As I prepare to leave Switzerland, I was listening to CNN as they interviewed a Swedish academic on his explanation of the political rebalancing underway in Sweden. It became a discussion of what the Swedes care about as they consider the issues most relevant to themselves. In many ways. Sweden ranks near the top of most global prosperity measures. According to the Legatum Prosperity Index, Sweden was ranked 2nd globally in 2023 with a prosperity score of 83.7, out of 167 countries. It performs especially well on Living Conditions, Empowered People, Inclusive Societies, and Personal Freedom. Switzerland currently holds the top spot in that Index, having overtaken Denmark and Norway since the 2023 edition. Rankings across the index’s history have rotated among a small cluster of Nordic/Western European countries. Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, Sweden, and Finland have each held #1 at different points over the past two decades. Everything about this trip to Europe over the past two weeks would validate those rankings. This is a wonderful place by any standard.
In addition, Sweden is the 6th least corrupt nation out of 180 countries, per Transparency International. Sweden also ranks 5th out of 127 economies, with particular strength in governance and quality of life. By raw size, Sweden has the 26th highest GDP among 193 countries as of 2025, a reminder that “prosperity” indices measure much more than economic output alone. A smaller population means Sweden’s GDP rank looks modest even though its per-capita wealth and quality-of-life scores are elite. On broad wellbeing/prosperity composites (which combine economic strength, health, education, safety, governance, and personal freedom), Sweden consistently lands in the global top 2–10, usually trailing only its Nordic neighbors like Norway, Denmark, and Finland. What that tells me is that listening to what Swedes care about the most should be instructive about prioritizing what we as Americans should care about.
My term for this issue is “wellbeing”, so we need to put some definition on that. There’s no single universally agreed definition or list of attributes, but most models of wellbeing converge on a similar set of core elements. The major frameworks are psychological, economic, and philosophical. Physical health properly sits at the top of the list. Bodily functioning, freedom from illness/pain, energy, sleep, nutrition are key…and all the things needed to maintain all that. Emotional/psychological wellbeing come in right behind that. Positive emotion, low chronic distress, emotional regulation, and a general sense of life satisfaction are very important. Meaning and purpose also have their place. A sense that one’s life and activities matter and are connected to values, contribution, or something larger than oneself. Relationships and social connection also play a role. Bonds with family, friends, and community giving rise to feeling loved, supported, and belonging are essential. Feeling in control of one’s own choices, and capable and feeling effective in what one does are central to self-determination theory and the importance of that to wellbeing. We all want to be absorbed in activities that use one’s skills, whether it’s work, hobbies or creative pursuits. Achievement and growth and gaining progress toward goals, learning mastery, and getting a sense of development over time adds to the mix. And let’s not forget the importance of security. Financial stability, safety, predictability and freedom from existential threat or chronic scarcity all rank high on the list.
A few well-known frameworks organize these aspects of wellbeing differently. Martin Seligman’s PERMA model is the latest approach and ranks positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment in that order. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is still better known. It creates a hierarchy that goes physiological needs → safety → belonging → esteem → self-actualization. There’s also Ed Diener’s subjective wellbeing chart that shows life satisfaction + positive affect + low negative affect = wellbeing. Others say thatwellbeing is about having real freedom to live a life one has reason to value with health, education, political freedom, etc.
Most researchers now treat wellbeing as multidimensional rather than a single score. A person can be high on some elements (say, achievement) and low on others (say, relationships) at the same time. Wellbeing has become a genuine political battleground in recent years, with debates spanning economics, governance, and social policy. The major fault lines start with GDP vs. wellbeing as the measure of success. A growing movement (New Zealand’s “Wellbeing Budget,” the OECD’s Better Life Index, the UK’s ONS wellbeing measures) argues governments should target happiness/life satisfaction alongside or instead of GDP growth. Critics counter that wellbeing metrics are subjective, hard to compare across cultures, and risk becoming a political tool to obscure poor economic performance. This leads to the controversial topic of Universal Basic Income (UBI). Proponents of UBI argue unconditional cash payments reduce poverty-related stress and give people security to pursue meaningful work. Opponents worry about cost, inflation, work disincentives, and whether cash transfers address root causes of poor wellbeing (like social isolation or purpose) as well as targeted services would. Work-life balance and the four-day week debates are ongoing with shorter work weeks, “right to disconnect” laws (adopted in France, Portugal, and elsewhere), and paid leave mandates at the forefront. Supporters cite burnout reduction and productivity data from trials while critics argue this may hurt competitiveness or disadvantage smaller businesses. Social media and youth mental health now figures prominently in the discussion. Intense political fights over social media regulation, age verification laws, and phone bans in schools, driven by concern that social media use is driving rising rates of teen depression and anxiety. This pits free-speech and parental-rights arguments against child-protection arguments. The US Surgeon General declared loneliness an epidemic in 2023. This raises questions about whether government should fund community programs, public spaces, or is overreaching into inherently personal/social domains.
A basic issue of wellness revolves around universal healthcare and mental health parity. How much of wellbeing is a state responsibility (public mental health services, healthcare access) versus individual/market responsibility remains one of the oldest and most polarized debates, especially in the US. This goes hand-in-hand with the issues of immigration, inequality, and national wellbeing Some argue rising inequality erodes collective wellbeing even amid GDP growth; others argue redistribution policies reduce growth and opportunity, which itself harms long-term wellbeing.
Here is what I know for sure from all this pondering about wellbeing…the U.S. has lost sight of all priorities other than the monetary ones and other places like Europe, where prosperity does not lag the U.S. by meaningful amounts, has managed to keep the broader picture in perspective. We can do better and should look to Europe for guidance for our own long-term wellbeing.