The world's most competitive economies are European socialist democracies

[jay gw]

GENEVA (Reuters) - Nordic countries have some of the world's most competitive economies, despite high taxes and extensive social security systems, with Finland in the lead, according to a study issued Wednesday.

In the study, the Geneva-based World Economic Forum set the United States second after Finland in its annual competitiveness league but recorded growing business concern over the Bush administration's handling of the nation's finances.

Apart from Finland, four other Nordic nations -- Sweden at third, Denmark at fourth, Iceland at seventh and Norway at ninth -- were among the top 10 in the table issued with the Forum's Global Competitiveness Report 2005.

The others in the top 10 were Taiwan, Singapore, Switzerland and Australia.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/09/28/news/international/competitiveness.reut/

__________

Well there goes the arguments that a nation must have constant flows of immigrants to be competitive, as most of the top 10 have little to none, and the argument that higher tax rates lead to slow economic growth and poverty, which none have. The United States has far more people proportionally under the poverty line than any of the other 10. They also, like Norway and Australia, have budget surpluses unlike the United States which has several trillions of dollars in current and projected deficits.

[Freakshow]

I don't see anything in that article that indicates what exactly was measured. That's like those articles that talk about survey results, but don't tell you exactly what the survey questions were. They interpret the survey results for you, sometimes in a way that doesn't reflect reality. See the recent thread here about rape, and the surveys showing number of sexual assaults on college campuses.

Without knowing what was measured, I just disregard articles like this. If the media was really doing a good job, they would present must more data to back what they are trying to say.

[jay gw]

I don't see anything in that article that indicates what exactly was measured.

That's because you didn't read all of it.

Without knowing what was measured, I just disregard articles like this.

That's because you're a Republican that wants no taxes at all and articles like this one are stumbling blocks.

[Freakshow]

That's because you didn't read all of it. Yes, I did. And I did not see exactly what was measured. Statements like "The study, based on hard economic data and business opinion surveys in 117 countries..." and "The study, this year involving 11,000 business leaders in the countries surveyed and a wide range of research institutes, focuses on factors affecting overall economic performance, from the quality of public institutions to technology and innovation." do not tell me exactly what was measured. Those statements are so broad and high-level as to be totally meaningless.


That's because you're a Republican that wants no taxes at all and articles like this one are stumbling blocks. I am not a Republican. And saying I want "no taxes" is a strawman argument. Specifically, it is the "extreme man" variation of the straw man argument. Try harder next time.

[jay gw]

Freakshow: I am not a Republican.
Freakshow: I will be the first person to completely slam and tear into the UN and any dictatorship in the world.
People that think the United Nations is like a dictatorship. Hmmm.....

Freakshow: "Don't learn to defend yourself. Rely on the government to do that for you." It's part of an overall view that people should rely on government for virtually everything.
Against "big" government. Hmmm......

Freakshow: If the US vanished overnight, Canada would have to slash its social spending in order to increase its military spending.

American ultra patriotism and jingoism. Hmmm....

[Freakshow]

People that think the United Nations is like a dictatorship. Hmmm.....
The statement you quoted (which has absolutely nothing to do with this thread; don't know why you brought it here) did not mean that the UN was itself a dictatorship. It meant that I am a big critic of the UN. And I am a big critic of dictatorships. It doesn't mean they are the same thing.

That's the best response you could come up with?

[Jon_in_london]

The 'Nordic Model' has many advantages- it may actually be superior to the 'Anglo-Saxon' model... much as some may hate to admit it.

Although high-tax, the tax money is used effectively. Scandanavian countries have first rate public services including very good child care that allows mothers to work and be economically active. They invest heavily in innovation (for eg. Nokia and Ericksson) and offer state-sponsered re-training for the unemployed. All this and lots else, adds up to a formidable economic engine....

As I tried to to point out in another thread in this section, the UK is almost the opposite, we invest poorly in innovation and training- prefering to rely on immigration to fill skills gaps- and 'New' Labour is too incompetent and corrupt to get value for money for public service investment.

[Freakshow]

People that think the United Nations is like a dictatorship. Hmmm.....



Against "big" government. Hmmm......
I also am against the war on drugs (I think they should be legalized), I don't care if gay people get married, I am an atheist and am opposed to religious influence in government, and I think just about any consensual crimes (like prostitution) should be legalized. ETA: I also think George Bush is a complete idiot.

Does that sound like a Republican to you?

And I am not a member of any political party. Never have been.

You are not a very good debater. All you are doing is responding with ad hominem attacks, instead of debating the issue. I'm done here.

[CapelDodger]

Does that sound like a Republican to you?You seem like the potentially saved. You appreciate what the community should not concern itself with, but may be unsound on what it should concern itself with.

And I am not a member of any political party. Never have been.Same with me, which is why the best chance I have of influencing anything important is through this forum. There's an up-side - no blame attaches - and a down-side - I don't get on TV much or own several castles. Or get to sack the Vatican, which is my particular ambition.

[CapelDodger]

As I tried to to point out in another thread in this section, the UK is almost the opposite, we invest poorly in innovation and training- prefering to rely on immigration to fill skills gaps ...The continuation of Empire by other means. The relatively (look at the French experience) painless British withdrawal from Empire was cushioned economically by patriation of the cheap labour the Empire depended on, third-world wages operating with first-world capital. Which created the capital for the new industries and the educated, healthy, mostly indigenous boomers like me to run them.

Of course, a couple of generations on, when the old first-world capital was sold for scrap a while back, there are repercussions ...

The Swedes have benefited from the fact that their imperial ambitions were snuffed out by the Russians and Prussians so long ago. Their choices involved the Baltic and its environs. These islands were never in a position to ignore the Atlantic Ocean once the oceans became the arteries of the world economy. That time is over, IMO, but we're not as far down the road to adjustment as the Swedes.

On the other hand, the Swedes are further down the road to the next problem.

[Ed]

The 'Nordic Model' has many advantages- it may actually be superior to the 'Anglo-Saxon' model... much as some may hate to admit it.

Although high-tax, the tax money is used effectively. Scandanavian countries have first rate public services including very good child care that allows mothers to work and be economically active. They invest heavily in innovation (for eg. Nokia and Ericksson) and offer state-sponsered re-training for the unemployed. All this and lots else, adds up to a formidable economic engine....

.

The nordic countries are like gated communities in the US. They are small, ridigidly control immigration, maintain a great deal of cultural homogeniety and so forth.

If you want "diverse" and "inclusive" you get one thing with the attendent problems, you reject those things you get what you get. Pays yer money, takes yer choice.

[Hawk one]

Actually, Norway's never been that innovative. We just have lots of oil, gas and fish. :D

[Dr Adequate]

That's social democracies, jay gw.

Socialism is a political system in which the state controls the means of production, distribution and exchange.

[Orwell]

That's social democracies, jay gw.

Socialism is a political system in which the state controls the means of production, distribution and exchange.

That's one way to put it. More accurately: adherence to the theory social organization which believes the proprietorship and the authority of the means of production, capital, land, etc. should belong to the entire community. Government ownership is one way top achieve this. Other possibilities: co-operatives, anarcho-syndicalism, worker ownership of factories (another kind of co-op)...

[Leif Roar]

The nordic countries are like gated communities in the US. They are small, ridigidly control immigration, maintain a great deal of cultural homogeniety and so forth.

You're not particularly up to date on post-war nordic history, are you?

Norway, population of 4.6 million, has 365 000 first and second generation immigrants, roughly 8% of the population. Of those 265 000 are of non-western origin and 32% of the first generation immigrants have lived in Norway for less than 5 years.

Denmark, population of 5.4 million, has 452 000 first and second generation immigrants, or roughly 8.4% of the population, 320 000 of non-western origin.

In Sweden, population of 9 million, there live 1.1 million people, or 12.2%, who are born in a foreign country.

[Mark]

That's social democracies, jay gw.

Socialism is a political system in which the state controls the means of production, distribution and exchange.

Then Conservatives in the US should stop referring to any government program they don't like as "Socialism."

[MRC_Hans]

The Scandinavian countries are not socialist by any meaningful definition of the term.

Of course, if you are so far to the right that everyting else looks distantly left to you, you mignt not notice the difference, but then none of your definitions are likely to be meaningful, anyhow.

Hans