Friday, May 31, 2013
Let us be realistic about what sample of data we are comparing as there is a loopsided comparison between apple and oranges. How can you compare a country of more than 300 million people with countries which are maybe hardly 20 million or less and then expect that the U.S. should have the same kind of infrastructure and living standards and all the assortment of indexes that define which is the best places to live? And happiness is a relative subject which can mean different things to different people. Despite being behind some countries on the index of livability, most of the people are happy enough to live and raise their families here. And for better or for worse, the U.S. is the first choice for most of the immigrants despite its troubles because it is here that people of different nationalities thrive and try to achieve something for their future generations. And the U.S. is the only country which takes more immigrants than other countries and try to assimilate them as much as possible and in the course of that if it is not successful that is not because it is not trying but the sheer number of new comers with different back grounds have different needs which takes time to adjust and reallocate resources so that they may be served better. And it all costs money, which is constantly increasing as some groups fall through the cracks. I wonder if this same situation exists in other so called "HAPPY" countries and how will they be able to cope with this influx and how well then their "HAPPINESS" level suffer.