> I doubt that "friendliness" is really something you see drastic differences in around the globe

So, you have never been to Eastern Europe or CIS countries.

Does your definition or "friendliness" assume that you speak the local language? Because if the answer is yes, I have no doubt you can find equally friendly (and rude) people in Eastern Europe as you can in Beijing, London, Cairo or New York. You may have a different opinion but I believe that there is a basic level of humanity anywhere in the world, and that this level often has an inverse correlation with material wealth.[1] That being said, if you can't use mutually intelligible words for things, people tend to become a bit reserved. That's something that's true everywhere in the world.

If you assume an English speaker traveling around, I would argue it's not a fair comparison to equate the friendliness of a stranger in Russia with the friendliness of a stranger in the United States, for example -- not only because of pure language reasons, but also for simple reasons of historical, educational, and cultural context. Not that finding a rude American is hard, mind you. I'm speaking from experience as an ESL speaker who has been there several times :-)

(But, to answer your question, no, I have unfortunately not been to EE/CIS -- but I have been to China, which I think is a strong contender.)

[1]: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/save/why-poor-pe...

I was born and live in Eastern Europe. I have also lived in Israel for a few years, and have visited other countries for significant period of time.

People here are much less trusting and are much more aggressive to others. It is actually LESS visible if you're a foreigner, because people are also concerned with self-image, and don't really perceive you as a threat or a contender for anything.

As an American who doesn't speak Russian, you'll get a much better treatment from stranger on a street than another Russian would.

> I believe that there is a basic level of humanity anywhere in the world, and that this level often has an inverse correlation with material wealth.

Every possible crime statistics contradicts this. Poor countries in general view violence as something more normalised than advanced ones.

I know someone that spent several weeks walking and hitch-hiking around Georgia. Everywhere he went, the locals welcomed him in, gave him a place to stay and invited him to dinners full of local food, local wine and raucous toasting. His single bad experience was in a hostel with another foreigner who turned out to be a racist arsehole.

As I answered to another reply, you would also get a much better reception as a foreigner than as a local. Especially if you're tourist with money. Not because they make a cynical decision to appear hospitable, they're sincere in their sympathy to you: you're not a threat or a competitor to them, unlike another local.

Fine, but this whole thread is about why someone would move from the UK to the US.

In the zoomed out view shown by default the air quality is visualized as almost identical in Europe and the U.S. so I'm not sure what you're trying to say. I'd also encourage you to think about the correlation between air quality and population density -- compare the Scandinavian countries for example with the large swaths of land in the U.S. that have excellent air quality: they likely have one thing in common which is the amount of people that actually live there.

It is entirely unclear to me what that map represents. Is air pollution the worst in the Sahara, where practically nobody lives?