It would have been nice to have been able to write this book with the style of Mailer, the wit of Shaw, the breadth of Myrdal and the zeal of Nader. It would also have been miraculous. Rest assured there are no miracles here. On the contrary, the work in your hands undoubtedly bears all the marks of imperfect human design. It's too long for one book, but probably too short for the story to be told. It's not the sort of book one can hope to fmish, even in five volumes. There is always one more table one might squeeze in, one more column or row, an illustrative chart or figure, another important refer­ ence to check, something dangling here or there that nags one to fiddle with it, wrap it up, tie it down, and so on. All one can do, I think, is put up with the nagging and press on. I can't imagine anyone making so many factual claims and evaluative judgments, and putting together so many numbers in so many different areas without making dozens of mistakes. I can't imagine anyone working with national statistics and not having plenty of mistakes made for him. As I look back on it now, it's hard to imagine anyone being naive enough (bold enough has a better ring to it) to take on the task of writing a book like this in the first place. Of course, I had Myrdal's great An American Dilemma to encourage me.

For readers who intend to read this volume without reading the first, some in­ troductory remarks are in order about the scope of the work and the strategy used in all five volumes to measure the quality of life. In the frrst chapter of Volume I, I reviewed the relevant recent literature on social indicators and so­ cial reporting, and explained all the general difficulties involved in such work. It would be redundant to repeat that discussion here, but there are some fundamental points that are worth mentioning. Readers who fmd this account too brief should consult the longer discussion. The basic question that will be answered in this work is this: Is there a difference in the quality of life in Canada and the United States of America, and if so, in which country is it better? Alternatively, one could put the question thus: If one individual were randomly selected out of Canada and another out of the United States, would there be important qualitative differences, and if so, which one would probably be better om To simplify matters, I often use the terms Canadian' and 'American' as abbreviations for 'a randomly selected resident' of Canada or the United States, respec­ tively.

For readers who intend to read this volume without reading the ftrst, some introductory remarks are in order about the scope of the work and the strategy used in all ftve volumes to measure the quality of life. In the ftrst chapter of Volume I, I reviewed the relevant recent literature on social indicators and social reporting, and explained all the general difficulties involved in such work. It would be redundant to repeat that discussion here, but there are some fundamental points that are worth mentioning. Readers who fmd this account too brief should consult the longer discussion. The basic question that will be answered in this work in this: Is there a difference in the quality of life in Canada and the United States of America, and if so, in which country is it better? Alternatively, one could put the question thus: If one individual were randomly selected out of Canada and another out of the United States, would there be important qualitative differences, and if so, which one would probably be better off? To simplify matters, I often use the terms 'Canadian' and 'American' as abbreviations for 'a randomly selected resident' of Canada or the United States, respectively.

For readers who intend to read this volume without reading the first, some in­ troductory remarks are in orde{about the scope of the work and the strategy used in all five volumes to measure the quality of life. In the first chapter of Volume I, I reviewed the relevant recent literature on social indicators and so­ cial reporting, and explained all the general difficulties involved in such work. It would be redundant to repeat that discussion here, but there are some fundamental points that are worth mentioning. Readers who fmd this account too brief should consult the longer discussion. The basic question that will be answered in this work is this: Is there a difference in the quality of life in Canada and the United States of America, and if so, in which country is it better? Alternatively, one could put the question thus: If one individual were randomly selected out of Canada and another out of the United States, would there be important qualitative differences, and if so, which one would probably be better off! To simplify matters, I often use the terms 'Canadian' and 'American' as abbreviations for 'a randomly selected resident' of Canada or the United States, respec­ tively.

It would have been nice to have been able to write this book with the style of Mailer, the wit of Shaw, the breadth of Myrdal and the zeal of Nader. It would also have been miraculous. Rest assured there are no miracles here. On the contrary, the work in your hands undoubtedly bears all the marks of imperfect human design. It's too long for one book, but probably too short for the story to be told. It's not the sort of book one can hope to fmish, even in five volumes. There is always one more table one might squeeze in, one more column or row, an illustrative chart or figure, another important refer­ ence to check, something dangling here or there that nags one to fiddle with it, wrap it up, tie it down, and so on. All one can do, I think, is put up with the nagging and press on. I can't imagine anyone making so many factual claims and evaluative judgments, and putting together so many numbers in so many different areas without making dozens of mistakes. I can't imagine anyone working with national statistics and not having plenty of mistakes made for him. As I look back on it now, it's hard to imagine anyone being naive enough (bold enough has a better ring to it) to take on the task of writing a book like this in the first place. Of course, I had Myrdal's great An American Dilemma to encourage me.

For readers who intend to read this volume without reading the first, some in­ troductory remarks are in order about the scope of the work and the strategy used in all five volumes to measure the quality of life. In the frrst chapter of Volume I, I reviewed the relevant recent literature on social indicators and so­ cial reporting, and explained all the general difficulties involved in such work. It would be redundant to repeat that discussion here, but there are some fundamental points that are worth mentioning. Readers who fmd this account too brief should consult the longer discussion. The basic question that will be answered in this work is this: Is there a difference in the quality of life in Canada and the United States of America, and if so, in which country is it better? Alternatively, one could put the question thus: If one individual were randomly selected out of Canada and another out of the United States, would there be important qualitative differences, and if so, which one would probably be better om To simplify matters, I often use the terms Canadian' and 'American' as abbreviations for 'a randomly selected resident' of Canada or the United States, respec­ tively.

For readers who intend to read this volume without reading the ftrst, some introductory remarks are in order about the scope of the work and the strategy used in all ftve volumes to measure the quality of life. In the ftrst chapter of Volume I, I reviewed the relevant recent literature on social indicators and social reporting, and explained all the general difficulties involved in such work. It would be redundant to repeat that discussion here, but there are some fundamental points that are worth mentioning. Readers who fmd this account too brief should consult the longer discussion. The basic question that will be answered in this work in this: Is there a difference in the quality of life in Canada and the United States of America, and if so, in which country is it better? Alternatively, one could put the question thus: If one individual were randomly selected out of Canada and another out of the United States, would there be important qualitative differences, and if so, which one would probably be better off? To simplify matters, I often use the terms 'Canadian' and 'American' as abbreviations for 'a randomly selected resident' of Canada or the United States, respectively.

For readers who intend to read this volume without reading the first, some in­ troductory remarks are in orde{about the scope of the work and the strategy used in all five volumes to measure the quality of life. In the first chapter of Volume I, I reviewed the relevant recent literature on social indicators and so­ cial reporting, and explained all the general difficulties involved in such work. It would be redundant to repeat that discussion here, but there are some fundamental points that are worth mentioning. Readers who fmd this account too brief should consult the longer discussion. The basic question that will be answered in this work is this: Is there a difference in the quality of life in Canada and the United States of America, and if so, in which country is it better? Alternatively, one could put the question thus: If one individual were randomly selected out of Canada and another out of the United States, would there be important qualitative differences, and if so, which one would probably be better off! To simplify matters, I often use the terms 'Canadian' and 'American' as abbreviations for 'a randomly selected resident' of Canada or the United States, respec­ tively.