Subjective. Irrelevant. Dependent on what criteria you use to define "quality of life". Different criteria = different conclusions. Opinions are not facts, and anyone can weigh value differently to control the outcome.
If Nation 'A' has more qualities than Nation 'B' of what a particular individual places the greatest value on, that individual will naturally consider Nation 'A' to be superior to Nation 'B'. However, a different person might place higher value on different qualities, making Nation "B' preferable to Nation 'A'.
You clearly put a higher weight on single-payer healthcare, and wealth redistribution than I do, so nations which do that will always rank higher in your evaluation. I have a preference for liberty, a market-based economy, and merit-based preference, as such I will always tend to rank those nations higher.
Ok. Let's look at objective data.
Right now the US has a higher infant mortality rate than Cuba.
I know you will argue with he source, so here is another saying the US has he highest rates of infant mortality among developed nations, and it comes from the CDC (yeah, our own government acknowledges this as true):
So I guess if you want to have children, you have a higher chance of them living in other countries.
Then there is quality of education that children receive:
"The latest ranking of top countries in math, reading, and science is out — and the US didn't crack the top 10"
So there are two issues. Please refute them instead of just repeating "its all subjective" even when presented with objective facts.
When it comes to infant mortality, there are a number of problems that make true comparison difficult. Other countries more regularly abort children which may be considered problematic (lower chance of survival, ect). If it is not allowed to be "born", it cannot "die" and count as an infant mortality. Also, because those countries are single payer, many children (premies with low chance of survival) that we would "waste resources" trying (unsuccessfully) to save are considered stillborn or miscarriages, rather than counting as an infant mortality. In other words we acknowledge life where they don't. If you never count it as alive, you don't have to acknowledge it died.
How about you show me, specifically, what America is best in the world at.
I know it isn't education, healthcare, or life expectancy.
I imagine you will probably respond with "Yes it is."
How about providing some evidence? You don't like the sources I provided, then provide others.
Perhaps I am wrong. Show me with something other than the "'Murica is da best!!!!!!!111" propaganda.
I know, I know. It is very un-american of me to actually consider facts instead of blindly worshipping the idea of America.
Sure, if you use third world countries as your comparison, America is amazing.
Not so much if you use countries like Sweeden, Finland, Canada, etc.
America is one of the worst "first world countries" when you look at access to education, healthcare, and wealth equality.
I guess that depends on what metrics you use to measure. The US may not have the best healthcare if you are measuring *accessibility*, but I wouldn't use that to measure who is "best". The state of medicine in the US is far and away better in terms of *quality* and *technology*.
I would never use "wealth equality" as a metric for anything.
How about oppressive taxation? Scandinavia has America beat on that one, for sure.
It isn't so much an issue of open borders. It is a matter of a lack of resources currently available to me. I can make money working, but all of that goes to rent and bills and the expenses of just existing. So I couldn't hire a coyote (not sure if they exist to get people into canada or if they do what the actual term is) because that costs money. Same thing for plane and boat tickets. As well as the vaccinations that would be a good idea t get since m immune system has developed to fight bacteria found in the US. Which is why I said if someone gave me a ticket I would go.
Don't lie.. You can't move to canada because you wouldn't pass through immigration. The majority of people who complain about how horrible it is here in america don't have the skills or education to actually legally emigrate. The countries they tout as "superior" don't want them.
Even if you knew what Canada requires for citizenship, you are still lacking some important information that would keep you from accurately assessing if I qualified or not: You know almost nothing about me ( and nothing significant).
If you were qualified you'd have the means to move. I know you aren't financially stable(by your own admission), and I know that most countries want people that will contribute, not drain. If you are having trouble with simply paying rent and buying food, you aren't the kind of person that nations are looking for. Sorry. They need people who will pay taxes. Someone who can't afford the cost of living is not that.
Most liberals decide how bad things are based on what they’re told by the liberal media and Hollywood. For example, the unemployment rate umong blacks skyrocketed under the Obama administration. But few if any blacks complained about it because, hey, we got a black president and that makes it OK.