Unlock stock picks and a broker-level newsfeed that powers Wall Street.
Why life is better in places economists hate

I travel a fair amount and I started noticing something a few years ago that has become even more evident lately. All the places economists say are terrible seem pretty great to me, and all the places the economists say are wonderful, well, let’s just say they have issues.

Economists look down their noses at France, disdain Spain (and Portugal too), and to them Italy is laughable. As for Japan, the dismal scientists hold it up as the quintessential un-economy that hasn’t grown for years. Even locales in the U.S are to be avoided they say. You wouldn’t want to live in New Orleans, right? It’s a basket case.

In fact, there’s some pretty cool living to be done in all those places I say.

As for the paradigms, economists hold up Singapore, China and of course the good old USA, with New York City and Silicon Valley being singled out as particularly desirable.

To which I say, maybe not.

Now before you start calling me unAmerican and telling me to ‘love it or leave it,’ I can assure I have great fondness for my country. It’s probably the case that I would never permanently leave the US, i.e., renounce my citizenship, though that I wouldn’t have inserted the word ‘probably’ in the previous sentence had I been writing this a decade ago. Also, I wonder if it wasn’t for the fact that I was born in the US, would I choose to live here. (I call it the Martian test. If you touched down fresh from Mars and could live anywhere, where would you pick?)

The point is even with all of the great things about America, who can ignore facts like the alarming decline in our life expectancy—three years running now, our plummeting standing in the World Happiness Report (for the third year in a row, the U.S. has dropped in the ranking and now sits at No. 19, one spot lower than last year), never mind our toxic, dysfunctional politics and broken healthcare system.

‘GDP’ has its limitations

Economists tend to ignore those points though, and focus instead on traditional, hard data measures when rating countries. Metrics like GDP, GDP growth, per capita GDP as well as government spending and debt are their stock and trade. GDP in particular is the accepted benchmark used by Western economists, which I would argue provides a very limited view. But because of the weight GDP carries, we tend to think of the U.S., which of course has the biggest GDP in the world, and China at number two, as the two best economies in the world.

Certainly GDP has its limitations: “[The ] worst example of GDP is that it increases when someone breaks a window and it has to be replaced. [That] creates work that adds to value added for year, but it doesn’t contribute to economic well being broadly,” says Jaana Remes, an economist and partner at the McKinsey Global Institute and co-author of an article entitled, “Is GDP the best measure of growth?