[thriftwy]

Would Singapore be a genuinely worse place to live if its GDP per capita would be "just" $35,000 instead of $70,000?

It would probably have slighly smaller population, less economic regulation and more sustainability. So the difference between Yew and "number two" is the difference between "Excellent" and "Great".

Come on, is that so important? I'd rather read on about a leader who turned "mediocre" into "pretty good".

Because most countries are not Singapore, they don't have what it takes to be even Taiwan.

"When a Rhino looks at the moon, he wastes the flowers of his spleen", as neither Japanese nor Chinese say.

[kawaiikouhai]

This is just moving the goalposts and sophistry at this point. Your initial statement was Taiwan was measurably better per capita than Singapore, though the GDP and economic statistics show otherwise. You can also look at various happiness indices, where Singapore is #1 in Asia, since happiness is correlated with GDP per capita.

and If you really believe $70,000 is no different from $35,000, I urge you to donate all your income excess of $35,000 to me. I take Venmo, Cashapp.

[thriftwy]

This is not moving the goalposts. The goalposts were the unsurpassed wisdom of Lee Kuan Yew. It is still a hipster bullshit if you ask me.

Taiwan was 1.5x worse GDP-wise in 1960 and now the difference is 2.0x. That's not that much. Especially as I have said about city states and whatnot.

I donate significant amount of my income, just not to you obviously.

[fuzztester]

your first two paragraphs, taken together seem like upside down logic to me, or totally illogical. cart before horse kind of thing.

and that "probably" ... :)