The happiest countries

[Canuckistani]

This is the first topic I've started here. If I've broken any rules, LMK.

Economic prosperity, health and a strong social support network continue to correspond highly with happiness. Once again, the United States fails to make the top 10 happiest nations in the world, while countries like Australia, Israel and all of the Scandinavian nations do.

1. Denmark

> Life satisfaction score: 7.8

> Employment rate: 73% (6th highest)

> Self-reported good health: 71% (17th highest)

> Employees working long hours: 1.92% (4th lowest)

> Disposable income: $23,213 (15th lowest)

> Educational attainment: 76% (18th lowest)

> Life expectancy: 79.3 (11th lowest)

2. Norway

> Life satisfaction score: 7.6

> Employment rate: 75% (4th highest)

> Self-reported good health: 80% (8th highest)

> Employees working long hours: 2.66% (5th lowest)

> Disposable income: $30,465 (3rd highest)

> Educational attainment: 81% (tied - 15th highest)

> Life expectancy:81.2 (10th highest)

3. Netherlands

> Life satisfaction score: 7.5

> Employment rate: 75% (tied - 3rd highest)

> Self-reported good health: 77% (11th highest)

> Employees working long hours: 0.68% (2nd lowest)

> Disposable income: $25,740 (13th highest)

> Educational attainment: 73% (15th lowest)

> Life expectancy: 80.8 (14th highest)

4. Switzerland

> Life satisfaction score: 7.5

> Employment rate: 79% (1st highest)

> Self-reported good health: 87% (4th highest)

> Employees working long hours: 5.87% (17th highest)

> Disposable income: $27,756 (5th most)

> Educational attainment: 87% (8th highest)

> Life expectancy: 82.6 (2nd highest)

5. Austria

> Life satisfaction score: 7.5

> Employment rate: 72% (8th highest)

> Self-reported good health: 69% (17th lowest)

> Employees working long hours: 9.02% (10th highest)

> Disposable income: $27,541 (7th highest)

> Educational attainment: 82% (tied - 12th highest)

> Life expectancy: 80.7 (22nd lowest)

...

9. Canada

> Life satisfaction score: 7.4

> Employment rate: 72% (7th highest)

> Self-reported good health: 88% (3rd highest)

> Employees working long hours: 3.91% (11th lowest)

> Disposable income: $27,138 (8th highest)

> Educational attainment: 88% (5th highest)

> Life expectancy: 80.8 years (13th highest)

http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/the-happiest-countries-in-the-world.html?page=1

Edited May 25, 2012 by Canuckistani

[Signals.Cpl]

This is the first topic I've started here. If I've broken any rules, LMK.

http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/the-happiest-countries-in-the-world.html?page=2

What do they mean disposable income? Money after taxes or money after my bills are paid? Because I can tell you I don't know many people with $27,000 disposable income.

And how do they get Life Satisfaction score?

[Canuckistani]

What do they mean disposable income? Money after taxes or money after my bills are paid? Because I can tell you I don't know many people with $27,000 disposable income.

And how do they get Life Satisfaction score?

Disposable income is total personal income minus personal current taxes.

Life Satisfaction - they asked some people some questions would be my guess. Same questions they asked some people in other countries.

[Fletch 27]

How happy are you that you are not dead:

1) Extatic

2) Very happy

3) glad

4) Death doesnt seem that bad

5) i was i was dead..

Till you figure that out, These survery are complete BS.. Funded by a left leaning group wanting to see Unions everywhere. Thats just a guess however..

Life Satisfaction - they asked some people some questions would be my guess. Same questions they asked some people in other countries.

[Signals.Cpl]

Life Satisfaction - they asked some people some questions would be my guess. Same questions they asked some people in other countries.

What questions? Are you happy to be alive? Do you enjoy not being dead?

If we don't get the survey we cannot for sure say that they are happy or not. Did they ask 10,000 Canadians from all over the country in all walks of life and make a guess or did they ask people in Toronto right outside the welfare office?

[Canuckistani]

What questions? Are you happy to be alive? Do you enjoy not being dead?

If we don't get the survey we cannot for sure say that they are happy or not. Did they ask 10,000 Canadians from all over the country in all walks of life and make a guess or did they ask people in Toronto right outside the welfare office?

You really should ask them. My bet would be on the former.

[Canuckistani]

How happy are you that you are not dead:

1) Extatic

2) Very happy

3) glad

4) Death doesnt seem that bad

5) i was i was dead..

Till you figure that out, These survery are complete BS.. Funded by a left leaning group wanting to see Unions everywhere. Thats just a guess however..

Sure, a guess pulled out of you know where. This is OECD data analysed by 24/7 Wall Street. I doubt that an organization that does analysis for equity and global investors is all that left leaning or wants unions everywhere. You should do a bit of research before you spout off.

[Signals.Cpl]

You really should ask them. My bet would be on the former.

Well then this survey means nothing. I can go out and get massive support for a anything if I ask questions that are framed to get the answer I want.

[Canuckistani]

Well then this survey means nothing. I can go out and get massive support for a anything if I ask questions that are framed to get the answer I want.

How, if "they ask 10,000 Canadians from all over the country in all walks of life" does that mean nothing?

[Signals.Cpl]

How, if "they ask 10,000 Canadians from all over the country in all walks of life" does that mean nothing?

I am asking what they did, did they ask 10,000 people or was it an office poll. If they ask 10,000 people in order to get a proper view of the subject its one thing, asking 10,000 quebecers might give a different answer then 10,000 Albertans who might give a different answer from asking 10,000 prisoners.

If they don't present the questions asked to the people, define what disposable income means to them, or who they asked then this means NOTHING.

[Canuckistani]

I am asking what they did, did they ask 10,000 people or was it an office poll. If they ask 10,000 people in order to get a proper view of the subject its one thing, asking 10,000 quebecers might give a different answer then 10,000 Albertans who might give a different answer from asking 10,000 prisoners.

If they don't present the questions asked to the people, define what disposable income means to them, or who they asked then this means NOTHING.

I'm sure they would be delighted to tell you if you just asked. Unfortunately the article I listed doesn't address your questions. But you saying it means nothing means nothing, since you have nothing to back up your contention that this is a bullshit survey. Why is it you think that the OECD and or 214/7 Wall Street are mickey mouse outfits?

[Signals.Cpl]

I'm sure they would be delighted to tell you if you just asked. Unfortunately the article I listed doesn't address your questions. But you saying it means nothing means nothing, since you have nothing to back up your contention that this is a bullshit survey. Why is it you think that the OECD and or 214/7 Wall Street are mickey mouse outfits?

You are trying to prove that a country is happy based on questions asked you do not know about. If I asked a group of anti-war protestors if they support war and I asked a group of pro-war protestors if they supported a war I would get nearly unanimous support for and against.

And you have nothing to prove that its NOT a bullshit survey.

[Boges]

Again with the Scandinavia is the greatest place on Earth sentiment.

If those countries were so great why don't any of the countries have more than 10 million people?

You'd think their immigration would be high and people would be flocking to these places instead of shitholes like the US and Canada?

[Canuckistani]

Again with the Scandinavia is the greatest place on Earth sentiment.

If those countries were so great why don't any of the countries have more than 10 million people?

You'd think their immigration would be high and people would be flocking to these places instead of shitholes like the US and Canada?

Because they are small countries that don't have an open door policy to immigration. Otherwise many people would flock there.

[Canuckistani]

You are trying to prove that a country is happy based on questions asked you do not know about. If I asked a group of anti-war protestors if they support war and I asked a group of pro-war protestors if they supported a war I would get nearly unanimous support for and against.

And you have nothing to prove that its NOT a bullshit survey.

Maybe you'll find this helpful: http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/economics/how-s-life/subjective-well-being_9789264121164-14-en

It's easy to just call bullshit, but you've got to have something to go on. The OECD is a pretty solid organization, they're not going to do what you've alleged.

[Guest American Woman]

As I said before, in other threads about this same survey/topic, the results are meaningless because people don't all want the same things in life. These studies are based on what the person doing the study thinks makes people the "happiest," and quite simply put, different people want different things in life. It's why some people move to more socialist countries and some move to more capitalist countries; why some move to countries with less religion while others move to countries with a stronger faith base. It's why some people move to a country with a large population as others prefer a country with a small population. Some people prefer a multi-cultured country, while others prefer it if most people are just like them. Some people love heat and humidity, others prefer four seasons. Furthermore, some things, such as a higher crime rate, naturally occur within higher populations, but that doesn't mean everyone would be happier living in a lower crime Mayberry setting. No one can determine "happiness" for others, which is why I give no meaning to such surveys/studies. Furthermore, two people who are just as happy could answer questions differently simply because they have a different perception of the question.

I personally wouldn't want to live in a Scandinavian country, and obviously my ancestors felt the same way or they wouldn't have moved to the U.S. Different strokes for different folks.

[Canuckistani]

As I said before, in other threads about this same survey/topic, the results are meaningless because people don't all want the same things in life. These studies are based on what the person doing the study thinks makes people the "happiest," and quite simply put, different people want different things in life. It's why some people move to more socialist countries and some move to more capitalist countries; why some move to countries with less religion while others move to countries with a stronger faith base. It's why some people move to a country with a large population as others prefer a country with a small population. Some people prefer a multi-cultured country, while others prefer it if most people are just like them. Some people love heat and humidity, others prefer four seasons. Furthermore, some things, such as a higher crime rate, naturally occur within higher populations, but that doesn't mean everyone would be happier living in a lower crime Mayberry setting. No one can determine "happiness" for others, which is why I give no meaning to such surveys/studies. Furthermore, two people who are just as happy could answer questions differently simply because they have a different perception of the question.

I personally wouldn't want to live in a Scandinavian country, and obviously my ancestors felt the same way or they wouldn't have moved to the U.S. Different strokes for different folks.

Good reply. It doesn't invalidate the survey tho. These results don't mean that everybody in Denmark is happier than everybody in Canada, just that within the limits of subjective self-report a majority are. And not by very much. Each country will have people that are ecstatic and some that are totall miserable.

[Signals.Cpl]

Maybe you'll find this helpful: http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/economics/how-s-life/subjective-well-being_9789264121164-14-en

It's easy to just call bullshit, but you've got to have something to go on. The OECD is a pretty solid organization, they're not going to do what you've alleged.

I'm saying the value of the study is based on the questions asked, the way the questions were framed, and who was asked. So you are saying that since this is a "respectable" organization we should not ask questions?

If you publish a study that states which ranks people's happiness then they should put in the criteria of their ranking system. If your intention was to prove that Denmark is the happiest country in the world, did you twist your questions to fit the desired result? Did you ask the group of people who are most likely to give you the desired answer? Did you disregard people's answers due to their opposition to your desired result?

[Boges]

Because they are small countries that don't have an open door policy to immigration. Otherwise many people would flock there.

So that's the answer to happiness? Some would call that racist.

[Guest American Woman]

Because they are small countries that don't have an open door policy to immigration. Otherwise many people would flock there.

This is from 2006, re: the world's happiest country: The world’s happiest country is Denmark

Also from 2006, emphasis mine: Denmark: Integrating Immigrants into a Homogeneous Welfare State

Traditionally, Denmark has not regarded itself as a country of immigration. This is due to its relatively homogeneous population of 5.4 million, a strong sense of national identity, and the fact that, until recently, immigration flows were moderate.

Most immigrants in Denmark came from other Nordic or Western countries

, and

the country experienced more emigration than immigration.

So that's the answer to happiness? Some would call that racist.

I agree. Yet, even at that, more people left Denmark than moved there.

(Edited to add link)

Edited May 25, 2012 by American Woman

[Fletch 27]

This guy wants to tell a dane who lived there how happy he "should" have been after 20 years... Canukistan has never been there but insists its glorious.... With the mass exodus as I stated prior. This guy is a left wing lemming. Ka du snak dansk? They Have an open door policy on immigrqtion! Maybe check your facts prior to advertising your stupidity......

Danes would love nothing better than to leave Denmark but have been whipped by the government for so long... Only the strong and those with drive depart... The rest and comfy in lower class

Canukistan, I suggest you try the outskirts of aarhus where the Somalis have set up a small group of whore-houses, resembling a small country town and catering to the whino's from the neighboring towns.. It's adorable.... Just don't park south of faarvang where the gypsies steal every vehicle that has a warm engine.... I do recommend billund however for the legoland... It's really nice this time of year. Typical lefty..

Edited May 26, 2012 by Fletch 27

[Canuckistani]

So that's the answer to happiness? Some would call that racist.

Wait, I see what you did there. Nice acrobatics. I guess people will throw the race card at anything. You asked why people were not flocking to immigrate to the Scandinavian countries. I answered that they are small countries which restrict immigration. That's why people don't flock there - they're not allowed, there's no room. What does any of that have to do with race?

Edited May 26, 2012 by Canuckistani

[Canuckistani]

This is from 2006, re: the world's happiest country: The world’s happiest country is Denmark

Also from 2006, emphasis mine: Denmark: Integrating Immigrants into a Homogeneous Welfare State

Traditionally, Denmark has not regarded itself as a country of immigration. This is due to its relatively homogeneous population of 5.4 million, a strong sense of national identity, and the fact that, until recently, immigration flows were moderate.

Most immigrants in Denmark came from other Nordic or Western countries

, and

the country experienced more emigration than immigration.

I agree. Yet, even at that, more people left Denmark than moved there.

(Edited to add link)

But did more leave than moved there because immigration is restricted? You don't think if Denmark had an open door policy, it would attract many immigrants?

Canada takes more immigrants per capita than any other nation. If there's a mass exodus of Danes, they're sure not coming here. Compare that to the Irish, who after the severe beating their laissez faire economy took in 2008 are coming here in droves.

By all indicators Denmark is a very good country to live. Just because Fletch doesn't like it, doesn't mean the people who stay behind are unhappy with it. In fact they seem very happy with it.

Edited May 26, 2012 by Canuckistani

[Signals.Cpl]

Wait, I see what you did there. Nice acrobatics. I guess people will throw the race card at anything. You asked why people were not flocking to immigrate to the Scandinavian countries. I answered that they are small countries which restrict immigration. That's why people don't flock there - they're not allowed, there's no room. What does any of that have to do with race?

Room? They are pretty large countries and underpopulated at that.

[Canuckistani]

You guys will argue any little point, huh?

Denmark's strict immigration laws have saved the country 6.7 billion euros, a government report has claimed. Even though Denmark already has some of the toughest immigration laws in Europe, right-wing populist politicians are now trying to make them even more restrictive.

So whatever the reason, even if Denmark is less populated than Nunavut, they have chosen to limit immigration. That's why people don't flock there.

Oh, and: Population density Canada = 3.3/km², US = 33/km², Denmark = 129/km²

Edited May 26, 2012 by Canuckistani