Talk:Quality of life

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This environment-related article is part of a WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. See WikiProject Environment and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

--Alex 08:38, 24 July 2006(UTC)

it`s all good

[edit] Improvement drive

A related topic, Grameen Bank, has been nominated on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. Contribute your expertise and vote for Grameen Bank on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive!--Fenice 06:46, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] VOTE!! - HDI in Infobox#Countries|country infobox/template?

The Human Development Index (HDI) is a standard UN measure/rank of how developed a country is or is not. It is a composite index based on GDP per capita (PPP), literacy, life expectancy, and school enrollment. However, as it is a composite index/rank, some may challenge its usefulness or applicability as information.

Thus, the following question is put to a vote:

Should any, some, or all of the following be included in the Wikipedia Infobox#Countries|country infobox/template:

(1) Human Development Index (HDI) for applicable countries, with year;

(2) Rank of country’s HDI;

(3) Category of country’s HDI (high, medium, or low)?

YES / NO / UNDECIDED/ABSTAIN - vote here

Thanks!

E Pluribus Anthony 01:52, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Economic/Utility Theory View

An economist would suggest that quality of life is not derived from a raw numerical value of earnings, but rather the happiness (often refered to as utility) that it creates. Because it is impossible to compare utilities directly, dollars are generally used as the common medium.

New Ideas from Dead Economists (Todd Buchholz) cites a prime example in sayting that, "Baseball great Willie Mays used to say that he would play for free." While this isn't literally true -- he would need enough to survive day to day -- it means that most of what he earns (even if it were only tens of thousands) is improving his utility. The same, common theme can be used to compare a teacher to a trash collector.

The teacher does not only gain the value of their wage, but also the satisfaction of their work. If a teacher would happily teach for $5/h, even a $10/h wage represents $5/h above the value which they demand for their lost time. By contrast, a trash collector might be unwilling to do their job for any less then $20/h. Despite half the wage, a utility theorist would recognize that the teacher had a higher quality of life then the trash collector because they are being compensated more then the perceived value of their time.

The same issue could be addressed from the demand side. If two people purchase the same item (a book for examle) for $10, they don't necessarily received the same value from that item. If one were willing to pay no more then $10 and the other were willing to pay $60, the latter would gain $50 in value through the transaction. An addicted bookworm could, on a very tight salary, generate a higher personal utility then someone who realizes little value above the dollars spent on their purchases.

Obviously, this represents an over-simplification of the issue, but it notes that the actual quality of life needs to be based on the additional value we receive *from* the activities we do (both work and play) and not just dollars which are transacted.