What is Quality of Life?

[Rhea]

The overpopulation thread spawned what I think might be an interesting question; Quality of Life - what is it and how can we decide on a measure that can inform government policy?

Some thoughts that sparked this:

1. It means that overpopulation means a vast complexity of things and you are concerned with only a single one of them, nutrition.

No, actually I'm not. I'm also concerned with all the other aspects of quality living. But once again; the quality of life; at least in the west; of urban populations is HIGHER than that of people in the countryside. This is a simple fact. By your rant filled posts, it seems as if you think living in Paris or Tokyo is some sort of blade runner-style nightmare, but in reality it's quite the opposite.

Really What's the measure of "quality of life"? Genuinely curious, assuming you have a reason to say that and I'm looking to learn what it is.

Urban populations are better educated, have greater income equality, live longer, live *healthier* too (despite the increased air pollution), and have easier access to any service they may need or want. It's really hard to look at these facts and think urban populations DON'T have a higher quality of life.

So what measures do people think contribute to quality of life?
Are there measures that justify saying, "you all move to cities because your quality of life will be better"?

 

[Rhea]

Here's an article on the health aspects:
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304793504576434442652581806

although it's interesting that they compare income without comparing cost of living. So while income is 2/3, the cost of housing, for example, is less than 1/2.
Some parts of this are interesting and I wonder if the ACA implementation will show some differences in outcome between rural and urban life, since one part of the health difference lies in access to insurance and healthcare.

 

[Nexus]

Quality of life metrics are somewhat subjective.

 

[Rhea]

Quality of life metrics are somewhat subjective.

I agree with you. And yet we use them for legislative purposes like doling out services. So are there some that are very obvious? Is there anywhere to even start?

 

[EricK]

Given freedom of movement, it is reasonable to assume that people move where their quality of life, all things considered, is highest (by their own subjective measure).

 

[SimpleDon]

Quality of life metrics are somewhat subjective.

I am sorry, but no, quality of life measurements are easy to quantify. Basic needs, food, clothing, shelter, health care, education, transportation, employment, etc. Beyond basic needs, access to entertainment, recreation, leisure time, disposable income, etc. These seem to be easy to qualify. Or are we talking about something else?

 

[EricK]

Quality of life metrics are somewhat subjective.

I am sorry, but no, quality of life measurements are easy to quantify. Basic needs, food, clothing, shelter, health care, education, transportation, employment, etc. Beyond basic needs, access to entertainment, recreation, leisure time, disposable income, etc. These seem to be easy to qualify. Or are we talking about something else?

Presumably the problem comes if you have to weigh-up better health care, say, in one place, with better education in another etc - would the quality of life in your town be improved more by an extra hospital or an extra school (or by better transportation links, or a new factory opening etc, etc)?

 

[Nexus]

I agree with you. And yet we use them for legislative purposes like doling out services. So are there some that are very obvious? Is there anywhere to even start?

Obviously at the base levels Maslow's hierarchy of needs would be a starting point. It seems from your first few posts and the quotes in them you were arguing against is was subjective preferences. Dystopian's assertion that people were better off in cities was highly suspect. The suburban flight of the 20th century demonstrates many people didn't think urban areas were better for them personally. And one assertion of his in particular seemed outright false, that there was more income inequality in rural areas. You find the very wealthiest in major cities like New York with the homeless in their alley dumpsters. You won't find many industries that cater exclusively to the ultra affluent in rural places like you see in big cities.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I agree with you. And yet we use them for legislative purposes like doling out services. So are there some that are very obvious? Is there anywhere to even start?

Obviously at the base levels Maslow's hierarchy of needs would be a starting point. It seems from your first few posts and the quotes in them you were arguing against is was subjective preferences. Dystopian's assertion that people were better off in cities was highly suspect. The suburban flight of the 20th century demonstrates many people didn't think urban areas were better for them personally.

Mind you, that was when industry was pumping large amounts of toxins into the air! The suburbs were cleaner.

 

[Nexus]

These seem to be easy to qualify. Or are we talking about something else?

I meant that post in response to city vs rural life. With more people also come more hassles. So while a few million new residents to your area might mean you get the new symphony orchestra you always wanted and major baseball team it also means you might go from a house with a back yard to an apartment with neighbors on five sides.

Plus you get a host of new ordinances you have to follow. These are the guaranteed hassles. And you might get worst case problems like far higher crime, traffic and pollution. I've lived in Seattle and New Orleans as well as very rural Montana and Semi rural places with a few hundred thousand people. Not once in any of those places did I think to myself this place would be better if only more people lived here.

 

[EricK]

Not once in any of those places did I think to myself this place would be better if only more people lived here.

But assuming people move to where the quality of life is better, then it might very well be true that the place would be better if more people moved there - though the causality would be running the other way - more people are moving there because the city is getting better.

Or in other words, cities are not better directly as a result of the presence of a large number of other people; rather what makes cities good is what draws a large number of other people to live there besides you.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Quality of life metrics are somewhat subjective.

I am sorry, but no, quality of life measurements are easy to quantify. Basic needs, food, clothing, shelter, health care, education, transportation, employment, etc. Beyond basic needs, access to entertainment, recreation, leisure time, disposable income, etc. These seem to be easy to qualify. Or are we talking about something else?

You're assuming everyone values the same things equally.

You're also neglecting health-related factors. You have said your ALS will at some point make you want to die--that's a clear indication that you believe that health can drive one's net quality of life negative.

Stephen Hawking is in the same boat--yet he still values life. Obviously different people evaluate things differently.

 

[Zeluvia]

Some simple quality of life things that affect your health.

1. Sleeping when you are tired.
2. Pissing when you need to piss.
3. Eating when you are hungry.
4. Having a secure place to sleep.
5. Private alone time.

 

[Tigers!]

I am sorry, but no, quality of life measurements are easy to quantify. Basic needs, food, clothing, shelter, health care, education, transportation, employment, etc. Beyond basic needs, access to entertainment, recreation, leisure time, disposable income, etc. These seem to be easy to qualify. Or are we talking about something else?

The problem in that word' basic'. How do you define basic? My level of basic is different to yours which is different to the bloke over there.
For example your level of basic transport might be a base level Ford, mine is a jaguar (in my dreams anyway)

 

[Rhea]

For example your level of basic transport might be a base level Ford, mine is a jaguar (in my dreams anyway)

Ford owned Jaguar until 2008. Fun fact.