Is life in Europe better than U.S.?

Questions comparing the “quality of life” between nations, states, regions, communities, continents all have the same answer: The wealthy, powerful and privileged have a good quality of life and those who are poor, powerless and underprivileged have a poor quality of life.

The standards of living/quality of life experienced by the poor, disadvantaged and powerless should only be compared to the quality of life/standards of living of the poor and disadvantaged people from nation to nation, state to state, region to region, etc. For example, what is the quality of life/standard of living of someone who is very poor, underprivileged and powerless living in the American State of Washington compared to the State of Missouri? How do the impoverished and underprivileged citizens of USA as a whole compare to someone who is a very poor and powerless in Haiti, Pakistan, India or China or France or Sweden?

To be very poor in every State of the USA almost always means access to health care, at least for pregnant women and children and elderly and even illegal immigrants; a home, education, clean running water, electricity, no need to share a home with many relatives, decent nutrition and usually transportation, even ownership of a car, televisions, cell phones, and some extras. To be extremely poor in S. Sudan might mean life barely sustained in an overcrowded and under-funded refugee camp.

There are all kinds of programs staffed with people doing everything they can to get homeless Americans into shelter; the issue of being homeless in the USA almost always means serious mental health/addiction issues. A “home” in a S. Sudanese refugee camps means rags and plastic draped over some sticks.

To be a baby born into extreme developing-world poverty means that chances are that you won’t make it til your fifth birthday. In the USA, Australia, Japan, Western Europe and the UK even the most fragile, disabled premature infants of the very poor are born in hospitals and cared for in Neonatal Intensive Care Units where millions may be spent to help you survive infancy and millions more dedicated to helping even disabled children of the poor to achieve their full potential.

How do humanity’s many nations, States, cities and communities compare in how the most vulnerable and the impoverished are cared for? There are some developing-world nations that do more to support the poorest and most-vulnerable than some of the wealthiest nations on Earth. GDP and average income statistics do not always define how nations support their most vulnerable and underprivileged citizens, but GDP is ALWAYS a primary factor in what resources are available, if not how those resources are distributed.

The variations in the distribution of available resources/wealth to assist the poorest and most-vulnerable citizens depend upon both the dominant culture and the systems of government plus the degree of corruption in government. Some cultures do not assume responsibility for the most-impoverished and least-powerful and others do in varying degrees. Democracy and literacy and gender equality hugely enhance the quality of life for the poorest citizens and entire nations. Theocracies and totalitarian rule tend to concentrate power and wealth for the elite few while the majority of citizens are poor; the extremely poor are desperately impoverished and often live without even life-sustaining support. Mother/infant/under-five morbidity and mortality is often tragically high and there is little opportunity for the very poor to improve their “quality of life” for themselves or their children.

“A society is judged by how the least of their citizens are treated” (paraphrased) is attributed to Gandhi, Nelson Mendela and others, but the origin of the quote is obscure. That quote, however, is the absolute truth of how we must compare and judge one nation or State or cultural tradition from another, NOT by any other preference or standard.

Therefore, KSA, with an enormous GDP and an incredibly high average income utterly fails because of Saudi neglect and oppression of extremely poor citizens and the legions of foreign laborers who live miserable lives of grossly unacceptable poverty and subjugation. New Zealand has a small GDP and average income but has social programs that give excellent support to the poorest and most-vulnerable.

All wealthy first-world nations can do better than we are, but to be impoverished and powerless in the ME, Africa and much of Asia and parts of South, Central America and Mexico is to have a very low or NO “quality of life” and even to be deprived of life itself, and little opportunity to better one’s life or hope for things ever changing.