Oh, fericirea

22 Ianuarie
Se pare ca problema asta a fericirii ma cam bantuie. Azi (adica ieri) mi se trage de la un articol al dragului de Melvin Durai, care se pare ca e nostalgic dupa anii petrecuti in Zambia (aflata pe locul 163 in lista de tari, mult sub Romania, aflata pe locul 120), altfel de ce si-ar fi intitulat blogul Nshima? Dintr-un link in altul mi-am calculat si indicii personali de fericire care arata asa:
http://www.itint.co.uk/hpisurvey/feedback.php
Happy Planet Index
Your personal Happy Planet Index (HPI) is 44.1, which is similar to that of countries such as Belgium, Spain or Pakistan. This is above the UK average, about the same as the world average of 46, but well below the reasonable ideal we have set, of 83. Your score is above that of your country, 37.7.Below is a breakdown of the various components that make up your HPI score.
You: 44.1 Average: 43.6 [Average is of all online responses to this survey - not the average for your country]
Life Expectancy
Your life expectancy is lower than the average for your gender and country. You might have noticed some of the questions we've asked related to your life expectancy are related to factors beyond your control, such as family history. However, others, particularly your lifestyle choices - whether and how much you smoke and exercise, and what you eat - can be changed for the better. Everyone knows these habits can be hard to change, but you wouldn't be the first to do so!
You: 68 Average: 80.8 [Average is of all online responses to this survey - not the average for your country]
Ecological Footprint
Your ecological footprint is 4.23 global hectares, or 2.35 planets. This is equivalent to the average in Japan or Bahamas.
(UUUU, that hurts. I'm cofounder of Romanian Ecological Mouvement). Daca nici eu nu reciclez.... Ulterior Anca mi-a spus ca a facut si ea testul cand se afla in USA si indiferent ce raspuns dadea reiesea un consum de ~ 5 planete.
Your ecological footprint is greater than the average for the country you live in. If you live in a country with large economic inequalities, do note that this might be the case even if you are environmentally aware and trying to reduce your footprint, as others in your country might be living in very different circumstances. For example, Brazil's mean footprint of 2.2 g ha does not distinguish between the very low consumption lives of tribes in the Amazon, and those of people living Western-style lives in the big cities, whose personal footprints will inevitably be much higher. You are using between and one and a half and three times your share of the planet's resources (assuming no resources are put aside for other species). This is an amount typical of people in many industrialised countries, though just below the average for the UK. As such, if you are living in an industrialised country, you are probably doing some things well and some things not so well in terms of reducing your ecological impact. Seven ways that everyone can reduce their footprint include:
It's obvious, but we have to say it. Conserve energy. Turn off the lights when you leave a room, buy energy-efficient bulbs and appliances, turn off your TV completely, rather than leave it on standby.
*Reduce your waste. If there are ways to recycle where you live, try and do so. If you have a garden, start a compost heap. Re-use plastic bags. Give away clothes you don't use, rather than throwing them away. There are hundreds of little things you can do.
*Live with someone! Whether it be your partner, family, children or friends, sharing your living space means sharing your ecological impact. It will probably also increase your well-being!
Leave your car in the garage. Car use has a huge impact on ecological footprint. Obviously it's easier for some people than others, but where possible, try to use public transport more. Or, even better, get on a bike, or simply walk!
*Go local. Why buy tomatoes from another country, if you can get home grown ones? For those living in Europe - think about all those miles travelled by wine from South Africa and Australia, when Europe produces some of the best wines in the world.
You don't have to become vegetarian, but cutting down on meat, particularly beef, and particularly from animals fed by imported soya feed, is an effective step to reducing your footprint.
It has to be said that air travel is one of the biggest contributors to many people's footprints. For example, flying direct from London to Sydney and back would add 5.44 g ha to your footprint - that's the average Briton's footprint for an entire year. Flights with a connection add even more polluting air miles.
You: 4.23 Average: 5.35 [Average is of all online responses to this survey - not the average for your country]
Carbon Footprint
Your carbon footprint is 0.7 global hectares, or 0.39 planets. This is about the same as the average for your country (1.06 gHa).
You: 0.7 Average: 2.97 [Average is of all online responses to this survey - not the average for your country]
Life Satisfaction
You reported a life satisfaction of 8. This is the most common response across UK and indeed all of Europe. However, it is above average, so we are happy that you are so happy. Only in two countries is the mean life satisfaction higher - Switzerland and Denmark.
You: 8 Average: 6.77 [Average is of all online responses to this survey - not the average for your country]
Well-being
The new economics foundation (nef) recognises that there's more to life than feeling good, which is why our model for well-being is based on four domains – personal feelings, personal functionings, social feelings and social functionings. 'Feelings' refers to your attitude to the way you, your future and society are. 'Functionings' looks at whether you have the opportunities to do the things that bring you well-being. Like with life satisfaction, a score of 5 is theoretically the middle score, but, given the way most people respond to surveys, is below average.
Personal Feelings
In this online questionnaire, personal feelings are assessed with two questions – one testing your optimism and one testing your self-esteem.
You are optimistic about the future and probably also about yourself.
You: 6.55 Average: 6.05 [Average is of all online responses to this survey - not the average for your country]
Personal Functionings
In this online questionnaire personal functionings are assessed with five questions – two evaluating your subjective opinion on your health and how activity you are, the other three testing you for feelings of autonomy, purpose and worth.
In some ways you are unable to function in the way you would like. Perhaps you have had problems with your health, are feeling unable to make your own decisions, or do not have the opportunity to get involved in activities that give you a sense of purpose and ability. Some slight changes in lifestyle would help.
You: 5.27 Average: 6.16 [Average is of all online responses to this survey - not the average for your country]
Social Feelings
In this online questionnaire social feelings are assessed with four questions – three assessing your opinion of your community, whilst the last looks at personal relationships.
You have a strong sense of trust and belonging in your community and a happy personal life.
You: 5.59 Average: 5.69 [Average is of all online responses to this survey - not the average for your country]
Social Functionings
In this online questionnaire social functionings are assessed with four questions – two assessing your job / studies, one your free time, and one your community participation. If you did not respond to the work / study questions, your score is judged purely on the other two aspects.
You are very satisfied with your job / course - it is very interesting, rarely stressful, and leaves you plenty of time to do the things you want to do, such as participating in community activities.
You: 7.05 Average: 5.6 [Average is of all online responses to this survey - not the average for your country]
Am copiat un articol, citat de MD, care contine recenzia unei carti care pare f interesanta:
http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2008/01/15/the-geography-of-bliss/People love to think, talk and argue about happiness. I have a hard time counting the number of times I’ve been approached at development conferences by someone who wants to tell me the story of Bhutan’s decision to focus on Gross National Happiness, not Gross National Product. Or the times I’ve been forwarded an article asserting that Nigeria tops a world happiness survey. We’ve all been happy and unhappy, and we’ve all got opinions - well- or ill-informed - on what makes people happy, which means we’ve all got something to say on the topic.
I was interested in correlating happiness to health, and threw some simple statistical techniques at a data set I’d found online. In a development that made me, well, pretty unhappy, I discovered that the data I was using - also Adrian White’s Global Projection of Subjective Well-Being - was apparently “borrowed” from the New Economics Foundation’s “Happy Planet Index”. That data, in turn, is apparently extrapolated from Dr. Ruut Veenhoven’s World Database of Happiness, which is a concordance of happiness research from around the world. The database includes results from 95 countries, many of which have been surveyed several times over the course of decades, asking people a fixed series of questions about their subjective satisfaction with their own lives.
Veenhoven’s database is the starting point fror Eric Weiner’s excellent “The Geography of Bliss“, a witty, funny and insightful book, which follows the wanderings of a self-described “grump” through his travel to happy and unhappy nations.
A foreign correspondent for NPR, Weiner sees a lot of nations at their worst. And he claims not to be a happy man, an addict of self-help books designed to help him enjoy his life more. Explicit in his journey is the question, “If I lived here, would I be happy?” There are some interesting geographic patterns to happiness. Impoverished and wartorn nations are generally not happy places. Scandinavian and Alpine nations are, for the most part. You might conclude that cold, rich nations are the places to be if you’d like to be happy.
But making generalizations in this field is difficult.Many of the former Soviet states are cold, and most rank very low in happiness. Money’s not guaranteed to help either. There’s an “East-Asian Happiness Gap“, where wealth East Asian nations are a lot less happy than you’d expect given their wealth. (Possible explanations for the gap include, “environmental disruption, excessive competitiveness, repressive education, excessive conformity, negative attitudes towards enjoyment, and the emphasis on outward appearance.” Sounds like a drag.)
Weiner travels to nine nations in writing the book, some unusually happy (Switzerland, Bhutan, Iceland), some surprisingly unhappy (Qatar, Moldova). He’s better at writing about the unhappy ones than the happy, which may reveal a fundamental truth of travel writing - it’s just not much fun to read about someone having a great time. (One of my favorite travel writers is Redmond O’Hanlon, whose jungle journeys generally sound like misery, interspersed with danger, failure and sheer terror, gently seasoned with British wit. My guess is that he wouldn’t be nearly as good at writing about beach vacations in the Bahamas.)
It’s hard to draw firm conclusions from Weiner’s travel about what makes some nations happy and others miserable. Weiner gives us intriguing hints at the state of the art of happiness research, writing at some length about “the hedonic treadmill“ (Georgetown University psychiatry professor Norman Rosenthal describes the hedonic treadmill by comparing the pursuit of happiness to a person on a treadmill, who has to keep working just to stay in the same place."As we acquire new things, we shift our expectations so that what seemed like a fortune to us before now seems not quite enough. As one famous millionaire put it, 'How much money is enough? Just a little bit more.' Observing how greater wealth generates higher expectations, researchers refer to the 'hedonic treadmill' theory, which compares the pursuit of happiness to a person on a treadmill, who has to keepworking just to stay in the same place."), a concept coined by Philip Brickman and Donald Campbell, who were studying the happiness of lottery winners and accident victims. Unsurprisingly, the lottery winners were quite happy, and the paralyzed accident victims unhappy. But over time, both returned to levels quite close to their happiness before these surprising developments.
Most people believe that acquiring a bit more money would make them happy; they tend to find that acquiring wealth is a trap, as they always want a bit more (hence, the treadmill.) There’s an exception - people who are truly impoverished will see their happiness increase with increased income. But this effect maxes out at a surprisingly low level, around $15,000 in annual income. In a rich country, there are only a few things likely to have an unambigious effect on your happiness over a long period of time, Weiner tells us: “Noise and big breasts. Studies have found that we really never get used to loud noises, despite prolonged exposure. Another study found that women who get breast implants never tire of the enjoyment it brings them, and presumably their companions as well.” And now you know.
Weiner adds his own layer of theory to his travels, introducing a couple of useful concepts to people interested in happiness. He discovers that throughout his travels, he meets people who are much happier in the places they’ve migrated to than in the lands of their birth. “They are hedonic refugees, moving to a new land, a new culture, because they are happier there. Usually, hedonic refugees have an epiphany, a moment of great clarity when they realize, beyond a doubt, they were born in the wrong country.” My guess is that a lot of people born in Burkina Faso, for instance, have this moment of clarity but aren’t able to relocate to Denmark - this is, perhaps, a more useful concept for explaining the migratory patterns of the rich and privleged than the world as a whole. But it’s an intriguing clue about “cultural fit”, the idea that someone who doesn’t fit well with the dominant culture of a place may be unhappy even if most of her fellow citizens are blissful.
Weiner also suggests that culture goes a long way towards explaining unhappiness in Moldova, the unhappiest nation he visits. Moldova is legendary in the happiness studies community, a nation that ranks extremely low in happiness despite beating out many nations in terms of life expectancy and wealth. Weiner believes this is because Moldova is:
Moldova este pe locul 147. Pana la 178, cu voia HPI, ultimul loc de pe lista, mai e....
…a fabricated nation. It doesn’t exist. Oh yes, you can go there, as I did, and walk its streets, eat its mamaliga, drink its bad wine, talk to its miserable people. Later, safely home, you can flip open your passport and admine, if that’s the word, the stamp that says “The Republic of Moldova”. None of this matters. Moldova does not exist, and existence is, in my book, a prerequisite for happiness. We need a solid identity - ethnic, national, linguistic, culinary, whatever - in order to feel good about ourselves.
This theory helps explain Weiner’s reaction to Qatar, which he finds surprisingly unhappy. His visit to Qatar’s historical museum, an unairconditioned concrete bunker in a nation where summer temperatures routinely break 50C, convinces him that Qataris have outsourced their history and heritage, not just all menial - and much technical - labor. Unless it’s the claustrophobia that comes from a society bound by tribal rules, but freed of the constraints of traditional financial rules by incredible wealth through national resources. Turns out it’s almost as difficult to pin down the causes of unhappiness as it is to explain happiness.
“The Geography of Bliss” makes a lousy self-help book - it won’t help you relocate to your happy spot on the earth, if such a thing exists. But it’s a really fun way to get a handle on what we do and don’t know about happiness, and you’ll likely be (marginally, slightly, temporarily) happier if you read it.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=165813
On page 56 of the book At What Price: Conceptualizing and Measuring Cost-of-Living and Price Indexes the hedonic treadmill theory is addressed as follows:- Nothing can keep people happy or unhappy for long. - Expectations quickly adapt to new circumstances.“If these circumstances are characterized by continuous improvement, ever increasing amounts of goods are required to maintain the same level of satisfaction. Conversely deteriorating circumstances wouldmake people unhappy for some time, but only until expectations are back in line with reality, as long as basic needs are met.”The National Academies Press: At What Price http://books.nap.edu/books/0309074428/html/56.html
The Hedonic Treadmill:“Those who rush to experience intensively pleasurable activities find that, amusing as they are, they soon become accustomed to them - the pleasure from them isn't sustainable. In order to maintain the intensepleasure they try more extreme and expensive things, but they'll adapt to them too. Abstinence from pleasures can make smaller pleasures seem more intense.”http://www.geocities.com/rainforest/vines/4111/psych3.html
In an article by Martin Morse Wooster:“.. relying on money as the measure of happiness might cause you to step onto what psychologists call the "hedonic treadmill," where you feel you would be happier if your income increased by 25 percent.Apartment renters would like to be able to get a house, homeowners want a larger house and a second car. (..) Once you're on the hedonic treadmill, it's very hard to get off, since it never ensures happiness; whatever you earn, you'll always want 25 percent more money.Reason: February 1994 http://reason.com/9402/col.wooster.shtml

http://www.happyplanetindex.org/list.htm
About the Happy Planet Index
The Happy Planet Index (HPI) is an innovative new measure that shows the ecological efficiency with which human well-being is delivered around the world. It is the first ever index to combine environmental impact with well-being to measure the environmental efficiency with which country by country, people live long and happy lives.
The Index doesn’t reveal the ‘happiest’ country in the world. It shows the relative efficiency with which nations convert the planet’s natural resources into long and happy lives for their citizens. The nations that top the Index aren’t the happiest places in the world, but the nations that score well show that achieving, long, happy lives without over-stretching the planet’s resources is possible. The HPI shows that around the world, high levels of resource consumption do not reliably produce high levels of well-being (life-satisfaction), and that it is possible to produce high levels of well-being without excessive consumption of the Earth’s resources. It also reveals that there are different routes to achieving comparable levels of well-being. The model followed by the West can provide widespread longevity and variable life satisfaction, but it does so only at a vast and ultimately counter-productive cost in terms of resource consumption.
The Happy Planet Index (HPI) strips the view of the economy back to its absolute basics: what we put in (resources), and what comes out (human lives of different length and happiness). The resulting Index of the 178 nations for which data is available, reveals that the world as a whole has a long way to go. In terms of delivering long and meaningful lives within the Earth’s environmental limits - all nations could do better. No country achieves an overall ‘high’ score on the Index, and no country does well on all three indicators.
No single country listed in the Happy Planet Index has everything right. We have to acknowledge from the start that while some countries are more efficient than others at delivering long, happy lives for their people, every country has its problems and no country performs as well as it could. Yet, fascinatingly, it is possible to see patterns emerging that point to how we might better achieve long and happy lives for all, whilst living within our environmental means.
Cifrele ingrosate reprezinta locul pe lista iar cele simple: Life Satisfaction, Life Expectancy, Ecological Footprint, Happy Planet Index
1 Vanuatu 7.4 68.6 1.1 68.2 2 Colombia 7.2 72.4 1.3 67.2 3 Costa Rica 7.5 78.2 2.1 66.0 4 Dominica 7.3 75.6 1.8 64.6 5 Panama 7.2 74.8 1.8 63.5 6 Cuba 6.3 77.3 1.4 61.9 7 Honduras 7.2 67.8 1.4 61.8 8 Guatemala 7.0 67.3 1.2 61.7 9 El Salvador 6.6 70.9 1.2 61.7 10 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 7.2 71.1 1.7 61.4 11 Saint Lucia 7.0 72.4 1.6 61.3 12 Vietnam 6.1 70.5 0.8 61.2 13 Bhutan 7.6 62.9 1.3 61.1 14 Samoa (Western) 6.9 70.2 1.4 61.0 15 Sri Lanka 6.1 74.0 1.1 60.3 16 Antigua and Barbuda 7.4 73.9 2.3 59.2 17 Philippines 6.4 70.4 1.2 59.2 18 Nicaragua 6.3 69.7 1.1 59.1 19 Kyrgyzstan 6.6 66.8 1.1 59.0 20 Solomon Islands 6.9 62.3 1.0 58.9 21 Tunisia 6.4 73.3 1.4 58.9 22 São Tomé and Principe 6.7 63.0 1.0 57.9 23 Indonesia 6.6 66.8 1.2 57.9 24 Tonga 6.6 72.2 1.6 57.9 25 Tajikistan 6.1 63.6 0.6 57.7 26 Venezuela 7.4 72.9 2.4 57.5 27 Dominican Republic 7.0 67.2 1.6 57.1 28 Guyana 7.2 63.1 1.5 56.6 29 Saint Kitts and Nevis 7.4 70.0 2.3 56.1 30 Seychelles 7.4 72.7 2.6 56.1 31 China 6.3 71.6 1.5 56.0 32 Thailand 6.5 70.0 1.6 55.4 33 Peru 5.6 70.0 0.9 55.1 34 Suriname 7.3 69.1 2.3 55.0 35 Yemen 6.2 60.6 0.7 55.0 36 Fiji 6.7 67.8 1.7 54.5 37 Morocco 5.6 69.7 0.9 54.4 38 Mexico 6.9 75.1 2.5 54.4 39 Maldives 6.6 66.6 1.6 53.5 40 Malta 7.5 78.4 3.5 53.3 41 Bangladesh 5.7 62.8 0.6 53.2 42 Comoros 5.9 63.2 0.8 52.9 43 Barbados 7.3 75.0 3.1 52.7 44 Malaysia 7.4 73.2 3.0 52.7 45 Palestine 5.4 72.5 1.1 52.6 46 Cape Verde 5.8 70.4 1.3 52.4 47 Argentina 6.8 74.5 2.6 52.2 48 Timor-Leste 6.6 55.5 0.8 52.0 49 Belize 6.9 71.9 2.6 52.050 Trinidad and Tobago 6.9 69.9 2.3 51.9 51 Chile 6.5 77.9 2.6 51.3 52 Paraguay 6.5 71.0 2.2 51.1 53 Jamaica 7.0 70.8 2.6 51.0 54 Nepal 5.5 61.6 0.6 50.0 55 Mauritius 6.5 72.2 2.4 49.6 56 Mongolia 6.7 64.0 1.9 49.6 57 Uruguay 6.3 75.4 2.6 49.3 58 Ecuador 5.6 74.3 1.8 49.3 59 Uzbekistan 6.4 66.5 1.9 49.2 60 Grenada 6.5 65.3 1.9 49.0 61 Austria 7.8 79.0 4.6 48.8 62 India 5.4 63.3 0.8 48.7 63 Brazil 6.3 70.5 2.2 48.6 64 Iceland 7.8 80.7 4.9 48.4 65 Switzerland 8.2 80.5 5.3 48.3 66 Italy 6.9 80.1 3.8 48.3 67 Iran 6.0 70.4 2.1 47.2 68 Ghana 6.2 56.8 1.1 47.0 69 Bolivia 5.5 64.1 1.2 46.2 70 Netherlands 7.5 78.4 4.7 46.0 71 Madagascar 5.8 55.4 0.8 46.0 72 Cyprus 6.9 78.6 4.0 46.0 73 Algeria 5.2 71.1 1.5 45.9 74 Luxembourg 7.6 78.5 4.9 45.6 75 Bahamas 7.7 69.7 4.1 44.9 76 Papua New Guinea 6.3 55.3 1.3 44.8 77 Burma 5.3 60.2 0.9 44.6 78 Belgium 7.3 78.9 4.9 44.0 79 Slovenia 6.6 76.4 3.8 44.0 80 Oman 7.3 74.1 4.4 43.9 81 Germany 7.2 78.7 4.8 43.8 82 Croatia 5.9 75.0 2.9 43.7 83 Lebanon 5.6 72.0 2.3 43.6 84 Taiwan 6.6 76.1 3.9 43.4 85 Haiti 5.5 51.6 0.5 43.3 86 Syria 5.1 73.3 1.9 43.2 87 Spain 7.0 79.5 4.8 43.0 88 Hong Kong 6.6 81.6 4.6 42.9 89 Saudi Arabia 7.3 71.8 4.4 42.7 90 Gambia 5.7 55.7 1.1 42.5 91 Cambodia 5.6 56.2 1.1 42.2 92 Albania 4.6 73.8 1.5 42.1 93 Jordan 5.1 71.3 1.9 42.0 94 New Zealand 7.4 79.1 5.5 41.9 95 Japan 6.2 82.0 4.3 41.7 96 Congo 5.7 52.0 0.9 41.6 97 Egypt 4.8 69.8 1.5 41.6 98 Turkey 5.3 68.7 2.0 41.4 99 Denmark 8.2 77.2 6.4 41.4 100 Brunei Darussalam 7.6 76.4 5.6 41.2 101 Georgia 4.1 70.5 0.8 41.2 102 Korea 5.8 77.0 3.4 41.1 103 Bosnia and Herzegovina 5.1 74.2 2.3 41.0 104 Senegal 5.6 55.7 1.2 40.8 105 Azerbaijan 4.9 66.9 1.5 40.7 106 Gabon 6.2 54.5 1.7 40.5 107 Libya 5.7 73.6 3.1 40.3 108 United Kingdom 7.1 78.4 5.4 40.3 109 Laos 5.4 54.7 1.0 40.3 110 Benin 5.4 54.0 1.0 40.1 111 Canada 7.6 80.0 6.4 39.8 112 Pakistan 4.3 63.0 0.7 39.4 113 Ireland 7.6 77.7 6.2 39.4 114 Poland 5.9 74.3 3.6 39.3 115 Norway 7.4 79.4 6.2 39.2 116 Macedonia 4.9 73.8 2.3 39.1 117 Israel 6.7 79.7 5.3 39.1 118 Namibia 6.5 48.3 1.6 38.4 119 Sweden 7.7 80.2 7.0 38.2 120 Romania 5.2 71.3 2.7 37.7 121 Hungary 5.7 72.7 3.5 37.6 122 Guinea 5.1 53.7 1.0 37.4 123 Finland 7.7 78.5 7.0 37.4 124 Mauritania 5.3 52.7 1.1 37.3 125 Kazakhstan 5.8 63.2 2.8 36.9 126 Togo 4.9 54.3 0.9 36.9 127 Kenya 5.6 47.2 0.9 36.7 128 Czech Republic 6.4 75.6 5.0 36.6 129 France 6.6 79.5 5.8 36.4 130 Armenia 3.7 71.5 1.0 36.1 131 Singapore 6.9 78.7 6.2 36.1 132 Slovakia 5.4 74.0 3.6 35.8 133 Greece 6.3 78.3 5.4 35.7 134 Tanzania 5.5 46.0 0.9 35.1 135 Guinea-Bissau 5.4 44.7 0.7 35.1 136 Portugal 6.1 77.2 5.2 34.8 137 Eritrea 4.4 53.8 0.7 34.5 138 Bahrain 7.2 74.3 6.6 34.4 139 Australia 7.3 80.3 7.7 34.1 140 Mali 5.3 47.9 1.1 33.7 141 Mozambique 5.4 41.9 0.7 33.0 142 Cameroon 5.1 45.8 0.9 32.8 143 Djibouti 4.8 52.8 1.3 32.7 144 Ethiopia 4.7 47.6 0.7 32.5 145 Bulgaria 4.3 72.2 2.7 31.6 146 Nigeria 5.5 43.4 1.2 31.1 147 Moldova 3.5 67.7 1.2 31.1 148 Burkina Faso 4.7 47.5 1.1 30.1 149 Lithuania 4.7 72.3 3.9 29.3 150 United States of America 7.4 77.4 9.5 28.8 151 Cote d'Ivoire 4.5 45.9 0.9 28.8 152 Rwanda 4.4 43.9 0.7 28.3 153 Sierra Leone 5.0 40.8 0.9 28.2 154 United Arab Emirates 7.4 78.0 9.9 28.2 155 Angola 4.8 40.8 0.8 27.9 156 South Africa 5.7 48.4 2.8 27.8 157 Sudan 3.6 56.4 1.0 27.7 158 Uganda 4.7 47.3 1.5 27.7 159 Kuwait 7.2 76.9 9.5 27.7 160 Latvia 4.7 71.6 4.4 27.3 161 Niger 4.5 44.4 1.1 26.8 162 Malawi 4.6 39.7 0.7 26.7 163 Zambia 4.9 37.5 0.8 25.9 164 Central African Republic 4.9 39.3 1.1 25.9 165 Belarus 4.0 68.1 3.2 25.8 166 Qatar 7.0 72.8 9.5 25.5 167 Botswana 5.4 36.3 1.3 25.4 168 Chad 4.5 43.6 1.3 25.4 169 Turkmenistan 4.0 62.4 3.1 24.0 170 Equatorial Guinea 5.2 43.3 2.5 23.8 171 Lesotho 4.3 36.3 0.6 23.1 172 Russia 4.3 65.3 4.4 22.8 173 Estonia 5.1 71.3 6.9 22.7 173 Ukraine 3.6 66.1 3.3 22.2 175 Congo, Dem. Rep. of the 3.3 43.1 0.7 20.7 176 Burundi 3.0 43.6 0.7 19.0 177 Swaziland 4.2 32.5 1.1 18.4 178 Zimbabwe 3.3 36.9 1.0 16.6
Nu e ciudat ca pe locul 6 se afla Cuba, mult deasupra Romaniei (locul 120) ?Dar macar suntem deasupra Ungariei, locul 121.
Cel mai bun comentariu despre aceasta situatie il ofera dragul de Melvin Durai, cu nelipsitul sau umor (oare de ce umoristii mei preferati sunt indieni care acum s-au stabilit in Canada? Si de ce m-am simtit atat de atrasa de Sonali? Anca zice ca pt ca semanam. Trebuie sa amintesc si despre Man from Matunga, deasemenea umorist indian):http://www.nshima.com/
I'd rather be poor in a country that gives me freedom than rich in a country that's restrictive. I'd hate to live in a country that controls the media or chops off the hands of thieves. I'd hate to live in a country where women don't have much freedom, not just the freedom to work and move around freely, but also the freedom to wear bikinis.
Despre treadmill MD scrie:
Yeah, we humans quickly adjust to our circumstances. That 52-inch high-definition TV might make you happy for a few days, but you'll soon get used to it and it won't seem so big anymore, especially when your friend Abdul buys an 80-inch model, the bastard.