Argentina Ranks 4Th On Cato Institute Misery Index

[thorsten]

As much as I think that there is no sound measure for a fuzzy term like "misery" and thus wouldn't put too much credit on these kinds of reports in general, its interesting to see people spending a lot of time arguing against the list by naming countries which are worse in their opinion and not in the list without realizing that the report covers 89 countries in total which does not even cover 50% of all countries...

 

[steveinbsas]

Totally agree. Look at the countries they name - Serbia, Iran, Venezuela, Jamaica, Argentina.

Hello? Syria, massive US/Saudi/Israeli/Qatari-sponsored invasion by organ-eating savages, but not even on the list?

Afghanistan, occupied by USA and its European lapdogs for a dozen years, a half-a-million people dead and millions more displaced, with no end to the occupation in sight, but still not on the list?

Pakistan, subjected to a decade of US drone strikes murdering women, children and the elderly without mercy or discrimination, threatened by civil war, millions displaced internally or refugees, and still not on the list?

Yemen, again subjected to murderous US drone strikes slaughtering the innocent indiscriminately, civil war with the Houthi, border conflicts with Saudi Arabia, one of the lowest standards of living in the Arab world, but still not on the list?

Iraq, a million dead during the US attack and occupation, still occupied by 10,000 US troops under the guise of a "guard force" for the embassy, terrible birth defects as a result of the profligate use of depleted uranium ammunition by US forces, and now an invasion by the US/Saudi/Qatari-sponsored ISIL, but not even on the list?

Nigeria, decades of low-level civil war and now apparently next on the list for US invasion and occupation, but not even on the list?

Sudan, decades of low level civil war, partition into two nations, and now a civil war within South Sudan, but not even on the list?

Zimbabwe, 35 years of iron-fisted rule by Robert Mugabe, one of the worst tyrants sub-Saharan Africa has ever seen, devastated economy, recurring episodes of cholera and typhus/typhoid because the Mugabe "government" has neglected the once-fairly-good infrastructure until not even the capital of Harare has clean drinking water. And then there is the blood diamonds issue, complete with slave labor. And the periodic slaughter of the Ndebele by the Shona-dominated army, led by the 5th brigade. But still not on the list?

And we're supposed to believe that Argentina is worse than all of these?

Now have a look at the Wikipedia article on the Cato institute, check the three founders, see where it says Charles Koch? As in Koch brothers? I think that tells us all we need to know about the Cato institute. Whether or not individual Libertarians are aware of it, this is nothing more than a stalking horse for the reactionaries.

Steve, you mean well, and your heart is in the right place, but you are being used.

What are you talking about? I did not start this thread and I didn't make a comment about it's validity. I'm only surprised that you beat ajo to questioning (if not smearing) the source by mentioning the Koch brothers, and that does not constitute a refutation of anything.

What's important to note is that the the results of the "index" are based on three factors: consumer prices, interest rates, and unemployment. It doesn't really measure individual misery any more than national score or the Happy Plant Index measures individual happiness. The latter is heavily "weighted" by the "ecological footprint" of a county and when any individual takes the individual survey as Sockhopper did in 2010 when Argentina was ranked at number 15, two places higher than the most recent survey:

http://www.happyplan...ries/argentina/

Sockhopper took the survey and here is what he/she posted about it on Septembe 11, 2010, providing a great example of how national rankings are meaningless on an individual basis:

Well, I suppose that not expending resources gained from environmental efficiencies on war is bound to make people happier. But unless we know what a country does with an efficiency it gains by having people buy, say, expensive energy-saving light bulbs, I don’t see any link between that ‘efficiency’ and its citizens’ happiness. In Canada, promoting such bulbs was followed this summer by 3 provinces increasing taxes on consumers’ electricity use from 5% to 13%. Neither the light bulbs nor the tax have increased happiness. Before this increased tax was introduced, the federal government justified it by saying the increase would go to exporters to increase their competitiveness. But now that the increase is in force, it’s not going to them or anything that makes people happy.

I listened to the video and was impressed. It made me happy! Then I took the "Happy Index Survey” which is really a test with questions whose answers are used to judge your own personal 'happiness' level by what you give to the planet. It’s at:

http://survey.happyp...x.org/index.php

Now I AM unhappy. This test’s results told me to reduce meat in my diet although I did the test twice, each time answering that I’m fully vegetarian (and have been since long before environmentalism taught that vegetarianism is a ‘sacrifice’ we ‘should’ make. I never regarded it that way.)

The test judged my level of eco-responsibility to a significant degree on whether I frequently spent money buying “energy-saving light bulbs and appliances” which lowers one’s ecological footprint. Or whether I spent money on what it manipulatively and disrespectfully calls “ ‘stuff’- such as electrical and electronic equipment, furniture, hardware, and jewelry but not clothes”. Thus, the purchases I made to restore and renovate what I already own (eg. a sewing machine to mend clothes and linens, boxes to store thread, a lamp to see what I’m fixing, a kitchen knife, oven mitts) plus a replacement towel rail and a $200. camera threw me into the second worst bracket as an abuser of world resources by having spent more than $800. on these items! Buying anything not hyped as ‘green’ raises your footprint! The results of my test told me to stop buying everything in sight and to make do with my old pans although my 15-year old ones which we maintain and look almost new are our only pans. Who do environmentalists think they’re kidding?

No credit was given for using public transport other than for getting to work; for not owning a car, for taking up just 53 sq. ft of living space my whole life, for not buying packaged and processed foods and ready-meals or for not buying appliances that most people consider necessary. Neither did cooking from scratch earn me ’green’ points. This highly politicized version of environmentalism is indistinguishable from good old consumerism. Doing what you can to hold onto what you have seems to have no place in this ‘ism’. I felt like I’m on another planet because real ‘environmental efficiences’ just don’t count. Happiness is still largely based on what one buys. All that’s been tweaked is the definition of which consumables bring status to…..environmentalists.

Clothing is specifically excluded from the survey probably because textiles are small fry compared to where the big money lies for enviro-consumables. Nowhere in the test are things needed for babies or children. So if you have a child for whom you need to buy a crib, you better not also need a new mattress yourself if you want to have a green-worthy eco-print on this test because both count as your own furniture purchases. I don’t see how killing your back and potentially going on disability due to that is going to protect future generations’ or anyone’s well-being or our natural resources.

The test said that my only flight per year, to Buenos Aires, had rocketed my carbon footprint by about 6 times (ie. just London to Athens one way once would have doubled it). It told me to stop using 'planes so often, to find alternative transport, lengthen my trips (what-beyond 5 weeks?) and to forego my indulgent and numerous week-end jaunts! No one's so stupid to misjudge the distance to BA that badly and so, clearly, the so-called 'environmental' objective here is to isolate we do-gooders and instructors of the world's poor on how to save the earth, from having physical contact with people whose societies already live far more moderately than we will ever implement. Remain isolated and we can continue believing that the West is best at leading the way.

I ended up with the footprint of a resident of Croatia which the test said was only just so-so okay. And not on account of my own efforts but merely by the happenstance of my living in North America! A true personal test would judge an individual's success on its own merits and not dole out a handicap excusing your society's notorious wastefulness.

Nothing in the test acknowledges or rewards the value of finding individual solutions that don't stick to what the environmental movement and its industries dictate. This discourages individual creativity by discounting it which worries me when it’s so needed to cope in a worldwide recession. Regarding ‘recycling’, the test asks only how often you recycle. It doesn't increase your green-score to do more than turn off the TV when you’re not watching it and put your empty cans in the right box. Develop a social plan that inspires cartoneros to design very modern jewelry from the tons of waste they collect and you’ll fare no better eco-wise on this survey.

The test is sneaky. It mingles the questions that have always been asked to predict one's longevity and assess one’s well-being with what clearly is a marketing tool for environmental industries. It is not a ‘happiness’ test at all. It’s merely collecting data on how people spend their money. I thought buying more was the problem that environmentalism purported to address in the first place!

After seeing how the test manipulates a stunningly narrow conformity, I looked again at the country-list. But this time I saw the countries named as mostly ones held back by the West, or exploited or ignored by it. I suppose it's hard to claim you’re the most planet-caring unless you can contrast yourself with the poor abroad and around you who unlike yourself can’t afford to buy solar panels or who have nowhere to mount them, and who can't afford to replace functioning fridges.

If Argentines are happy, it’s because they regard social connections as very important and are creatively free to develop methods of recycling where everyone can contribute, and where you don’t need to be wealthy or compete for a badge or carry a bag that blares how much you-especially love the planet.

 

[steveinbsas]

As much as I think that there is no sound measure for a fuzzy term like "misery" and thus wouldn't put too much credit on these kinds of reports in general, its interesting to see people spending a lot of time arguing against the list by naming countries which are worse in their opinion and not in the list without realizing that the report covers 89 countries in total which does not even cover 50% of all countries...

Perhaps "economic freedom" is an "easier" term to define, but the results of a recent "index" placed Argentina very low (166) on a list of 186 countries.

http://www.heritage....untry/argentina

That index was published by the Heritage Foundation, which of course was attacked in less than 30 minutes after I stated the thread by a member who had noting to say about the index or the results.

http://baexpats.org/... freedom index

I anyone thinks I was being used by starting this thread, I would love to know how.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

Perhaps "economic freedom" is an "easier" term to define, but the results of a recent "index" placed Argentina very low (166) on a list of 186 countries.

http://www.heritage....untry/argentina

That index was published by the Heritage Foundation, which of course was attacked in less than 30 minutes after I stated the thread by a member who had noting to say about the index or the results.

http://baexpats.org/... freedom index

I anyone thinks I was being used by starting this thread, I would love to know how.

Even though Argentina is an economic basketcase, Cato and Heritage define themselves by the narrowest untenable ideology, even if they're not wrong on everything.

 

[ARbound]

 

[ajoknoblauch]

With no apologies to the Cristinistas and Camporistas, Cato and Heritage probably rank Nos. 1-2 on the "How To Make the Less Fortunate Miserable Index."

 

[Noesdeayer]

Up by thier own bootstraps is what I'd call it. Last Tuesday,June 10 I had a very excilerating experience "Una Experiencia Endeavor" or Emprendimientos in Spanish.( I can already hear some voices riling against this organization given its U.S, and free market origins).Nonetheless,after 35 years in Argentina it filled me with a new hope in the future of this country.La Usina del Arte in La Boca was packed with some 2,000 participants anxious to discover what we could do to contribute to this future.There were all kinds of small start ups and independent professionals like myself participating. I will be a mentor and sponsor with www.inicia.org.ar There were local investores and others from U.S.,Canada and other L.American countries too.There were speeches by local entrepreneurs,videos and lots of networking.What really impressed me were the number of young "twenty somethings" (I am 72) whose enthusiasm was so inspiring.Ceviche would have loved it.I came away feeling that this was Argentina as it should,and,hopefully,soon will be Many hands do indeed make light work.

 

[Matiasba]

what? do you not like hard data? do you not like when inquestionable data is agaisnt your opinion?

refute what I say, prove me wrong! or wait, you cant.... what a pitty!

keep on trolling, so you can prove my point of your lack of arguments!

You are a poor, unhappy soul stuck in this country. I feel very sorry for you.

 

[EdRooney]

Yellow card, Matías.

There's no need to belittle ARBound for his unfortunate situation. Not cool. While I agree he is unfairly extrapolating his own problems to the rest of the country, he is not trolling by any stretch of the imagination. There is no call to be mean.

 

[Matiasba]

Yellow card, Matías.

There's no need to belittle ARBound for his unfortunate situation. Not cool. While I agree he is unfairly extrapolating his own problems to the rest of the country, he is not trolling by any stretch of the imagination. There is no call to be mean.

Im sorry, but I dont know what I did to this guy.

Maybe because of his situation or because he thinks I work for the government or La Campora, or maybe he thinks I am related in any way with the government.

I Know he is in a miserable situation and I dont want to make fun of him or anything. I think that because in some ways I support this government (which I not, I said tons of times here that I actually like some -the main- of their economic policies, and my position here is merely defensive) he can give vent with me. Maybe bacause Im one of the very few that in some ways defend the K administration that (he thinks) make his life miserably.


As for me, what I did is only, respectfully disagree, repeating what I actually showed many times on this board, hard data, numbers, etc, remember? from La Nacion, from World Bank, the progress I talked many times of the HDI, even the IMF support that data about people getting out of poverty and climbing to the middle class.
Now this, I did it with respect, as I do always, and if it happens that I do not agree with what someone says, I say it with respect.

Posting images, or discrediting what I say with a Campora image is not ony disrespectful but also immature. And yes, it is trolling.
From my point of view, if you just cant deny what the other say, or if you just cant stand in a discussion, leave, dont make fun of whatever the other is saying. Dont like what he says? you run out of arguments? retire yourself from the discussion, as I did many times, but with dignity. No need to mock.