time to retire, I would also choose Canada over the US as a place to live.

I'm currently having this debate with my fiance actually, so I've looked into it quite a bit. She's an American with her family in Texas, I'm Canadian with my family in Ontario.. she prefers there (primarily due to the weather I think..), and I'm still fence sitting. Pro's and con's to living and working in both countries, but I certainly don't think that Canada is 'better' for the average person than the US.

[Sgt_Strider]

If you can afford it or have insurance it is *far better (and probably the best system in the world). They have access to technology that we don't.. their doctors are better educated than ours, and they actually have enough hospitals and physicians to almost eliminate wait times in most states.

Edit: This might be kind of relevant. Where I work, we are heavily involved in the Terry Fox Run coming up, and had some speakers in today. One of the speakers was a 12 year old with bone marrow cancer. He has his surgery done in NY, and when they removed his leg, they actually put his foot where his knee was, and the prosthetic below. This gives him a '2 jointed' knee, rather than a 1 joint like most prosthetics. At the time, this wasn't available in Canada (not sure about now).

Not every American has the money to pay for surgeries and advance treatments. That doesn't necessarily mean their health care is better. Their doctors aren't necessarily better than ours. I find it hard to believe that you can make such an outrageous claim that American doctors are better trained than Canadian doctors. Just about any western educated doctors have similar abilities and are just as capable.

[devious9191]

Not every American has the money to pay for surgeries and advance treatments. That doesn't necessarily mean their health care is better. Their doctors aren't necessarily better than ours. I find it hard to believe that you can make such an outrageous claim that American doctors are better trained than Canadian doctors. Just about any western educated doctors have similar abilities and are just as capable.

Ah. That's not true. Surgeons make nearly twice as much in the states as they do in Canada. So, it stands to reason that the 'best' physicians that we have, would go South, at least while they're young. I know money isn't everything, but when you're talking about literally making twice as much.. I know I'd go.

[poedua]

Not every American has the money to pay for surgeries and advance treatments. That doesn't necessarily mean their health care is better. Their doctors aren't necessarily better than ours. I find it hard to believe that you can make such an outrageous claim that American doctors are better trained than Canadian doctors. Just about any western educated doctors have similar abilities and are just as capable.

So ...Canada and the U.S. rank in the mid 30's of the countries with the best health care.

It'd be interesting to look at the top 3 health care countries in the world and see what makes them tick ( i.e number & quality of doctors , # of MRI etc.)

And, if we can, cherry pick the best ideas for Canada to emulate.