Indices that try to capture aspects of life other than money have also been made, such as Human Development Index [1]. Europe and North America lead these too. Nobody thinks Bhutan, on average, is a better place to live in than Norway. It might be better for a particular person due to cultural and familial reasons, but ceteris paribus Norway is better in all aspects.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

Do note that HDI does indeed depend on some assumptions and those includes "equating earning more money with a "better life"" as GNI (PPP) per capita. With no further increases after 75k USD (International dollar), unadjusted for inflation since introduction more than a decade ago. It also does give large amount of value to traditional education (i.e. total amount of years in full time schooling) and not outcomes of that (e.g. literacy). Schooling is also capped at 18 years, which is in line with a Master in most western countries; if schooling is this important then why cap it?

I'm not sure about Bhutan, because I've never been there, but for sure I think that middle-class life here in Romania (for those that can afford it) is a lot better and more relaxed than middle-class life in Norway (for starters, people here in Romania don't have to fear the State taking away their kid at a moment's notice, as it happens in Norway). Which is to say that those "charts" are very deceptive.

The marginal utility of an extra dollar goes down as you get more of them, but it never reaches zero, especially if you have big dreams.

Just look at Musk and his startups - I bet he's very glad to have that 200 billionth dollar, because now he can have the space program he always wanted. This wouldn't have been possible in the third-world country where he grew up.

First, HN consistently misuses the term "third world". In 2024, this term is now very out of date to describe developing economies (and below). Also, the original meaning was not at all what most people think -- it was about Soviet vs US alignment. And, no, South Africa was definitely middle income when he grew up there -- and it still is (sadly). For a long time (maybe still true?), the GDP per capita in SA nearly the highest amoung all African countries. (I think Seychelles is the richest African country now.)

"Third world" was a geopolitical term but now it's economic and cultural.

I assure you South Africa is third world by any measure. The GDP of SA (a large country with tons of resources and a population of 60m) is roughly on par with that of the Toronto metro area (population 7m) or the Phoenix metro (population 5m). It's middle income... and it probably will ~always be.

None of this really matters though - what Musk has done in the US (like it - or him - or not) was only possible in the US.

GDP is a kind of screwed up measure because the buying power of the dollar in the US is so much worse than most other countries. Case in point you can find a little san jose neighborhood where the gdp is an order of magnitude higher than a little mexico city neighborhood with more or less the exact same sorts of homes on the same sort of street. Now you might argue the sj homes are that much more valuable because of what they offer beyond the home via location proximity to opportunities, but its not like everyone benefits from such things or even that these opportunities are equally available to everyone. Yet everyone shoulders the costs of others success and position.

Depends on what. Tech is cheap:

https://iphone-worldwide.com/

From my experience travelling, the best measure I have seen with my own eyes a blend of GDP-per-capita and PPP-per-capita. I say "blend" because some places have incredibly cheap labour, which makes PPP-per-capita artificially high. Unfortunately, you see more depression, obvious, poverty in those places.

About your example of living in San Jose, California, USA vs Mexico City: Where would you prefer to live? Where do you think the schools, hospitals, economy, and social safety net (retirement, etc) is better? Sure, the houses may look similar, but San Jose is objectively rich by global standards and Mexico City is middle income.

Honestly it might be not so different in mexico city. There are probably some decent enough schools, I wouldn’t be surprised if a good private school is a lot cheaper. Medical is probably the same for all intents and purposes but I expect your out of pocket to be way cheaper. Plenty of californians go to mexico for costly dental or medical work already. And lastly for retirement I am sure your savings will go much further in mexico city than in san jose. There are many californians who send money to family in mexico because the quality of life is better for them to stay there and stretch that dollar then for the entire family to all move north. You might be talking an upper middle class lifestyle there vs a desperate one.

It's really hard to take people who use the term "third world" this way seriously. There are more precise ways to clarify your opinion without resorting to meaningless pejoratives.

OK well I’m from there. When I moved to the first world, my eyes were opened. They literally are worlds apart culturally and economically.

The term “third world” is a good and very descriptive one.

I'm not denying that these are worlds apart—it's simply not a materially-meaningful term.

Nearly everybody does when it is there own money. Sure you can show studies that more money doesn't make you happy, but almost everyone regularly has times they don't buy something just because they can't afford it and all think that thing would make them happier. I've know people making minimum wage, and people making nearly $million/year and both find money tight at the end of the month despite the vast difference in income. My personal wish list of things to buy totals more than my likely lifetime income, and your probably does too.

> My personal wish list of things to buy totals more than my likely lifetime income, and your probably does too.

I dunno, I'm really more bottlenecked by time than by income. >50% of my household income goes to savings, so I could comfortably buy more things, but I'm already backlogged on dealing with the things I've already purchased.

I guess the obvious answer would be to turn some of the money into more free time, but I've already picked all the low-hanging fruit there, so the remaining options are considerably higher effort/cost.

Time is a limit as well. I don't have time to learn to use that tig welder I haven't bought yet, but it is on my list and I have a few projects not done because I don't have one.

We could try explaining this to someone in a poor country scraping by on $50 monthly. Hint: They'll laugh at us in the face.

There's a reason people take huge risks to flee to the West, including traveling on unsafe boats, crisscrossing areas controlled by bandits, or crossing the environmentally harsh Darien Gap.

> once you have enough to have your needs met

you missed this part