explain to me right now why this isn't the best way

Sweden is ranked too high

>>70063183
HDI is a shitty measure of human development. It is bounded between 0 and 1 and no amount of income can ever contribute more than 1/3 to the HDI. The classic argument is a nation of immortals with infinite wealth but no education would have lower HDI than Angola or Vietnam.

Median income is better.

>>70063200
not an argument

File: a84946c6a98dd0b835e26f2f542fbd42.png (212KB, 1466x1006px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 1466x1006px

>>70063183
bORING MAP

begause inegualidy means gommunism :DD

>>70063331
gith

>>70063274
>Median income is better.
I hope you mean Median income (PPP).
>no education
Implicitly, it states that education is a necessecity for human development. I don't find it odd at all. After all, we are talking about empirical data here.

>>70063274
Aside from this HDI has a variety of other problems:

1. It uses years of education and current school enrollment as a percentage of population as a measure of education. This has obvious problem as it benefits nations with a large student population even if said education is extremely poor. If quality of education is taken into account by for example factoring in PISA scores, the results drastically change. For example, the current HDI way to measure this puts the USA very low for a developed country, yet PISA scores show that average US students have nearly identical scores to those in, say, Denmark.

2. It uses life expectancy without any other health metrics. This doesn't determine how healthy the people are, just how long their hearts keep beating. For example, China is infamous for its health problems, yet has a relatively high life expectancy.

3. The UN uses the Atkinson Index to adjust for income inequality. This formula is heavily weighed towards the bottom 10% income and does not accurately represent income for the higher income groups. It also incorporates moral judgement within the formula.

The HDI, especially the income adjusted HDI, is a measurement of how closely a nation resembles Norway, not a measurement of actual human development.

>>70063514
What are these infamous health problems in China?

File: Screen Shot 2017-01-17 at 5.03.40 PM.png (169KB, 1055x664px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1055x664px

>>70063487
>I hope you mean Median income (PPP).

Of course.

>Implicitly, it states that education is a necessecity for human development. I don't find it odd at all. After all, we are talking about empirical data here.

Except not only is hard-capping wealth the way it does extremely misleading (since of course a millionaire small business owner is better off than a middle class office worker even if the latter had four extra years of education), but it doesn't actually measure educational attainment in any way. It just measures how many people are enrolled in some type of school, no matter how poor the schooling is. A more complete measurement would be to compare PISA scores, or something else that actually measure the quality of education.

>>70063544
Pollution, malnutrition in rural regions, and incredibly high rates of smoking-related deaths and mental illness.

>>70063651
How many are afflicted by it? If it was a serious problem they obviously wouldn't have a life expectancy on par with western countries

File: 1484585900948.jpg (133KB, 776x678px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 776x678px

>>70063612
>ameridumbs

File: autismmap.png (276KB, 900x469px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 900x469px

>>70063183
Because you could always rank them like this

>>70063612
I very much agree, having said that, HDI isn't meant to rank countries at all and shouldn't even be used to define which countries are "developed" it's just a useful bird's eye view of an admittedly small cross section of indicators meant to track progress of living standards (thus wealth, education and life expectancy are weighed) and which can be used, within reason, for comparisons. Cuba is a relative high HDI for Lat Am despite having objectively lower income than the median for the region, you're pretty much screwed if you're whatever passes for middle class there compared to almost every country except maybe Venezuela and Haiti. If you're poor tho chances are you'll be better off as you will at least have better access to health and education than the average for someone in your income level elsewhere in the region so it isn't like the measure is entirely useless, it's just come to be used in ways it wasn't meant to be used such as le meme defining "first world" (which is obsolete cold war terminology but that's a different matter entirely) a part of this lies on institutions, governments and the fucking media misusing it tho, plus it doesn't help the lists are ranked as if it indeed was a competition. It[s arguable whether life is better in say Australia compared to Switzerland or Norway vs Canada. The answer is it probably depends on a lot of factors, third world upper middle class likely lives in far more luxury (bigger homes, staff like maids, drivers) than their developed world equivalent even if they probably find it a bit more expensive/harder to buy that trendy high tech gadget or get their hands on this season's designer fashions.

>>70063183
Indonistan should be dark red.