These 10 Countries Are The Most Prosperous In The World, And They Don't Include The U.S.

50 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
In 2012, if you were only looking at the economy category, the U.S. still ranked within the top 20 healthiest countries. In 2013, the U.S. has dropped to 24th place.
These 10 Countries Are The Most Prosperous In The World, And They Don't Include The U.S.

Will we be left out of the "new economic world order"?
With the current mentality of the American voter, yes "we" will.


Joe Mobley
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

    These 10 Countries Are The Most Prosperous In The World, And They Don't Include The U.S.



    With the current mentality of the American voter, yes "we" will.


    Joe Mobley
    Why not explain that mentality to us?
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317253].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

      Why not explain that mentality to us?
      Consider the quality of elected officials across the country and draw your own conclusions.


      Joe Mobley
      Signature

      .

      Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317275].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

        Consider the quality of elected officials across the country and draw your own conclusions.


        Joe Mobley
        As a jr. social scientist, considering the attitudes (which lead to policies and their effects on the society) of elected officials would make for a much better analysis.
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317726].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
        Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

        Instead of I've got mine who cares about yours? It's more like why not let's all team up so that we can all get a decent life in our society..
        Because it's these b^stards that want to pick the team members, appoint the team captains and control the finances.

        Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

        Consider the quality of elected officials across the country and draw your own conclusions.
        How's that working out so far?


        Joe Mobley
        Signature

        .

        Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10321650].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    That's a lot of socialism...
    Signature
    Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
    Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317271].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
      Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

      That's a lot of socialism...
      Not to mention that all of those countries have universal health care, higher minimum wages, higher taxes. and impose more restrictions on corporations.
      Signature
      Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon.
      It'll just knock over all the pieces, poop on the board, and strut about like it's won anyway.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317293].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ThomM
        Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

        Not to mention that all of those countries have universal health care, higher minimum wages, higher taxes. and impose more restrictions on corporations.
        They also don't have a two party political system set up so only they can win. Plus they average more then a 50% voter turn out.
        Signature

        Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
        Getting old ain't for sissy's
        As you are I was, as I am you will be
        You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317365].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
          Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

          They also don't have a two party political system set up so only they can win. Plus they average more then a 50% voter turn out.
          Australia may have a multitude of parties, but because of our electoral system only two have any chance of being in government. We also have compulsory voting. If you're registered and don't turn up at polling place on election day, you get fined. Many may think that's an affront to the concept of democracy, however it forces people to actually think about how we're governed at least once every few years (in theory at least).
          Signature
          Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon.
          It'll just knock over all the pieces, poop on the board, and strut about like it's won anyway.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317378].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
            Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

            We also have compulsory voting. If you're registered and don't turn up at polling place on election day, you get fined. Many may think that's an affront to the concept of democracy, however it forces people to actually think about how we're governed at least once every few years.
            Not necessarily. It just means all citizens are forced to turn up at the polling place - it doesn't follow that any more thought has gone into the actual voting decision. In other countries, a person's decision not to vote can conceivably be the result of careful thought.

            .
            Signature
            TOP TIP: To browse the forum like a Pro, select "View Classic" from the drop-down menu under your user name.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317399].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
              Originally Posted by Frank Donovan View Post

              Not necessarily. It just means all citizens are forced to turn up at the polling place - it doesn't follow that any more thought has gone into the actual voting decision. In other countries, a person's decision not to vote can conceivably be the result of careful thought.

              .
              Good point Frank. I've amended my post to incorporate this.
              Signature
              Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon.
              It'll just knock over all the pieces, poop on the board, and strut about like it's won anyway.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317414].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
                I didn't notice any mention of Norway's oil and gas reserves, which have been major contributors to that country's prosperity. But what might come as a surprise to many UK citizens (and, I suspect, to even more from the US) is the level of trust the Norwegians place in their government. They seem happy to let the state invest the oil revenue ($800bn) in a sovereign wealth fund - in effect, a giant savings account.

                That trust appears to be justified. There's a closely followed guideline that only 4% of the surplus from the fund is spent or invested in public projects.

                How Norway has avoided the 'curse of oil' - BBC News

                .
                Signature
                TOP TIP: To browse the forum like a Pro, select "View Classic" from the drop-down menu under your user name.

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317433].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
                  Originally Posted by Frank Donovan View Post

                  That trust appears to be justified. There's a closely followed guideline that only 4% of the surplus from the fund is spent or invested in public projects.

                  How Norway has avoided the 'curse of oil' - BBC News

                  .
                  That could have something to do with only a small amount (~24%) of Norway's political campaigns being funded by corporate donors.

                  International campaign finance: How do countries compare? - CNN.com

                  Interestingly, political ads are banned on TV and radio as well.
                  Signature
                  Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon.
                  It'll just knock over all the pieces, poop on the board, and strut about like it's won anyway.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317451].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ThomM
            Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

            Australia may have a multitude of parties, but because of our electoral system only two have any chance of being in government. We also have compulsory voting. If you're registered and don't turn up at polling place on election day, you get fined. Many may think that's an affront to the concept of democracy, however it forces people to actually think about how we're governed at least once every few years (in theory at least).
            Here it's almost impossible for a third party candidate to even get on the ballot. The presidential debates are controlled by the two parties. In one state they simply don't allow third party candidates on the ballot. In another a D or R needs 2,000 signatures on a petition to get on the ballot while a third party candidate needs 65,000. If they happen to reach that number a D or R contests the signatures so they have to be recounted. Between the legal fees and recounting costs it's usually to much for the T.P. C. to afford as third parties don't have the corporate sponsors that the R&D parties have.
            That has a lot to do with the voter turn out here. Many people know it's a rigged system and they're only going to end up with a R or D anyways so why bother voting. Last presidential election we had a 51% voter turn out. Switzerland was a little lower then they usually are at 89%. Our voter turn out numbers closely match the number of voters that are registered R or D which at around 60% and falling.
            Signature

            Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
            Getting old ain't for sissy's
            As you are I was, as I am you will be
            You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317440].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
              Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

              Here it's almost impossible for a third party candidate to even get on the ballot. The presidential debates are controlled by the two parties. In one state they simply don't allow third party candidates on the ballot. In another a D or R needs 2,000 signatures on a petition to get on the ballot while a third party candidate needs 65,000. If they happen to reach that number a D or R contests the signatures so they have to be recounted. Between the legal fees and recounting costs it's usually to much for the T.P. C. to afford as third parties don't have the corporate sponsors that the R&D parties have.
              That has a lot to do with the voter turn out here. Many people know it's a rigged system and they're only going to end up with a R or D anyways so why bother voting. Last presidential election we had a 51% voter turn out. Switzerland was a little lower then they usually are at 89%. Our voter turn out numbers closely match the number of voters that are registered R or D which at around 60% and falling.
              I don't think our 2 party system is the main problem or even a big problem.
              Signature

              "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10318920].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

                I don't think our 2 party system is the main problem or even a big problem.
                You wouldn't.
                Signature

                Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                Getting old ain't for sissy's
                As you are I was, as I am you will be
                You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10318936].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                  Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                  You wouldn't.

                  No I wouldn't.

                  Why?

                  Since one party's economic performance far outpaces the other in so many areas of economics I don't see our two party system as a major problem.

                  IMHO, although one is far from perfect, it's quite easy...

                  (for someone who just wants to see the great middle class of this country excel - anywhere close to what it was doing in the post WW2 economic boom) ...

                  ...to see the other one as a major problem - especially when it comes to the nation's economics.


                  No one is angry, there's no name calling so I don't know why anyone would delete this.
                  Signature

                  "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10319148].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                    Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

                    No I wouldn't.

                    Why?

                    Since one party's economic performance far outpaces the other in so many areas of economics I don't see our two party system as a major problem.

                    IMHO, although one is far from perfect, it's quite easy...

                    (for someone who just wants to see the great middle class of this country excel - anywhere close to what it was doing in the post WW2 economic boom) ...

                    ...to see the other one as a major problem - especially when it comes to the nation's economics.


                    No one is angry, there's no name calling so I don't know why anyone would delete this.
                    You're funny
                    Both parties memberships are in decline while independents are on the raise. The only thing the R and D's get right is that it's the other guys fault.
                    Signature

                    Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                    Getting old ain't for sissy's
                    As you are I was, as I am you will be
                    You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10319234].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                      Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                      You're funny
                      Both parties memberships are in decline while independents are on the raise. The only thing the R and D's get right is that it's the other guys fault.

                      The numbers are funny also.

                      And you're an independent?

                      If you are you're a right leaning one.
                      Signature

                      "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10319243].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                        Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

                        And you're an independent?
                        Yep, Independent with Libertarian leanings. I've never had the desire to join a political party. in fact I've never seen the sense in it. I'm not saying I haven't voted for an R or D before, except on the presidential level. There I've never voted for an R.
                        Signature

                        Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                        Getting old ain't for sissy's
                        As you are I was, as I am you will be
                        You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10319248].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                          Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                          Yep, Independent with Libertarian leanings. I've never had the desire to join a political party. in fact I've never seen the sense in it. I'm not saying I haven't voted for an R or D before, except on the presidential level. There I've never voted for an R.
                          Well believe it or not I'm still registered as an independent and get interesting looks almost everytime I go vote but as far as economics are concerned - the stats tell me to lean way towards the Dems.

                          As long as the Rs are not interested in a national economic plan, not interested in going green, not interested in upgrading our grid, not interested in doing anything whatsoever about climate change, not interested in trying to do something to cut down on the number of mass murders, not interested in raising the top tax rate and getting rid of the gravy of loopholes for the wealthy and large corps, in the tax code etc., I'm working with the Ds.

                          After all as a citizen and a businessman, I'd rather have an economy (GDP) that historically grows at 3.7% and doubles approx. every 25 years versus one that grows at only 2.1% and doubles every 50 years or so.

                          I think that's a significant difference.

                          We all have choices to make in our lives.
                          Signature

                          "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10319316].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author jimbo13
                            Hardly anyone lives in those countries.

                            NY and London have populations greater than half of them. Do it that way and London or NY would be up top.

                            Another completely pointless bit of research by some stupid UK think tank.

                            Dan
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10319389].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                            Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

                            Well believe it or not I'm still registered as an independent and get interesting looks almost everytime I go vote but as far as economics are concerned - the stats tell me to lean way towards the Dems.

                            As long as the Rs are not interested in a national economic plan, not interested in going green, not interested in upgrading our grid, not interested in doing anything whatsoever about climate change, not interested in trying to do something to cut down on the number of mass murders, not interested in raising the top tax rate and getting rid of the gravy of loopholes for the wealthy and large corps, in the tax code etc., I'm working with the Ds.

                            After all I'd rather have an economy (GDP) that historically grows at 3.7% and doubles approx. every 25 years versus one that grows at only 2.1% and doubles every 50 years or so.

                            I think that's a significant difference.

                            We all have choices to make in our lives.
                            Heck I can give you A LOT more things to dislike about the R's
                            I can for the D's also, but then I do like to be bipartisan
                            Getting back to what started this, I just think opening up the elections to more then two parties could have a couple of benefits at least that would be good for the country as a whole. First I think it would open up the debates to different ideas and put the candidates in a spot where they would have to actually debate the issues instead of pointing out their opponents short fallings. Second I think it would get more people voting and taking an active part in our elections. Third it could keep the candidates more honest.
                            Signature

                            Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                            Getting old ain't for sissy's
                            As you are I was, as I am you will be
                            You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10319394].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                              Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                              Heck I can give you A LOT more things to dislike about the R's
                              I can for the D's also, but then I do like to be bipartisan
                              Getting back to what started this, I just think opening up the elections to more then two parties could have a couple of benefits at least that would be good for the country as a whole. First I think it would open up the debates to different ideas and put the candidates in a spot where they would have to actually debate the issues instead of pointing out their opponents short fallings. Second I think it would get more people voting and taking an active part in our elections. Third it could keep the candidates more honest.
                              I don't have a problem with a third party emerging in this country. Why not?
                              Signature

                              "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10320467].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
        Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

        Not to mention that all of those countries have universal health care, higher minimum wages, higher taxes. and impose more restrictions on corporations.

        That may actually be the cumulative reason they have far less gun violence. Universal health care also includes mental health care.

        Our culture in the US speaks of independence, and freedom to have everything our own way.
        We keep saying we want smaller government......less handouts....fewer programs...

        But as a species, we are social. We really want to be part of an interdependent group, no matter what we say. And it's very rare that help is refused when offered.

        We have sooo many proven examples of how different governments and programs work.


        You know what else the countries on that list share? Far fewer guns, and gun violence, far more interest in science, and less interest in religion.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317398].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author rondo
          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

          That may actually be the cumulative reason they have far less gun violence. Universal health care also includes mental health care.

          Our culture in the US speaks of independence, and freedom to have everything our own way.
          We keep saying we want smaller government......less handouts....fewer programs...

          But as a species, we are social. We really want to be part of an interdependent group, no matter what we say. And it's very rare that help is refused when offered...
          Universal health care is freedom.

          Even though I rarely use it, I wouldn't want to live without it.

          I thought it was pretty sad the Oregon shooting survivors need to crowdfund their 6-figure health care costs.

          Andrew
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317547].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
            Originally Posted by rondo View Post

            Universal health care is freedom.

            Even though I rarely use it, I wouldn't want to live without it.

            I thought it was pretty sad the Oregon shooting survivors need to crowdfund their 6-figure health care costs.

            Andrew
            That's an interesting take, that I never thought of. I think I see where that would be true.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10318678].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
              Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

              That's an interesting take, that I never thought of. I think I see where that would be true.
              How can that be true with the mighty ACA being the law of the land? None of those folks had health insurance?

              IMHO, the ACA should set aside funds to take care of folks who've been injured due to a mass shooting.

              I wonder how much it will cost to cover the yearly tab??

              Last I heard, the ACA was running on something like 20 Billion maybe 40 Billion per year surplus or savings of the federal gov as opposed to what the feds were spending before the ACA because some states have opted out of medicaid expansion.


              I just found out that the ACA covers mental health issues also so the money is already there for the treatment.

              Health Insurance and Mental Health Services | MentalHealth.gov
              Signature

              "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10318868].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
      Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

      That's a lot of socialism...

      Mixed with a lot of capitalism!
      Signature

      "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10317759].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
        Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

        Mixed with a lot of capitalism!
        Somebody's got'ta pay for all that crap that the lazy and irresponsible think they are entitled to.


        Joe Mobley
        Signature

        .

        Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10320767].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
          Speaking of entitled, anyone see this ahole demanding a mac and cheese at UConn? Unbelievable!

          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10320903].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
          Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

          Somebody's got'ta pay for all that crap that the lazy and irresponsible think they are entitled to.


          Joe Mobley
          Joe, let me see if I can help you understand what's going on in those Nordic countries like Norway.

          Actually Joe, all the peoples of those countries are doing is...

          - Agreeing to a high tax rate on highly profitable corps, the wealthy (maybe 60%) and the working non-wealthy (maybe 45%) so that the people in the society - via specific government programs can...

          1: Provide for anyone who works 40 years a decent retirement.

          With most people a decent retirement is simply a decent place to live and enough decent food to eat.

          2: Free or very low cost higher education for anyone willing to partake.

          3: Free Universal healthcare for all of their citizens.

          Note: Let's not harp on the word "free" here, because the peoples of these types of economic systems have already paid for their benefits.

          BTW...

          Who wants to go broke just because they got sick? The people of most of those countries don't have to worry about that.

          4: A robust unemployment system in case one becomes unemployed.

          5: Some even have free day care as part of their social contract with the other peoples of their nation.

          6: Paid maternity leave.

          7: Some type of mortgage tax deduction like we have in the USA to help folks become homeowners.


          That's the social part.

          Those people have decided that they would like the major financial concerns in their lives dealt with by pooling their funds - via specific gov programs.

          Now, are there freeloaders in those countries? Sure there are but they have decided to NOT abandon their system because of a few freeloaders.

          I have no doubt that if and when the freeloaders in their society really start to endanger their way of life they will come down on them like a ton of bricks with maybe something like ...

          here's an entire area for you. You'll get something like a homeless shelter and a decent amount of food to eat - if that's all you want to do with your life.



          BTW...

          Oh, yea they may even have some state run industries such as utilities etc. in order to keep costs low to the average citizen. (there's some socialism for you)


          The capitalism part is...

          1: They can start all the small businesses they want and there are plenty of small businesses in the country - for people who want to get into that.

          2: They are also allowed to grow their small biz into large corporations.


          Bottom line... IMHO...

          Those people are healthier, happier and a whole lot less financially harried than the peoples of the USA because they have come to understand the concept of community and teamwork on a national scale and are making it work for them.

          Instead of I've got mine who cares about yours? It's more like why not let's all team up so that we can all get a decent life in our society..


          Now, I could be wrong but this is my interpretation of what is going on in countries like Norway.
          Signature

          "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10320969].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ThomM
            Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

            Joe, let me see if I can help you understand what's going on in those Nordic countries like Norway.

            Actually Joe, all the peoples of those countries are doing is...

            - Agreeing to a high tax rate on highly profitable corps, the wealthy (maybe 60%) and the working non-wealthy (maybe 45%) so that the people in the society - via specific government programs can...

            1: Provide for anyone who works 40 years a decent retirement.

            With most people a decent retirement is simply a decent place to live and enough decent food to eat.

            2: Free or very low cost higher education for anyone willing to partake.

            3: Free Universal healthcare for all of their citizens.

            Note: Let's not harp on the word "free" here, because the peoples of these types of economic systems have already paid for their benefits.

            BTW...

            Who wants to go broke just because they got sick? The people of most of those countries don't have to worry about that.

            4: A robust unemployment system in case one becomes unemployed.

            5: Some even have free day care as part of their social contract with the other peoples of their nation.

            6: Paid maternity leave.

            7: Some type of mortgage tax deduction like we have in the USA to help folks people homeowners.


            That's the social part.

            Those people have decided that they would like the major financial concerns in their lives dealt with by pooling their funds - via specific gov programs.

            Now, are there freeloaders in those countries? Sure there are but they have decided to NOT abandon their system because of a few freeloaders.

            I have no doubt that if and when the freeloaders in their society really start to endanger their way of life they will come down on them like a ton of bricks with maybe something like ...

            here's an entire area for you. You'll get something like a homeless shelter and a decent amount of food to eat - if that's all you want to do with your life.



            BTW...

            Oh, yea they may even have some state run industries such as utilities etc. in order to keep costs low to the average citizen. (there's some socialism for you)


            The capitalism part is...

            1: They can start all the small businesses they want and there are plenty of small businesses in the country - for people who want to get into that.

            2: They are also allowed to grow their small biz into large corporations.


            Bottom line... IMHO...

            Those people are healthier, happier and a whole lot less financially harried than the peoples of the USA because they have come to understand the concept of community and teamwork on a national scale and are making it work for them.

            Instead of I've got mine who cares about yours? It's more like why not let's all team up so that we can all get a decent life in our society..


            Now, I could be wrong but this is my interpretation of what is going on in countries like Norway.
            You should read up on the tax laws of some of these countries like Norway before you make such claims.
            Tax on "ordinary income"

            Ordinary income (alminnelig inntekt), which consists of all taxable income (wages, pensions, business income, taxable share income and other income) minus deductions (losses, debt interest, etc.), is taxed at a flat rate of 28%. In 2010, the tax on "ordinary income" is split in a local tax (kommunale skattøre) of 12.80%, a regional tax (fylkeskommunale skattøre) of 2.65% and a tax to the central government (fellesskatt) of 12.55%.
            Corporate taxable profits (ordinary income) are taxed at a flat rate of 27%.[14] The tax base is the sum of operating profit/loss, financial revenues and net capital gains minus tax depreciation. In addition, the profit is taxed on the owner's hand through dividend and capital gain taxation
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Norway
            Signature

            Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
            Getting old ain't for sissy's
            As you are I was, as I am you will be
            You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10321095].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
              Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

              You should read up on the tax laws of some of these countries like Norway before you make such claims.
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Norway

              That's even better for them since they're doing what they do at only 28%.
              Signature

              "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10321167].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

                That's even better for them since they're doing what they do at only 28%.
                VAT tax makes up most of their tax income. 25% general VAT, 15% on food stuffs.
                Also they only spend 4.8% of their national budget on Military. Meanwhile we spend more then the next 7 countries combined. U.S. defense spending compared to other countries | pgpf.org
                Why do you think other countries can have nice things but not us?
                Signature

                Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                Getting old ain't for sissy's
                As you are I was, as I am you will be
                You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10321199].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                Norway is one of the leading and successful examples of state capitalism. This is how they can have low taxes and provide many services.

                Its national oil champion, Statoil, is the largest company in the region. The Norwegian state owns large stakes in Telenor, the country's biggest telephone operator, Norsk Hydro, its biggest aluminium producer, Yara, its biggest fertiliser- maker, and DnBNor, its biggest bank. It holds 37% of the Oslo stockmarket, but it also controls some non-listed giants such as Statkraft, a power-generator, which if listed would be the third-biggest company on the stockmarket.

                The simple explanation for Norway's penchant for state capitalism is oil. When it was discovered in the North Sea in late 1969 it transformed the country's economy. Today Norway is the world's eighth-largest oil exporter. Petroleum accounts for 30% of the government's revenues as well as a quarter of the country's value added.

                The formula of controlling business through shares rather than regulation seemed to work well, so the government used it wherever possible. "We invented the Chinese way of doing things before the Chinese," says Torger Reve of the Norwegian Business School.

                In recent years the Norwegians have been adjusting their model to get the best combination of state control and global competition. In 2007 they merged two state companies, Statoil and Hydro, in order to create a national champion. They also reduced the state's share to 62.5%. For some this shows that Norway is liberalising. But the strategy is remarkably similar to that being adopted in China and other state-capitalist countries.
                The rich cousin | The Economist
                Signature
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10321203].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                  Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                  Norway is one of the leading and successful examples of state capitalism. This is how they can have low taxes and provide many services.

                  Its national oil champion, Statoil, is the largest company in the region. The Norwegian state owns large stakes in Telenor, the country's biggest telephone operator, Norsk Hydro, its biggest aluminium producer, Yara, its biggest fertiliser- maker, and DnBNor, its biggest bank. It holds 37% of the Oslo stockmarket, but it also controls some non-listed giants such as Statkraft, a power-generator, which if listed would be the third-biggest company on the stockmarket.

                  The simple explanation for Norway's penchant for state capitalism is oil. When it was discovered in the North Sea in late 1969 it transformed the country's economy. Today Norway is the world's eighth-largest oil exporter. Petroleum accounts for 30% of the government's revenues as well as a quarter of the country's value added.

                  The formula of controlling business through shares rather than regulation seemed to work well, so the government used it wherever possible. "We invented the Chinese way of doing things before the Chinese," says Torger Reve of the Norwegian Business School.

                  In recent years the Norwegians have been adjusting their model to get the best combination of state control and global competition. In 2007 they merged two state companies, Statoil and Hydro, in order to create a national champion. They also reduced the state's share to 62.5%. For some this shows that Norway is liberalising. But the strategy is remarkably similar to that being adopted in China and other state-capitalist countries.
                  The rich cousin | The Economist
                  So we should invest more in oil?
                  Signature

                  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                  Getting old ain't for sissy's
                  As you are I was, as I am you will be
                  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10321247].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                    Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                    So we should invest more in oil?
                    I think that is why Joe posted this story. He wants the US to compete with these much more socialistic leaning countries and in Norway's case, a state capitalist country.

                    Can you imagine if the US had the foresight to do some of what Norway has done in regards to oil reserves and other businesses? To control businesses through shares instead of regulations? Instead we have businesses controlling the government and were giving billions of subsidies to the oil companies. I think we have it backwards!
                    Signature
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10321273].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                      Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                      I think that is why Joe posted this story. He wants the US to compete with these much more socialistic leaning countries and in Norway's case, a state capitalist country.

                      Can you imagine if the US had the foresight to do some of what Norway has done in regards to oil reserves and other businesses? To control businesses through shares instead of regulations? Instead we have businesses controlling the government and were giving billions of subsidies to the oil companies. I think we have it backwards!
                      In more ways then one I'm afraid. If we stopped subsidizing oil, agriculture and wars (to name a few) and instead subsidized people we could turn things around pretty quick.
                      I've noticed while doing a little research on Norway that they make starting a business much easier then we do also. Their tax code doesn't seem as complicated either.
                      Even though their healthcare systems are way ahead of us they still have to deal with co-pays and out of pocket expense. Here's an interesting fact about Norway and Sweden's healthcare system.
                      Another characteristic of both Norway and Sweden is subsidiarity. That is, the devolution of decision-making to local authorities. In Norway, the organisation of primary health care is the responsibility of its 428 municipalities, while in Sweden health care is devolved to 21 county councils.Creating a better health system: lessons from Norway and Sweden
                      We can't just look to other countries and say "They got it so we should to" we have to take an honest look at the why's and how's they got it. That includes things like looking at the break down of their national budgets as well.
                      Signature

                      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                      Getting old ain't for sissy's
                      As you are I was, as I am you will be
                      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10321340].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
                      Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                      I think that is why Joe posted this story. He wants the US to compete with these much more socialistic leaning countries and in Norway's case, a state capitalist country.

                      Can you imagine if the US had the foresight to do some of what Norway has done in regards to oil reserves and other businesses?

                      To control businesses through shares instead of regulations?

                      Instead we have businesses controlling the government and were giving billions of subsidies to the oil companies. I think we have it backwards!

                      I hear you Tim, and I'm not sure if we'd ever do it the Norwegian way but I think we're at the beginning of another major economic cycle in American history.

                      We had the post WW2 boom and then we had the cycle from about 1980 until 2008 in which the nation clearly abandoned the set of policies that helped create the post WW2 boom.

                      Now, we're still digging out of the rubble of the great recession from the end of the last cycle.

                      If the WH does not change hands in 2016 it will IMHO, confirm the trend/cycle in which is the nation slowly swinging back to the attitudes and policies that helped us lead the world in almost every standard of living measurement during the post WW2 boom.

                      It's not easy turning the ship around but slow and steady wins the race.
                      Signature

                      "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10322475].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    It is interesting how sometimes the comments speak volumes!

    LIBERTEES SYDNEY BROWNSTONE 2 YEARS AGO
    They are all lily white.
    There are multiple ways to read that. It was not EXACTLY true, but what the heck. YEAH, and they are ALSO ALL in europe or apparently directly settled from europe. They ALSO all started out, directly or indirectly, as monarchies, and weren't communist. The idea that less work means more money is LUDICROUS! So HOW can they work less and make more? Well, they have a different culture, fewer people, fewer things they have to pay for, and MORE PEOPLE WORK, as a percentage. Of course, US money is worth less as well. It is ironic. Germany was once MANDATED to provide even beyond their potential for the world. They went BANKRUPT, and went to war in part because of it. The US is now, to a degree, mandated to provide for the world. Granted, there is no war and no treaty with teeth, but the US still pays a FORTUNE to provide aid, help, weapons, manpower, etc... and DOES fight other people's wars. And HECK, illegal immigration amounts to helping other countries out. After all, countries are only talking about collections of people here. If a person that is BROKE leaves mexico and comes to the US to retire, Mexico has one less poor person, and the US gets one MORE.

    The US is currently trying to "distribute the 'wealth'" Imagine that the 'wealth' is a gallon of water, and the country is a home. They don't like that container having a gallon of water. They "want to help the country"! So they pour the gallon all over the house, so the entire house has water. Oh SURE, the rug MIGHT be damp, but can even ONE person get a drink of water? 10 million dollars SEEMS like a lot, but over the entirety of the US, it is about $0.03 per person. So it would take over 3.3BILLION dollars to buy the average person lunch at a fast food place. And don't think the government won't take "its cut"!!!!! That 3.3billion would, on average, become 30billion. Heck, look at how much money was WASTED on that stupid healthcare.government website, used to facilitate the supposed ACA! I mean you CAN'T mandate that americans do something, and then mandate that they can't. ACA became impossible, so the ADMIN then, breaking the ACA, said we set up one just for YOU, use THIS portal. Likewise, $3MILLION paid to the CEO of walmart is effectively one PENNY per US walmart worker!

    They have bought HUGE prisons on high priced property, to never use them. They have spent BILLIONS in some public schools with most money not going to ANYTHING educational. I bet the scandinavian countries don't even do that.

    From wikipedia:

    The design of the website was overseen by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and built by a number of federal contractors, most prominently CGI Group of Canada. The original budget for CGI was $93.7 million, however this grew to $292 million prior to launch of the website. While estimates that the overall cost for building the website had reached over $500 million prior to launch,[1][8][9][10][11] the Office of Inspector General released a report finding that the total cost of the HealthCare.gov website had reached $1.7 billion.[12] On July 30, 2014, the Government Accountability Office released a non-partisan study that concluded the administration did not provide "effective planning or oversight practices" in developing the HealthCare.gov website.[13]
    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10318349].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Sumit Menon
    Most of these countries are/have -

    Sparsely Populated - People are nicer to each other when there are less of them around. This is not a guess. I know. I am Indian.

    Mono cultural population - It's easier to help someone when you identify with them.

    Little Religious BS - The right wing does not have a large vote bank with a particular religion.

    High on civil liberties - People are much happier when they don't have to fight for a right as blatantly obvious as gay marriage.

    Tax a lot of people - Scandinavian countries tax everyone who earn more than 1.2-1.6 times the average income under the highest tax rate. America taxes people that make more than 8 times the average at the highest rate. (Oh how the middle class shall bear the burden of taxation) I, of course, talk about the income tax.There's also a heavy VAT in these countries. Indirect taxes are as fair as any system of taxation can get.

    Would I pay a higher tax rate for free education, free healthcare and pension for everyone in the country? Of course I would. As long as there are sufficient health care professionals to treat everyone. As long as the academic curriculum is standardized and developed by experts and not priests or mullahs.

    Sumit.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10321379].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Sumit Menon
    In another story, Sweden seemed to have switched to a six hour work day.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10321382].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
      Originally Posted by Sumit Menon View Post

      In another story, Sweden seemed to have switched to a six hour work day.
      That interesting, this article says that the majority of the workforce still does 40 hour work weeks.


      Sweden flirts with six hour work day - Oct. 2, 2015
      Signature

      "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10322450].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Sumit Menon
        Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

        That interesting, this article says that the majority of the workforce still does 40 hour work weeks.


        Sweden flirts with six hour work day - Oct. 2, 2015
        A six hour work week makes perfect business sense. Most people spend 2-3 hours a day goofing off at work anyway. But the employers have to pay their wages. Cut those 2 hours and your productivity goes through the roof.

        Besides, most of the jobs these days are intellectual and not manual. The amount of time you spend at work may not be directly proportional to the results.

        I hope there is no government mandate to implement the six hour work day. More companies should pick this up by looking at the results. The worst case scenario would be that the government makes this a law and increases the minimum wage at the same time with the excuse that people aren't making enough money.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10323094].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KenThompson
    I'd still rather be an American and here, with all our faults, than anything or anywhere else. We'll be fine, Joe, and the rest of you closet and not-so-closet socialists.

    No, we should keep our guns. If you want to have higher taxes and universal health care and free rides for illegals and everyone else who wants to come here... then move to Europe.

    You seem a smug and arrogant group. Good for you. Feel good about yourselves. You know where the door is, and so do I, of course, at least to this place. But I forgot that this place isn't a US based forum, anymore. So I'll leave.

    Feel free to bash me, delete this post or whatever.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10322603].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
      Originally Posted by KenThompson View Post

      I'd still rather be an American and here, with all our faults, than anything or anywhere else. We'll be fine, Joe, and the rest of you closet and not-so-closet socialists.

      No, we should keep our guns. If you want to have higher taxes and universal health care and free rides for illegals and everyone else who wants to come here... then move to Europe.

      You seem a smug and arrogant group. Good for you. Feel good about yourselves. You know where the door is, and so do I, of course, at least to this place. But I forgot that this place isn't a US based forum, anymore. So I'll leave.

      Feel free to bash me, delete this post or whatever.
      Now there's someone who doesn't understand the difference between socialism and the social contract a government has with its citizens.
      Signature
      Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon.
      It'll just knock over all the pieces, poop on the board, and strut about like it's won anyway.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10322677].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

        Now there's someone who doesn't understand the difference between socialism and the social contract a government has with its citizens.
        Yea, you get that all too often in the states from a lot of people who also have a fetish-fear of free-loaders of all sorts taking over.

        I said this...

        Quote:
        Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post


        Instead of I've got mine who cares about yours? It's more like why not let's all team up so that we can all get a decent life in our society. (that's my impression of how most folks feel in most of those top 10 countries)


        And then Joe said this (as a direct response to the above) ...


        Because it's these b^stards that want to pick the team members, appoint the team captains and control the finances.



        Do you have any idea what he meant by it?
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10322808].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

        Now there's someone who doesn't understand the difference between socialism and the social contract a government has with its citizens.

        And the social contract citizens have with one another.
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10326170].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          And the social contract citizens have with one another.
          I'm not aware of this "contract". Perhaps you might share some of the details.


          Joe Mobley
          Signature

          .

          Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10327038].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
      Originally Posted by KenThompson View Post

      I'd still rather be an American and here, with all our faults, than anything or anywhere else. We'll be fine, Joe, and the rest of you closet and not-so-closet socialists.

      No, we should keep our guns. If you want to have higher taxes and universal health care and free rides for illegals and everyone else who wants to come here... then move to Europe.

      You seem a smug and arrogant group. Good for you. Feel good about yourselves. You know where the door is, and so do I, of course, at least to this place. But I forgot that this place isn't a US based forum, anymore. So I'll leave.

      Feel free to bash me, delete this post or whatever.
      Why should we bash you? You're entitled to your point of view the same as everyone else.
      You're right about me being smug and arrogant. Mostly arrogant.

      You and I are really together on free rides for illegals. They can get in line for the Ferris wheel, like everyone else. Although, I'm not sure why you are so concerned about rides. I pay for a the tilt-a-whirl ride just like all real Americans. Why illegals get to go on these rides for free, should be outlawed.

      I'll get the pitchforks, you get the torches.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10322770].message }}

Trending Topics