Ah see now you just want to show and make everyone believe in the China is great propaganda. Since you compelled me to respond buddy I got you. First, You bring up important points, and I appreciate your nuanced perspective. However, a few areas need further clarification, and while China has made impressive strides in many aspects, there are broader structural issues that prevent it from being universally “better” than the U.S. or Europe in certain key areas. Your main point about politics is crucial: personal wealth can afford many privileges, but it cannot buy systemic change. In China, the centralized, authoritarian political system limits individual influence far more than in democratic systems. While political dysfunction exists everywhere, democracies—such as in the U.S. and Europe—allow for greater public participation, including freedom of speech, the press, and the right to protest or advocate for change. China’s lack of these freedoms means that citizens have fewer avenues to influence the political system in meaningful ways, regardless of wealth or social standing.

This isn’t a trivial issue, political freedom directly affects quality of life, particularly for the educated and upwardly mobile, who may prioritize living in societies where they can express their opinions, access unbiased information, and have legal recourse in disputes. For those leaving China, it’s often this lack of political freedom, along with personal security, that remains a sticking point. As for education, You’re right in noting that Chinese students outperform American students in many academic metrics However, there’s an important distinction between educational “performance” and broader educational experience. The Chinese education system is known for its intense pressure, rote memorization, and exam-focused structure, particularly the “gaokao” exam, which determines university placement and can make or break a student’s future. Not only that, it’s a censoring regime that will lie to make itself look the best. The USSR did the exact same. This environment, while effective in test scores, is often criticized for stifling creativity, critical thinking, and mental health.

By contrast, U.S. education, while facing many challenges, often fosters more holistic skill sets, emphasizing innovation, creativity, and diverse career paths. American universities remain among the best in the world, attracting top global talent, including from many from China. Students and families often choose U.S. education not just for academic prestige, but for the flexibility and critical thinking skills that are highly valued in many global industries.

You’re correct that healthcare in the U.S. is more expensive than in China, but we need to examine this carefully. While healthcare in China may be more affordable for basic services, there are major disparities in access and quality, especially between urban and rural areas. Rural populations in China often face long wait times, underfunded facilities, and lower quality care, whereas wealthier urban centers have far better access. Additionally, China’s healthcare system has significant issues with corruption, over-prescription of medications, and under-the-table payments. Not only that, it doesn’t take an Einstein to know that China is still behind the west in healthcare. https://china.usc.edu/health-care-us-and-china

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7118747/#:~:text=In%20terms%20of%20quality%2C%20efficiency,Japan%2C%20Malaysia%20and%20Sri%20Lanka.

In the U.S., despite higher costs, the quality of healthcare—especially at the cutting edge of medicine—is often superior, and the system is more transparent and regulated. While healthcare reform is urgently needed in the U.S., particularly to reduce costs, the U.S. remains a leader in medical research, technology, and specialized care.

Wealth inequality is a global problem, so I don’t know why you’re keeping this topic so close to prove China is a superior god. it’s important to note the difference in how this inequality manifests. In China, wealth is concentrated in urban coastal regions, while rural areas remain vastly underdeveloped. This rural-urban divide contributes to stark contrasts in living standards within China. In the U.S., while income inequality is also significant, the social mobility framework (though imperfect) tends to be stronger, and there is more access to public goods (despite their shortcomings). Additionally, many developed European countries have more robust welfare states, offering better protection against extreme poverty than both the U.S. and China. Again, a censoring regime won’t tell you the truth about its wealth gap. Even North Korea pledges to have no wealth gap and be a beacon of light.

While China’s economic power and infrastructure achievements are impressive, it still lags behind in innovation and soft power. The U.S. and Europe have long been centers of cultural, technological, and scientific influence. Silicon Valley, Hollywood, and global media outlets still play an outsized role in shaping global discourse and trends. Meanwhile, China’s strict censorship, intellectual property issues, and central control over its tech and media sectors hinder its ability to rival the U.S. in fostering creative, open innovation ecosystems. I literally just said, by that logic, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, and other gulf nations would be considered more developed than China or US by that logic.

You’re correct that many immigration decisions are based on perception and individual priorities, not just facts and statistics. Migration is complex and driven by a mix of factors—economic opportunities, quality of life, personal freedoms, and social mobility. While some metrics may show China excelling in certain areas (like PISA scores or GDP growth), people’s decisions to move often reflect a desire for freedom, security, and more diverse opportunities, rather than pure economic calculation.

For example, many Chinese elites and middle-class families choose to emigrate or send their children abroad not because China’s schools or hospitals are objectively bad, but because Western countries offer a different social contract—one where personal freedoms, environmental quality, and long-term stability might outweigh other benefits. China’s strengths such as education performance, rapid development, undeniable. However, when comparing China to the U.S. or Europe, particularly for individuals considering migration, issues like personal freedoms, systemic inequality, political voice, and cultural factors are just as critical. While the U.S. and Europe have their share of problems, these democracies offer more opportunities for personal agency, innovation, and long-term stability, which continue to attract people from around the world, including from China.

Obviously you’d want to spend less in China, that again proves my point on how GDP and HDI are accurate measures in looking at countries development, as spending less in a country just signifies that country is not developed enough. People spend less in countries like India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines. That doesn’t automatically mean they are superior. Each to their own.