Thursday, January 20, 2011

What if I Lived in India Instead?

I found this site today and found it interesting -- pick a country, any country, and it'll display for you a list of statistics about how your life would be different if you lived there.  (Info source, it says, is the CIA World Factbook.)

Here's how India -- my next stop -- compares to home:

If India were your home instead of Canada you would...

have 9.8 times higher chance of dying in infancy
have 2.1 times more babies
use 96.95% less electricity
consume 96.6% less oil
make 91.93% less money
die 14.83 years sooner
spend 97.66% less money on health care  (includes both public and private spending)
have 25.88% more chance of being unemployed
experience 14.64% more of a class divide
be 25% less likely to have HIV/AIDS
I tried out another few countries, just out of curiosity (surprise, surprise, Scandinavian countries and New Zealand stack up pretty well) ... the one that shocked me was our comparison with the US:

If The United States were your home instead of Canada you wouhld...

spend 82.93% more money on health care -- they spend so much more, for a worse system?  (Hmmm, maybe public health care ISN'T so evil as they think.)
experience 40.19% more of a class divide -- this, in the country (US) that thinks it's a classless society
have 34.53% more babies -- God help us, they'll outnumber us even more in future!
have 23.05% more chance of dying in infancy
use 21.38% less electricity -- this surprised me (as did the "less oil" stat below)
make 20.83% more money -- but at the cost of more hours (see below) and worse health care
die 3.05 years sooner
have 9.41% more chance of being unemployed
consume 6.11% less oil
be 50% more likely to have HIV/AIDS
work 4.17% more hours each year
Okay, I'm supposed to be doing more errands in preparation for my trip (I leave on Sunday), so I'd better hop to it.  Talk to ya later!


  1. maybe it means the individual citizen in the U.S. spends that much more on healthcare (vs. a Canadian, who doesn't pay for nearly as much out of pocket)? Interesting stats though.

  2. It said that the stats for health care spending included both public and private (so per-capita government spending + individual out-of-pocket costs) -- appears to mean that public health care is more efficient/cost-effective, I think!