Talk:Standard of living
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article is the subject of an educational assignment supported by Wikipedia Ambassadors through the India Education Program.|
gross domestic product
Standard of living is very hard to understand
A basic model for measuring "material" standard of living would include Mean Income/GDP Per Capita, material goods available/consumed, economic growth and unemployment.
However, "measured" material well-being tells only part of the story. In many circumstances, "personal" and Quality of Life attributes and recourses make one nation or society an appealing place to live, raise a family, visit or trade with.
Clinton is worse than Bush
Why is there a link to GDP? Consider the fact that canada had less GDP than mexico recently. Clearly this is a terrible model of standard of living
- Even though that may be true about Canada and Mexico, GDP is still a measurement of standard of living, whether you agree with this or not. I think that it is important that a link to GDP remain.--MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 17:46, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Can anybody tell me about the topic: "standard of living has improve but not the quality of life"? Or, like me does no one actually cares.
In a rich life happiness is not guaranteed. In other words happiness is a state of mind, and money doesn't make you happy it just pays the bills and brings in the groceries. You may have a career but you may not like working that job. smart group Cuttin' loose and dancing to the beat of my own drum
Use the CIA World Factbook (External Links). It is really good!
What I need is relative cost of living. For example, with $1,000 a month for 1-bed-room rent, it takes over $80k to get by in suburban Washington DC, but you can BUY a house in Ada, OK for $20k ($100 a month) and live a comfortable life earning just 12 grand a year. If you had no house payment, ate out of your garden and your own livestock, didn't have cable, internet or phone, you could probably live fine for $1 a day. So how do we measure "poverty"? DeknMike (talk) 14:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
I think these are too fine of lines being drawn. Yes, it is hard to measure what is happiness because there are not any variable to measure, but happiness in this sense is not on the individual level.--MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 17:56, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Access to land!?
This line (completely without citation): "A more realistic measure [of standard of living] is the number of people who have access to free subsistence land."
How is this at all a reasonable measure of standard of living? That number in Manhattan is zero. Many places in sub-Saharan Africa it is above zero. Are we really going to argue that sub-Saharan Africans enjoy a dramatically higher standard of living than Manhattanites!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 05:35, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
There is a spelling error in discrepancy and the example of Korea after the "historical" adjective before describing Germany can cause confusion as up until the 70's North Korea was vastly more wealthy than South Korea in addition to having a low income gradient among people. Basically the whole thing should be re-worded and expanded, this is a very weak and not quite informative —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 19:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.
The following request appears on that page:
|Many of the articles were selected semi-automatically from a list of indefinitely semi-protected articles.
Please confirm that the protection level appears to be still warranted, and consider unprotecting instead, before applying pending changes protection to the article.
Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.
Please update the Queue page as appropriate.
Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially
However, there can be problems even with just using numerical averages to compare material standards of living, as opposed to, for instance, a Pareto index (a measure of the breadth of income or wealth distribution). Standards of living are perhaps inherently subjective. As an example, countries with a very small, very rich upper class and a very large, very poor lower class may have a high mean level of income, even though the majority of people have a low "standard of living". This mirrors the problem of poverty measurement, which also tends towards the relative. This illustrates how distribution of income can disguise the actual standard of living.
This whole paragraph needs referenced. The part about inherently subjective possibly should be removed. It seems as if it is part of an essay that was added.--MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 18:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
I've travelled some in the world, and so have many people I've known or met. In casual discussions of "standard of living" people (travellers) often talk about the state of the housing that people are living in. And the institutional buildings. Not necessarily how new or expensive the houses or apartments or schools are, but whether they are shabby or in good repair - and whether the buildings perhaps have some beauty (be they older or recent, traditional or modern in style, or maybe just quaint). Also, whether the neighborhoods have amenities like parks and/or sports areas that are kept well. And whether the streets and roads are in good repair.
And what about the quality of the available food? Good, mediocre, or poor? I'm not referring to the cuisine of the country, but the quality of the basic foodstuffs.
Income (or the GDP) of the country and distribution of that money may be related, but may have an indirect or even tenuous relation to standard of living indicators I'm mentioning.Joel Russ (talk) 20:31, 27 August 2012 (UTC)