Best Countries To Be Born In

Small by population apparently, not size.

Yeah, I also don't get how people call Iceland a small nation, sometimes even a micronation. It is huge! (even if the population is small).

Endless I would say, atleast untill you have rewritten the description

you should define small countries in the subtitles. seems like weak data. Is there a similar study that includes all countries?

It's hard to enjoy a quiz if the rules are not appropriately defined. Specially in a test such as this one, since among the countries with greater living standards are many small ones in one sense or another (Luxembourg, Andorra, Singapore,...)

it's by population

Where does it say that? Should be better explained.

SWITZERLAND!!!! :D

GERMANY!!!!! What are we doing?

Leni, I’m not trying to start an argument but I’m just going to say that Switzerland is also neutral and doesn’t have enimes I don’t think. It would be good to be born in, and be safe during WW2

@seamus where are you from? Canada?Or Usa? Because that surely would have influenced the conversation. It is like when you say where you are from the other person says oo I would really want to go there sometimes. 95 % of the people I ve spoken really would like to go to the netherlands.. because well, that is where I am from so that is how the conversation goes.

And if you are from the us well, canada is close and people will think of whichever nearby place they like more than their current one. (Like, canada, usa, mexico, canada, usa, mexico...hmm.. ok canada!)

If you had asked that in europe canada definitely would not score 99% because of the reason someone else discounted australia, it is far away. Not the first thing to pop into your head. Not really on people's radar, they have a good rep though, but it would be more like "what about canada?" "Ow yea, that's not bad either!"

SeanersaurusRex, that also depends on where you live. Some parts of the world are closer to Canada and thus know more of it, and some are closer to Australia and thus think it is better than Canada. This opinionated rift between different parts of the world means that you need to turn to statistics. Australia has the second most liveable city in the world (Melbourne, behind Vienna by a small amount), and Australia also ranks higher than Canada in this quiz for which country has the best opportunities and safest, happiest environments for growing up in.

DENMARKKKKKKKK :D

UNITED STATES!!!!!

Murica

Note that the Englishest-speaking country is missing from this list: the UK. No wonder with their wacky NHS and inflammable housing.

First, the UK isn't the Englishest-speaking country - there's a quiz on that somewhere. Re the NHS - it's well-intentioned, and venerated as a sacred part of the national infrastructure, but it's under-funded and it's a huge (almost Soviet-style) bureaucracy. Quality of patient experience varies wildly - I've personally experienced both excellent and dreadful. You generally get treated as some kind of traitor if you point out that most other countries with universal healthcare seem to do it better (France is a particular good and particularly nearby example), but that doesn't stop it being true. Impressive that the US makes the list given its lack of universal healthcare, actually - shows how highly it must score in other areas.

What a dumb statement elbi. Wacky NHS? It's fine and would be even better if non-UK patients all settled their NHS treatment bills. Inflammable housing? One tower block had a tragic accident and the UK now has inflammable housing? I'd better warn my neighbours then!

Utt, oh....Trumpoid alert

Yeah, lucky I wasn't born in South Korea, since I don't speak Korean. Phew, close call!

@stevediverse that was a good one :) I think most missed the joke or even thought you were serious. You were indeed very lucky, what if you were a non english speaker born in an english speaking country!

I thought about typing Israel but didn't think it would be here since it said "safe". The only one I missed.

only democracy in the middle east, more safe than saudi arabia for women that's for sure

tshalla, That is not true. Palestinians who legally enter Israel are available to all the opportunities in the country.

Please specify whether small means in size or population, as Iceland is bigger in area than South Korea, Ireland, Taiwan, and Belgium (I think). Apart from that great quiz

And netherlands, denmark, uae and israel, austria and switzerland. Probably missed one. And size of the country by default means, well size of the country... so I wouldnt say specify but that is semantics. But yea if unspecified can mean population, why not size of people? Or mountains. It being about population when you havent mentioned it doesnot not really make sense, no more than the other examples.

It does not make it a small country, just a country with a small population. The amount of people that life somewhere does not shrink or increase the size of the physical country

To be born as a male citizen is even better, I would assume.

Like all such lists based on a small number of data points there are going to be blind spots and those blind spots are illuminated best by countries that might score well in the criteria they consider while being far behind in other areas. The UAE being the best example on this list. And while Israel is a very nice and well-developed country (and safe most of the time), I'm guessing they didn't include some parts of the West Bank or any of Gaza.

I thought of japan aswell, and placed uk and usa somewhere in the same region, uk wasn't on it, so didnt expect usa to make it.

based off of Material well-being as measured by GDP per capita (in $, at 2006 constant PPPS) Life expectancy at birth The quality of family life based primarily on divorce rates The state of political freedoms Job security (measured by the unemployment rate) Climate (measured by two variables: the average deviation of minimum and maximum monthly temperatures from 14 degrees Celsius; and the number of months in the year with less than 30mm rainfall) Personal physical security ratings (based primarily on recorded homicide rates and ratings for risk from crime and terrorism) quality of community life (based on membership in social organisations) governance (measured by ratings for corruption) gender equality (measured by the share of seats in parliament held by women)

South Korea has a dictator? What?

^ It wasn't a very well-composed sentence to be fair.

The data is from 2013. Even if what you say about the crime rates in Germany is true, the refugee wave started only in 2015, so this factor could not have been taken into account yet.

Finish reading the sentence, guys. He said the dictator was playing on the border.

That said, the UAE borders Saudi Arabia and Oman. Neither are "very violent." Saudi Arabia has one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world and Oman, by Middle Eastern standards, is downright pleasant. South Korea is a beautiful and peaceful country in spite of technically being at war with the north since the 1950s, and we can hope that the bluster from Pyongyang is not turned into all out catastrophe by the idiot currently occupying the White House; most analysts believe that it won't be. Germany and Scandinavia certainly have their problems, Muslim/South Asian rape gangs amongst them, though you'll find plenty of those in the UK as well. Shockingly large numbers of them, actually, many ineffectively prosecuted by police for fear of appearing racist. Meanwhile Iberia is still dealing with economic recession and massive unemployment. And they have immigrants, too.

kolp.... the ignorance in the comment you're calling out is still nowhere near as bad as that in the comments made on this site every day about the USA. See luxint's below, for example.

I think we can all agree that the world is deteriorating, even though we don't want it to.

No we can't. At what point in history was the world better than it is today?

Cao: touche. I'll rephrase. Excluding temporary set-backs spanning perhaps at most 1-2 decades, and taking a holistic view of all things including worldwide rates of poverty, disease, and violent conflict and not relying on isolated data points that paint a less rosy picture in the short-term, when was the world better off than it is today? I'm taking a longer view since, most of the time, when people claim that things are getting worse , they are thinking of some overly-nostalgic version of the 50s, 60s, 70s or 80s they've got in their imagination, or referencing pre-industrial societies, or in extreme cases pre-agrarian ones.

Yeah I really hate my retirement tripling in 3 years.

cool: you will when the proverbial chickens come home to roost. Trump has kept the strong Obama economy going mostly by manipulating interest rates, passing massive irresponsible short-sighted tax cuts, and also ballooning government spending. These are not smart things to do when the economy is already doing well, it's creating a fiscal bubble and also threatening to bankrupt the US government. Add to that his idiotic trade policies which will have dire long-term effects that won't be apparent for most people who aren't farmers at least for another year or so. The bubble is going to burst sooner or later and it's going to be bad. You might want to liquidate your 401k while you can.

¿Where is France and Spain? Only Spain Is better than most on the list.

2:53 left

Safe... Do you have to stay inside in Australia or does this include going out into the wirld with all the poisonous and dangerous animals that can kill you? IT'S A JOKE.

Sure, Australia has a lot of dangerous animals, but you have to seek them out/disturb them to be affected. Saltwater crocodiles and sharks may hunt people within their own habitats but our snakes and spiders are easily avoided. Africa, Asia and the Americas have large predators and other violent mammals that will chase you down and kill you

Please accept "ROK" for South Korea.

Israel? Yeah, right...

Yeah #1!

UAE...

Strange.. I tried North Korea three times and nothing.

Israel over France and the UK makes pretty good sense. Saudi wouldn't... but as kolp pointed out it's not on here. Maybe you're confusing Saudi Arabia with the United Arab Emirates? I've lost track of how many people I've known who didn't know the difference between the two.

Since everyone is obviously too lazy to make a single click, here's a breakdown of the criteria:

The independent variables in the estimating equation for 2006 include:
Material well-being as measured by GDP per capita (in $, at 2006 constant PPPS)
Life expectancy at birth
The quality of family life based primarily on divorce rates
The state of political freedoms
Job security (measured by the unemployment rate)
Climate (measured by two variables: the average deviation of minimum and maximum monthly temperatures from 14 degrees Celsius; and the number of months in the year with less than 30mm rainfall)
Personal physical security ratings (based primarily on recorded homicide rates and ratings for risk from crime and terrorism)
Quality of community life (based on membership in social organisations)
Governance (measured by ratings for corruption)
Gender equality (measured by the share of seats in parliament held by women)

My thoughts on this:
CLIMATE! yes finally a list that includes that. But... but... wtf!!?? FOURTEEN!!!?? 14 is NOT the ideal temperature. It would be maybe 25. Is this organization based in Iceland?

Material well-being, fine. Though I don't think GDP tells the whole story maybe include happiness index or suicide rates.

I would not count divorce rates as a bad thing. Having a realistic understanding of relationship dynamics and acknowledging that sometimes marriages ought to end is a good thing. Much better than, say, the Philippines where divorce is illegal. Though better to not get married at all.

Unemployment rate: probably as I guessed before a big part of why Spain is omitted.

25 might be the ideal temperature but this is measured as an average deviation. If it were an average deviation from 25 that would mean 60 degrees was as good as -10. I have experienced temperatures of -10 degrees (I think), and though it wasn't anywhere near ideal I didn't die. At 60 degrees (which it has never been anywhere ever on Earth since records began) I think it would be very difficult to survive for extended periods of time.

-10 and 60 should both be considered unlivable and immediately disqualifying. I've experienced both 0 and 50 before and personally would prefer 50, but both temperatures, if you were left outside without proper equipment or attire for extended periods of time, would kill you. But 0 would actually kill you faster and you would need more to survive it. 10 is too cold and 40 is too hot. 20 to 30 would be great. So I maintain, 25 a much better starting point than meat-locker level 14.

I disagree. To me the ideal mean annual temperature would be around 16˚C for a temperate climate, given that there should be an annual range of roughly ±15 to 20˚C. This means that during the height of summer the average high would be around 31 to 36˚C (quite to considerably hot), and average low around 0˚C to slightly below freezing in the winter (which would be a mild winter compared to sub-Arctic/polar climates). 25˚C would slightly too hot for me given the annual fluctuations - although I come from a tropical country. It has been shown that the ideal mean temperature for a country with high wealth and quality of life is around 16˚C.

There are many regions of the world where people live in climates where temperatures drop far below -10˚C and survive perfectly well. Very few people would prefer a climate of 50˚C to 0. 14˚C is most definitely not 'meat-locker' level or frigid - I'm from Malaysia and find this temperature ideal when wearing two layers of clothing.

Jack: I think you are a different species than me. That's nuts. 14 C is only suitable for caribou, not humans. Also places with huge swings in temperature are awful. Bad for my joints. Bad for my skin. Bad for my seasonal allergies. I don't understand why everyone doesn't just move to Hawaii honestly. But if forced to live in a place with huge swings in temperature, as stated above, 50 is still better than 0. 50 isn't even that bad if you just plant some trees, get in the shade, drink lots of pina coladas. You wouldn't want to go outside on a day that was 50 degrees out, but when it's 0 you can't get away from that even inside it gets in your bones. But honestly forget 0 and 50 both are horrible- 25 all year round plus or minus 7 degrees maximum would be perfect.

Interesting.

Homicide rates: fair to look at. Though, while insecure Europeans *desperate* to find anything to cling to to prop up their sanctimonious condemnation of Americans as inferior love to jump on the lower homicide rates in *some* European countries as justification for her smugness, the difference in probability that you will be murdered in any of these countries is absolutely minuscule. The chance that you'll be the victim of terrorism is even less. Yes, even in Israel.

governance: hard to measure accurately.

gender equality: Good to include. But I can think of far better ways to measure this.

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate , only two European countries (Russia and Ukraine) have a higher intentional homicide rate than the U.S. The U.S. is still in the upper quartile with regards to IHR. Only 7 seven other (World Bank) high-income country out of 79 have a higher IHR.

^so what I said was accurate, then.

It's based on data points which I listed above. Of course someone had to choose which data points to factor in but aside from that it's not really a matter of opinion, with a few exception (such as the thing I pointed out above about the ideal temperature being a frigid 14 degrees Celsius.)

Incidentally I think there is another quiz on the site somewhere about which countries people most want to emigrate to. The USA obviously was at the top of the list for that one. But... maybe that's just a result of better PR? Hollywood? The fact that the US is full of immigrants and many people around the world have family there already? I don't think it's objectively the best place in the world to try and immigrate to. Howevver that's different from being the best place in the world to be born in.

Only ignorant people would try to claim that the US was somehow a bad place to live due to economics, life expectancy, or gender equality. It's not a product of poor education that people want to go there, though yes, American culture as depicted in Hollywood movies is definitely part of the draw. No need to smear immigrants to the US as uneducated just to prop up your own biases. I made a similar point immediately before yours but didn't feel the need to tag on the uneducated thing.

For Israel I'm sure it's great to be born a Jew but not a Palestinian

even Palestinian Jews are not safe

if by "Palestinian" you mean Israeli Muslim or Israeli Christian or Israeli who self-identifies as "Arab"... it's still far, far better to be born in Israel than in... Egypt, or Lebanon, or Jordan, or Syria, or Saudi Arabia, or Iraq, or the Islamic State, or Sudan, or Somalia, or Djibouti, or Eritrea, or Libya, or Iran, or Turkey, or Armenia.... those are your options in the area.
If by "Palestinian" you mean non-Israeli citizen born to parents from the "West Bank"... well... even if you live out your entire life in Ramallah or Nablus, you're going to be much better off than the average Syrian, Egyptian, Iraqi or resident of Daesh and you'll enjoy much better freedoms and opportunities than residents of Saudi Arabia or Iran. And you would also have greater opportunity to become an Israeli citizen than residents of Beirut or Amman which, if you pursued, would make your life better.
If by "Palestinian" you mean resident of Gaza, yeah, that would suck.

Great to see you are still out there, patrolling and giving comment in a detailed way. What would JetPunk do without you? Every site needs an........

Intellectual who knows what he’s talking about most of the time? I think that’s how that sentence goes.

If Napoleon Bonaparte can find time to whisper from the great beyond his thoughts on what it means to be born in Israel, I can find time to answer back with my own.

Thank the lord for Kalby. He (for he must be a he, surely Shirley) is a much needed JP eccentric. It gives him a role, if nothing else...gawd bless ya KB!

Living in New Zealand and loving it.

America is pretty far down the list in the minds of whoever created this list. It's the most guessed answer however, so I think we can see who's winning in the court of public opinion :-)

it's based on numbers not opinion.

People type USA in just about every country quiz, unless it is about a different continent.

Social welfare is incredibly strong... probably to the point of being excessive there. The government is very wealthy. It's GDP per capita score is probably the thing that gives it the most points on the above criteria. There are other problems with the UAE, though, and it falls short in most of the other metrics used for the list.

Taiwan isn't even a country

best way to deal with any information that contradicts your opinions.

Interesting quiz! <3 Israel <3

Both the Americans crying about the USA placing less than 1st, and the Europeans crying about the USA placing at all or above whatever country they happen to be from: you both look pathetic. And most of the people here commenting on the Middle East appear simply ignorant. Not going to reply to every one of you individually so this takes care of all of them...

Netherlands!! :)

It's an extremely safe country. Beautiful. Vibrant. Full of friendly people. Well developed. Clean. Rich in history and culture. I lived there for a while. Have you ever been?

What? The US is guessed most? There are way more countries where you live better.

All much smaller, less populous, less influential, and less obvious answers, though.

The absence of Japan surprised me. In my opinion it's definately better to be born in Japan than (most of) The US

If by "most of" you're speaking purely in terms of geographic area I think I probably agree with you. If by "most you" you're talking about the urban and suburban areas where the majority of Americans are born, then I think you're probably wrong. However, I would much rather be born in Japan than in the United Arab Emirates. If this list were based on opinion and not a simple calculation then I would find this odd.

I don't even know why The United States is on this list? And, yes. I'm American

See my post above about the criteria. It's objective and based on numbers, not opinion. You've been brainwashed into hating your own country or falsely believing that the grass is greener elsewhere.

Thanks for having the courage to admit that, Geo. You've taken the first step toward recovery. Looking at the world with an open mind in an objective and properly skeptical way is an exciting thing when you do it for the first time so I envy you. Good luck!

What about UK

Based on the criteria I detailed above if I had to guess I would say 1. high divorce rate 2. lower GDP per capita than many other countries on the list (using Purchasing Power Parity, due to the high cost of living in the UK) 3. higher crime rates than many Western European countries (though the difference is even more negligible than the difference between the US and those same Western European countries) 4. and they were probably docked points for climate due to all the rain.

This quiz should be in 2 parts: 1) Which country is it best to be Born Rich in? ....... 2) Which country is it best to be Born Poor in? ........ Many so called poor countries have the richest people living the life of Gods ..... and some 'Rich countries' have plenty of poverty.

Apparently, this list (not the quiz) is limited to "best" conditions for "western-lifestyle males who happen to practice the dominant religion imposed in their country or that are so rich that religion is not an issue"

yeah... back after stalwart Republican and noted conservative Franklin Roosevelt and his famous Same Old Deal did nothing to change the country, right? Back when the highest marginal tax rate on the wealthy was 90%, just like Grover Norquist always advocates for.

I think most conservatives looking back at the 50s have some Ozzie and Harriet fantasy of how things actually were. They ignore the prevailing politics and economics of the age and instead look to things like the socially conservative culture, and perhaps racial and gender inequality (though that's not most of them), as the things that made the 50s great. But mostly it's just nostalgia and rose-colored glasses.

this data is dumb and biased

The data is what it is. You could say the criteria is dumb (such as claiming the ideal climate is 14 C, that's pretty dumb), but there's nothing wrong with the data.

Only guessed the USA. In other words, I got 100%

I am astonished, Japan and UK is not included!! especially Japan should be high on all the criterias plus alpha. UAE!! It is an absolute monarchy country, you cant be a politician, you dont have bar on the streets, no horse racing betting, and the food was the worst ever etc. Ive lived in all 3 countries plus US of course.

What difference does it make what borders it? Israel itself is nice.

"Does not include small countries such as iceland" I would not call iceland a small country, it being 100.250km² !! yet singapore is included with 687km² . (And israel, taiwan, belgium, netherlands, south korea, austria, ireland, denmark, switzerland and UAE are all smaller countries)

to me it is like asking which person is taller, but excluding some people because they are poorer. Followed by something like; yea but people with more money are "bigger" because they are more important.

If you are talking about small population say small population, not the size of the country.