Sweden´s competitiveness second best

[Thorum]

"Sweden has advanced (http://www.nordstjernan.com/news/sweden/2628/) from its former 4th place and is now the world's 2nd most competitive economy, only beaten by Switzerland, according to the annual comparison by the World Economic Forum, and thus overtaking both the U.S. and Singapore. Among the Nordic countries, Finland is placed 7th, Denmark 9th, Norway 14th, and Iceland is place 36th. The U.S. placed 4th. The rankings are calculated from both publicly available data and the Executive Opinion Survey, a comprehensive annual survey conducted by the World Economic Forum together with its network of Partner Institutes (leading research institutes and business organizations) in the countries covered by the Report."

:thumbs up

[Loddfafner]

Does this mean that socialism does not necessarily hold a country back?

[Thorum]

Does this mean that socialism does not necessarily hold a country back?

Simply put, yes. The lifestyles and living standards of Scandinavia speak volumes...

[poiuytrewq0987]

Simply put, yes. The lifestyles and living standards of Scandinavia speak volumes...

Sweden is very dependent on external goods. Sweden doesn't have a lot of valuable natural resources nor do it produce a lot of it. If there was a shake up in world's economy (such as a major war affecting Sweden's primary trading partners) there'd be a major depression in the Swedish economy. Living standards? It was created with artificial wealth, hardly commendable. Not to mention the fact Sweden hasn't been involved in a major war for the last, what, 200 years? Compared to Yugoslavia where we've been repeatedly occupied, bombed, embargoed... Sweden had it easy. I hate countries who brag about their economic performance when they've had it easy.

[Thorum]

Sweden is very dependent on external goods. Sweden doesn't have a lot of valuable natural resources nor do it produce a lot of it. If there was a shake up in world's economy (such as a major war affecting Sweden's primary trading partners) there'd be a major depression in the Swedish economy. Living standards? It was created with artificial wealth, hardly commendable. Not to mention the fact Sweden hasn't been involved in a major war for the last, what, 200 years? Compared to Yugoslavia where we've been repeatedly occupied, bombed, embargoed... Sweden had it easy. I hate countries who brag about their economic performance when they've had it easy.

The USA is dependent on external goods. There has been a major shakeup in the world's economy for the last few years, haven't you noticed? A very serious recession yet there was no depression in Sweden. Artificial wealth? :fponder:I don't know the term. Germany has been in repeated devastating wars and is ranked 4th. I have a feeling something else is bugging you...

[poiuytrewq0987]

The USA is dependent on external goods.

Yes and no. While a large number of American factories have been outsourced, it is still the largest producer of goods in the entire world.


There has been a major shakeup in the world's economy for the last few years, haven't you n nnoticed?That was largely isolated within America and the recent European debt crisis was in the making for a very long time. Even Sweden is not free from the crisis for it holds debt equivalent to 43% of its GDP which is neither good or bad.


A very serious recession yet there was no depression in Sweden.That's because the supply Sweden needs to create wealth hasn't stopped flowing into country. When it does, that's when Sweden will fail.

Artificial wealth? :fponder:I don't know the term.The building of wealth by the ways of debt.


Germany has been in repeated devastating wars and is ranked 4th. I have a feeling something else is bugging you...Not quite. The only major devastation it experienced was in WW1 (where its industries were not really touched) and WW2 but it had received massive amounts of foreign aid which allowed for easy rebuilding as did Japan (the only reason Japan is one of the most rich countries in the world). Compared to Yugoslavia? We were occupied by the Ottomans and Austrians for 500 years. The Balkan Wars, WW1, WW2, the Yugoslav Civil War and the illegitimate bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 and the economic embargoes post-war. Please don't be ignorant.

[Thorum]

Sorry for being ignorant...

[Pallantides]

Sweden is very dependent on external goods. Sweden doesn't have a lot of valuable natural resources nor do it produce a lot of it. If there was a shake up in world's economy (such as a major war affecting Sweden's primary trading partners) there'd be a major depression in the Swedish economy. Living standards? It was created with artificial wealth, hardly commendable. Not to mention the fact Sweden hasn't been involved in a major war for the last, what, 200 years? Compared to Yugoslavia where we've been repeatedly occupied, bombed, embargoed... Sweden had it easy. I hate countries who brag about their economic performance when they've had it easy.

Sweden have natural resources like timber, hydropower and iron ore.





...they have whole lot of timber.:D

[Motörhead Remember Me]

Sweden is very dependent on external goods. Sweden doesn't have a lot of valuable natural resources nor do it produce a lot of it. If there was a shake up in world's economy (such as a major war affecting Sweden's primary trading partners) there'd be a major depression in the Swedish economy. Living standards? It was created with artificial wealth, hardly commendable. Not to mention the fact Sweden hasn't been involved in a major war for the last, what, 200 years? Compared to Yugoslavia where we've been repeatedly occupied, bombed, embargoed... Sweden had it easy. I hate countries who brag about their economic performance when they've had it easy.

You speak the sort of rubbish which can only come from someone who has N O fucking clue whatsoever...

Sweden has a lot of natural resources timber, iron ore, minerals, water power plants, indigenous industries e.t.c.
One country which resembles Sweden much is Finland which is a country doing shamelessly well despite being ravaged by multiple wars for the last 200 years.
Yugoslavia was living in peace from the late 1940's to the early 1990's what did you manage to do during that time? Throw yourselves into a total mess without any outside help...
Artificial wealth? What are you on? What wealth is natural?

[Motörhead Remember Me]

Simply put, yes. The lifestyles and living standards of Scandinavia speak volumes...

True.

I have posted this in another forum earlier:


I’m always puzzled about how critical some people are about the Nordic, and other countries like Canada, Germany, New Zeeland and the Netherlands, where the welfare system is highly developed.
Obviously the welfare state model is a finger in the eye with people who despises the thought of the weak and insecure being allowed another opportunity instead of having to work underpaid for 14 h day, 7 days a week without paid vacation, beg, rob, sell their organs or prostitute themselves to make ends meet.

There is a firm belief that taxes are only pure evil and that the welfare state citizens are a bunch of freeloaders, lazy and comfortable, who only misuses the system and have effectively been stripped of any will to work hard and has no motivation for personal development. The welfare state is thought of as a crazy system and doomed to fail. Well, the truth is far from it, the welfare model is the closest thing we have to a sustainable development of the society and it is in fact a superb breeding ground for innovations and development.

Critics fail to explain why welfare states always produce individuals who excel in innovations, personal development and yes, are generally the most satisfied of people too. The critics of the welfare model always neglect the fact that the alternative to free education, child benefit, generous parental leave, rehabilitation and welfare is usually mass homelessness, mass poverty, a class society where there’s a structural inequality, expensive health care, hefty education fees, ruthless capitalism that exploits or communism that deceives the masses.

Citizens in a welfare state generally want's that it's own people live in welfare and with a reasonable social security net and is are ready to provide for it so that he/she may benefit from it too in times of crisis. I personally think that the price we pay in taxes is comparatively small for what we’re given in terms of education, healthcare and other social services.
I also think that anyone who grew up in any of the Nordic countries but would opt for a different system, is ignorant. But of course, there are flaws in the welfare state too and there are freeloaders. The system we have can only get better. And then there is this eternal issue of immigrants flooding welfare states to cash in on gullible indigenous taxpayers… It’s my belief that the welfare isn’t for everyone to come and tap into, just to wreak havoc after you’ve got what you want. But the welfare state gives people new opportunities and people usually come out right and contribute to the common good.

In each and every statistical index chart welfare states top or are near the top concerning . And there is a clear pattern; the more welfare in the state, the better the country performs.

Some links:
Prosperity index (rates the best countries to live on basis of 79 different variables organised into nine sub indexes – each identified as a foundation of long-term prosperity. http://www.prosperity.com/summary.aspx

Highest human development (meaning where people have the greatest chance of fulfilling their goals) http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/

Gross National Income of countries based on Purchasing Power Parity per
capita http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworl..._countries.htm

Most innovative nations http://www.eetasia.com/ART_880056129...T_97f40f78.HTM

Corruption index http://www.transparency.org/news_roo...cpi_2008_table

Press freedom ranking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index

Most gender equal nations http://www.weforum.org/en/Communitie...work/index.htm

The best countries to live for mothers with small children http://www.savethechildren.org/newsr...es-mother.html

Infant mortality rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...mortality_rate

Most peaceful nations http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/05/30/1553

10 safest countries in the world to visit http://tripatlas.com/articles/913/Th...world_to_visit

An interesting statistic is this one:
http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top...ime-rates.html
Every reported crime is a testimony of the citizens trust in the country’s legal institution!
Citizens in these high trust societies also tend to have the highest trust in their parliament from a global perspective http://www.qog.pol.gu.se/working_pap...3_Holmberg.pdf

Or, what do you think?

Go ahead, folks. Bash the Nordic/welfare model...

[poiuytrewq0987]

You speak the sort of rubbish which can only come from someone who has N O fucking clue whatsoever...

Sweden has a lot of natural resources timber, iron ore, minerals, water power plants, indigenous industries e.t.c.
One country which resembles Sweden much is Finland which is a country doing shamelessly well despite being ravaged by multiple wars for the last 200 years.
Yugoslavia was living in peace from the late 1940's to the early 1990's what did you manage to do during that time? Throw yourselves into a total mess without any outside help...
Artificial wealth? What are you on? What wealth is natural?

Haha... jebeni picka. The collapse of Yugoslavia was largely instigated by the NATO who wanted to see the breakup of Yugoslavia to subjugate us to their whims.

[Äike]

There's a slightly similar thread here (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16641).

Sweden has the most sustainable economy in the EU, while Estonia and Denmark both rank 2nd. Finland ranks 4th. Thus the top of the list is dominated by the Nordic countries.

[The Ripper]

Northern European. :p

[Äike]

Northern European. :p

Well, Balts are Northern-European, but Latvia is at the bottom of the list. While Finnic people/countries are Nordic.

[The Ripper]

Well, Balts are Northern-European, but Latvia is at the bottom of the list.
So?


While Finnic people/countries are Nordic.

Estonia is not considered Nordic, and neither are East Karelians. :coffee:

[Äike]

Estonia is not considered Nordic, and neither are East Karelians. :coffee:

Estonians do not care about that, they still consider themselves to be põhjamaalased. :p Põhjamaa on me sünnimaa (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWY4v3r7AXQ), mitte Baltimaa. ;)

[The Ripper]

Estonians do not care about that, they still consider themselves to be põhjamaalased. :p Põhjamaa on me sünnimaa (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWY4v3r7AXQ), mitte Baltimaa. ;)

Yeah, Northern.

[Äike]

Yeah, Northern.

Scots are also Northern, just like the Estonians. But the difference is, that they aren't Nordic. Northern is more of a geographical term, Nordic is a cultural term.

[The Ripper]

Scots are also Northern, just like the Estonians. But the difference is, that they aren't Nordic. Northern is more of a geographical term, Nordic is a cultural term.

Nordic is also a term that isn't applied to Estonians. Northern can just as well be a cultural term, just as "Eastern" and "Western" are.

[Äike]

Nordic is also a term that isn't applied to Estonians. Northern can just as well be a cultural term, just as "Eastern" and "Western" are.

The term Nordic wasn't also applied to Finland, 19 years(Estonia has been re-independent for 19 years) after its independence.

[The Ripper]

The term Nordic wasn't also applied to Finland, 19 years(Estonia has been re-independent for 19 years) after its independence.

Does this mean that Finland suddenly changed culturally, or does it mean that it was included in the Nordic political framework?

[Äike]

Does this mean that Finland suddenly changed culturally, or does it mean that it was included in the Nordic political framework?

It means that Finland has had enough time to make the world less ignorant and introduce its country.

I'm not that amazed that many people think that Estonians are Eastern-European or Baltic. Because most of them do not know much about our culture and country, we are quite recently re-independent. Any foreigner who truly learns about our culture and people, starts considering Estonians, Nordic. One guy even wrote a book about "The only post-communist Nordic country".

[The Ripper]

It means that Finland has had enough time to make the world less ignorant and introduce its country.
No, it meant that relations to Scandinavia and Sweden in particular were improved and the internal political situation stabilized and followed a Scandinavian model of Social Democratic lead consensus politics, and later it meant that Finland and the Scandinavian countries began to co-operate politically. In Finland, Nordic co-operation was one of the few politically correct forms of international co-operation in the Cold War era.

[Äike]

No, it meant that relations to Scandinavia and Sweden in particular were improved and the internal political situation stabilized and followed a Scandinavian model of Social Democratic lead consensus politics, and later it meant that Finland and the Scandinavian countries began to co-operate politically. In Finland, Nordic co-operation was one of the few politically correct forms of international co-operation in the Cold War era.

Sweden isn't ruled by social democrats anymore, are Swedes now less Nordic? ;)

I definitely agree with you that Estonians do not support social democracy. In my experience, Estonians dislike everything with the word "socialism" after experiencing 50 years of Extreme Leftist Socialist rule.

[The Ripper]

Sweden isn't ruled by social democrats anymore, are Swedes now less Nordic? ;)'

Did the Moderates (who have by the way incorporated many social democratic themes since decades ago, such as the welfare state, just as the "right" in Finland has) dismantle the Nordic political institutions and treaties? My point was that the definitions of Nordic are very much the result of political realities, not to mention that it seems to be a very confusing term for many. Estonia is not Nordic because it simply isn't. It can be included in the future, but at the moment it is not, no matter how culturally related it may be.


I definitely agree with you that Estonians do not support social democracy. In my experience, Estonians dislike everything with the word "socialism" after experiencing 50 years of Extreme Leftist Socialist rule.

In this aspect they have much in common with other post-Soviet countries, I'd imagine.

[Äike]

'

Did the Moderates (who have by the way incorporated many social democratic themes since decades ago, such as the welfare state, just as the "right" in Finland has) dismantle the Nordic political institutions and treaties? My point was that the definitions of Nordic are very much the result of political realities, not to mention that it seems to be a very confusing term for many. Estonia is not Nordic because it simply isn't. It can be included in the future, but at the moment it is not, no matter how culturally related it may be.

so, Estonia has to become social-democratic, to become Nordic? :eek:



In this aspect they have much in common with other post-Soviet countries, I'd imagine.

Not really, socialist parties are more successful in other post-communist countries, than in Estonia.

[ikki]

"Sweden has advanced (http://www.nordstjernan.com/news/sweden/2628/) from its former 4th place and is now the world's 2nd most competitive economy, only beaten by Switzerland, according to the annual comparison by the World Economic Forum, and thus overtaking both the U.S. and Singapore. Among the Nordic countries, Finland is placed 7th, Denmark 9th, Norway 14th, and Iceland is place 36th. The U.S. placed 4th. The rankings are calculated from both publicly available data and the Executive Opinion Survey, a comprehensive annual survey conducted by the World Economic Forum together with its network of Partner Institutes (leading research institutes and business organizations) in the countries covered by the Report."

:thumbs up

such measurements are quite weird. So how should we understand corporations that move their production to china? Small brained people that will lose money since it would have been more efficiant to build the factory in sweden or switzerland?
Or what is that "competitiveness" supposed to measure one wonders.. sure seems to have nothing at all to do with what everyone else understands as competitiveness

[The Ripper]

so, Estonia has to become social-democratic, to become Nordic? :eek:

You need to stop twisting my words when you lack arguments. The current definition of Nordic is the result of political and historical process that Estonia has been removed from for obvious reasons, and thus it isn't defined as Nordic.


Not really, socialist parties are more successful in other post-communist countries, than in Estonia.

Of course it varies, but the same anti-socialist sentiment exists in post-communist countries.

[Äike]

You need to stop twisting my words when you lack arguments. The current definition of Nordic is the result of political and historical process that Estonia has been removed from for obvious reasons, and thus it isn't defined as Nordic.

Estonia isn't considered Nordic, because we were occupied by the USSR for 50 years, thus being part of that "political, historical process" was impossible, I agree with you.



Of course it varies, but the same anti-socialist sentiment exists in post-communist countries.

If you say so.

[ikki]

The term Nordic wasn't also applied to Finland, 19 years(Estonia has been re-independent for 19 years) after its independence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Council 1956 is a bit more than 19 years ago. And im sure the nordic label was there before ;)

[Äike]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Council 1956 is a bit more than 19 years ago. And im sure the nordic label was there before ;)

I meant 19 years from 1917 = 1936, not 19 years from 1991. During the 1920's, there were more than 3 Baltic countries.

[The Ripper]

Estonia isn't considered Nordic, because we were occupied by the USSR for 50 years, thus being part of that "political, historical process" was impossible, I agree with you.
Thank you.


If you say so.

Not if I say so. Do you think that only Estonians are embittered by the Soviet experience? :confused:

[Äike]

Not if I say so. Do you think that only Estonians are embittered by the Soviet experience? :confused:

Well, there are plenty of former USSR citizens who miss the Soviet Union and regularly wave red flags and sing the Soviet anthem. Thus not all of them are embittered, the opposite is true for some.

[The Ripper]

Well, there are plenty of former USSR citizens who miss the Soviet Union and regularly wave red flags and sing the Soviet anthem. Thus not all of them are embittered, the opposite is true for some.

This goes without saying. Just as it goes without saying that many are anti-socialist.

[Motörhead Remember Me]

Haha... jebeni picka. The collapse of Yugoslavia was largely instigated by the NATO who wanted to see the breakup of Yugoslavia to subjugate us to their whims.

Yes, yes... And gypsies and jews... Jebo, jebo.

[Motörhead Remember Me]

'

Estonia is not Nordic because it simply isn't. It can be included in the future, but at the moment it is not, no matter how culturally related it may be.



Estonians as a people are the closest thing you can get to being culturally Nordic without being Nordic, in the political term. There are several similarities between Estonians and Nordic peoples but also some crucial differencies.
To have been removed from the Pan Baltic and Nordic co-operations for about 50 years have of course shaped Estonia.
Whenever I go to Estonia, I feel there is this one thing which is strange and culturally repulsive and it's the Slavic presence. Omit that and 50 years of occupation from Estonia (and Latvia) and we have two nations where peoples mindframes are similar to ours.

[Äike]

You need to stop twisting my words when you lack arguments. The current definition of Nordic is the result of political and historical process that Estonia has been removed from for obvious reasons, and thus it isn't defined as Nordic.

I just found a better way to reply your statement and get more information about your opinion.

If the USSR wouldn't have stopped at Eastern-Germany and advanced to Denmark and annexed it. Then Denmark would have regained independence in 1991, then Denmark wouldn't be Nordic, just like Estonia? As it couldn't take part of the 50 year "political and historical process".

In my opinion, 50 years of history doesn't change 3000 years of history.

[The Ripper]

In my opinion, 50 years of history doesn't change 3000 years of history.

The term Nordic as a term for a cultural sphere in northern Europe only emerged in the late 19th century, partially as an outgrowth of Scandinavism, and only because the weakening (and later retreat) of the Russian empire allowed for it. Even then, the position of the Baltic countries was peripheral compared to that of Finland, which back then had far closer contacts to Scandinavia. Had the USSR advanced as far as Denmark, the definition of Nordic would be different most likely and it most certainly would be used differently. In the future it might very well come to be synonymous with Northern European Lutheran countries, depending on many factors. You assume "Nordic" has always existed as something self-evident, never-changing and clear-cut. It hasn't. Like I've said before, I don't deny cultural relatedness that Northern European Lutheran countries share, but I disagree with your arbitrary use of "Nordic".

[Äike]

The term Nordic as a term for a cultural sphere in northern Europe only emerged in the late 19th century, partially as an outgrowth of Scandinavism, and only because the weakening (and later retreat) of the Russian empire allowed for it. Even then, the position of the Baltic countries was peripheral compared to that of Finland, which back then had far closer contacts to Scandinavia. Had the USSR advanced as far as Denmark, the definition of Nordic would be different most likely and it most certainly would be used differently. In the future it might very well come to be synonymous with Northern European Lutheran countries, depending on many factors. You assume "Nordic" has always existed as something self-evident, never-changing and clear-cut. It hasn't. Like I've said before, I don't deny cultural relatedness that Northern European Lutheran countries share, but I disagree with your arbitrary use of "Nordic".

In my opinion, Nordic is a cultural term which is used for people who are culturally similar.

For instance, in the 2nd half of the bronze age, Estonia had strong connections with Gotland, Central-Sweden and SW-Finland. Similar burial customs in Gotland and Estonia etc.

By Nordic I mean, that those people/areas have belonged into the same cultural (Nordic) sphere for a very long time.

[anonymaus]

In my opinion, Nordic is a cultural term which is used for people who are culturally similar.

For instance, in the 2nd half of the bronze age, Estonia had strong connections with Gotland, Central-Sweden and SW-Finland. Similar burial customs in Gotland and Estonia etc.

By Nordic I mean, that those people/areas have belonged into the same cultural (Nordic) sphere for a very long time.

I somewhat agree, and would say that our modern conception of Estonia as being outside the Nordic sphere is due to political conditions.

[ikki]

heres a little theory.

If it took Finland 9 years after being separated from Sweden 100 years earlier.
And Estonia was separated 300 years ago. Is then 3*9=27 or 3^2*9=81 years a proper waiting time? We will see what history says.