site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   1823 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for October 13, 2024

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I keep having a confusing experience where immigrants from third world countries, especially India, keep telling me that things are better in their home countries than they are here in Canada. This makes no sense to me given that the GDP per capita in Canada is about six times that of India, even after adjusting for cost of living. Also, the reports from people who visited there and the media show it to be an extremely poor and dysfunctional country. Far more Indians move to Canada for a better life than go the other way, giving up their maids and office jobs to work minimum wage jobs here, but then they say things are better in India.

Specifically, I've heard that the quality of healthcare is better in India and that the standard of living is generally higher. The people who say this still want to stay here, despite having been among the most privileged people in their home countries and living in a country that often doesn't recognize their qualifications or experience.

I've heard similar things from people from China. What is going on? Are they just lying? If so, why?

I occasionally read groups for Ukrainian refugees in Finland, and they also keep saying that healthcare was better in Ukraine. When looking to it a bit more, they often seem to mean that it's easier to go there with an intention of getting some specific treatment or meds and get those than in Finland, where the system is consciously built on gatekeeping and the avoidance of unnecessary treatments, so as to save in costs (to the taxpayer).

I have similar experiences with European healthcare. People don't care much about "average life expectancy" type of stats when they judge healthcare quality typically but simply how easy it is for them to get attention when they feel they need it. Also European healthcare is typically heavily drained by old people and tries to salvage costs by gatekeeping young people which doesn't help perceptions either.

It all depends on their class. For example, if you're a working class family from flyover Russia or Ukraine (or China or India), moving to a Western country, even to a flyover location just like yours will be a massive boost to the quality of life.

On the other hand, you lose all the benefits of your lifestyle if you emigtate as a PMC, with a few exceptions like joining a faang on a faang salary. Others have enumerated them already.

Specifically, I've heard that the quality of healthcare is better in India and that the standard of living is generally higher. The people who say this still want to stay here, despite having been among the most privileged people in their home countries and living in a country that often doesn't recognize their qualifications or experience.

From what I've heard online, the health-care system in Canada is highly overburdened, though if it's better or worse than the NHS, I can't comment.

When most Indians abroad say that healthcare was better back home, they're referring to private hospitals, decidedly not the government ones (I'd know, I've worked in both).

There's no months long queu to see a GP and you can pretty much self-refer to see a specialist. And a single consultation costs maybe 1% of your monthly salary to boot. And once in, I can't say the quality of care is any worse than in the West, and probably much more timely too for elective procedures. Look at me, staring the alternatives of being out a thousand quid for a psych assessment for ADHD here versus a 2 year wait list through the NHS.

In terms of standard of living, I'd say they're missing the creature comforts that come from low wage menial labor being available. There are so many things that are starkly better in the West, to the point where I don't feel the need to elaborate here.

Of course, by revealed preferences, the people you speak to still opt for Canada over their native lands. I don't think they literally mean that things were better back home, but certain aspects that they're missing now that they're gone, even if on an intellectual level they knew what they were getting into.

Hey that is me sometimes.

Well sort of. I don't know what those Indians are smoking but as a Turkish guy living in Western Europe for a while at this point, I do sometimes get into discussions with friends of similar background to the tune of "here things aren't actually better sometimes huh?".

A lot of it comes down to all of us being potential upper-class candidates back home, way above average in education and social stature and earning good money etc. Very few things can really substitute for relative social standing. It is difficult to get any above-mediocre social standing in Europe as a first-gen immigrant. So some of what you are observing is snarky comments from bitter people, but they have good personal reasons for being bitter.

GDP is a fine indicator but it will hide a lot from you in terms of living standards if you are ignoring costs, housing and taxes. For example Turkish PPP is at 44k, while German PPP is 62k from quick googling (Greece 41k lol). That is not such a massive difference. Pretty much all Anglo countries and Western Europe is suffering from gigantic housing problems, especially in major cities, especially effecting people who by definition could not have gotten into the mortgage market 10 years ago (i.e. young immigrants you are most likely to come across in white-collar and university settings). High progressive taxation systems are crippling for people who feel they deserve an upper class lifestyle and are trying to build it up with high-value professional labour income. You are basically slaving away for funding the boomer retirees of your host country. These boomers aren't even your own family so you won't benefit from this even in the form of inheritances. This creates massive resentment.

Often the first-tier cities of decent third world countries are actually quite decent places to be. They tend not to have "progressive" policing structures so ambient crime can be less of an issue (big variance here). They often have ample housing, and recently built. The infrastructure is often much newer.

And lastly, don't underestimate how much cheap low-class labour can improve one's life quality and how difficult it is to get accustomed to living without it.

So the comparisons come from a mix of real and perceived advantages of the home country, as well as people expecting an upper-class lifestyle not finding it in their host country. Also India is definitely not it, but a lot of "emerging" countries "emerged" quite a lot in the last decades and sometimes the perceptions didn't quite catch up in the West (and GDP is just not very good for comparisons between service and industry based economies)

In addition to what others have pointed out downthread with respect to food, crime, relative status, etc. another thing I've noticed is that people in developing countries are generally free from most of the mental health issues that plague North Americans, and often have a refreshing combination of optimism due to recent economic improvements and a sort of Daoist willingness to go with the flow however things turn out i.e. "Isn't it great we have all these shiny new cars and computers? Maybe it will all go to shit someday but we've dealt with that before and we'll get through it like we always do." I'm not sure if the latter is just a poor people thing or a non-Western country thing, but I suppose we'd have to take a closer look at places like Japan, which has been rich for a while now, to find out.

I know people say the Japanese don’t really want to emigrate but from what I understand a lot of young Japanese are pretty unhappy. The quality of their English education is just extremely bad. If Japanese teenagers spoke English as well as Swedish teenagers do, I bet emigration to the West of young professionals would be much much higher.

Living in a shithole has its advantages. Mainly that competition is a joke.

In America, a Stanford Economics PhD working at the fed is at best a lackey at a Trading Desk. In countries like Colombia, if you have any PhD and work at the central bank, you have real shot at running the printing press.

Now tell me who is more badass. Or influential.

Another example, here in Chile I know a radiologist who moved to the states. Earned real bank there. Strangely returned within a year. His reason?

"I feel richer here"

It’s true that if you come back to Ghana with your Stanford Econ PhD then they may well give you a job at the central bank, but it’s also true that if you’re the kind of Ghanaian wealthy enough to go through 10+ years of tertiary education in the US you’re probably pretty well connected in the local ruling class anyway.

In many ways it’s nicer being a developing country PMC making $100k a year than an American making $400k a year. You have (more) servants, the cost of living is low etc. But a big reason people return is the same regardless of wealth, which is that home is home and people like being surrounded by friends and family in the community they grew up in, whereas life as a foreigner (even a wealthy one) involves a baseline higher level of mental stress because of the unfamiliar environment.

if you’re the kind of Ghanaian wealthy enough to go through 10+ years of tertiary education in the US

Yes a lot of such cases are already local elites, but not at all. Scholarships can do wonders in this category if you were a bit savvy as a teenager (or your parents were)

As you correctly pointed out they are for the most part comparing being the top nth percentile of wealth and status back home to being give or take average in the first world. They are not really being sincere, push them a bit and they'll fold.

Also being high status and we'll respected in ones community makes one overlook a lot of the material downsides of a place.

They seemed to be talking about India in general terms, not just for themselves. I told one Indian that I heard their public hospitals are really bad and she agreed, but then she said it's even worse here.

The upper crust of indians has precious little idea of how the median Indian really lives once they are done driving them around or cleaning their house.

I can't compare India and Canada, but there are certainly many aspects of living in the US that are noticeably worse than major Chinese cities (where most immigrants will come from).

US food quality is garbage tier for anyone who didn't exclusively grow up on it (on taste, not on safety), our crime rates are high, our public transit is grimy and unreliable. There are many little things about day to day life in the US that grate on those who (perhaps justifiably) expect better. It's easier to notice these major and minor inconveniences than to account for all of the things that are improved.

Yeah, I think in the long run would-be Chinese emigrants will choose to stay in China. There's evidence they already are. The brain drain is becoming a trickle.

East Asia is just better than most places in a lot of ways, which is why you don't see people from Japan leaving very often. China will likely head that way over time as well as they become wealthier and more civilized.

India though... There's a reason they call it a 4th world country. It's one of the worst places on Earth. And yes I am lumping the entire country into that category. The only way someone could say it's better than Canada is through a very thick delusional lens.

Probably some nationalistic pride in the face of a growing pushback against their presence in the host country.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats