Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

People need food, housing, education and health more than they need iPhones.

Everyone needs these, not everyone needs an iPhone. Which means a country where everyone has their basic needs covered but no one has an iPhone, I would say, is a better country to live in (on average) than a country where half of the people have iPhones and houses and the other half doesn't have either houses or iPhones.

I think a lot of people fall into a trap of looking at their own circumstances and virtually move themselves to the other country, of course, as a software developer living in the bay area it's very unlikely you'll find a better place to live. You already have everything. But if you were to think "which country would you rather have been born in" the equation changes. Because in a country like the USA the chance of being poor or marginalised (think being born a woman or LGBT in a red state) is much higher than, say, France. Of course if you look at developing countries like Latvia the equation might change.

So, really, I think it's important to think about how much of our basic are covered for how much of the population.



> So, really, I think it's important to think about how much of our basic are covered for how much of the population.

This is fair, it's just that I feel like focusing on PPP often makes people miss out on certain aspects of the greater picture.

For example, why many might choose to work for either US companies if possible, or even travel to US to work and build as much capital as they can, before settling down either back home with a substantial amount of money, or alternatively choosing another country.

Of course, at that point one also cannot disregard how good or bad any given country is from a social standpoint, like human rights issues and so on.


Is Latvia really a developing country?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: