Small countries are more successful

[Empecinado]

Such as Iceland or Switzerland?

What relevance has Iceland? And Switzerland it's a different and special case.

Hasn't the EU said that Scotland or Catalonia should have to apply to be absorbed by the EU? So it looks like rather a fast way to get out of it.

The goal of the EU is to cut up the states to make easier the absorption. Scotland and Catalonia would be accepted for sure.

[Jusarius]

You can't really compare countries based on HDI if they are close to each other belonging to the same "class". The differences between the countries in TOP 20 - 30 are in many cases caused by non-meaningful factors like a slightly longer compulsory elementary school which however doesn't necessarily make the pupils better. HDI doesn't take into consideration the quality of education, for example just its duration.

Even if you could meaningfully compare countries in that TOP 42 list, I cannot see a correlation between country size and a better HDI score. Of course someone should make statistical analysis before we could be sure though.


This is however one strong factor that negatively correlates with HDI:

[Tchek]

Both Flanders as Wallonia score lower than Belgium. Interesting.

Which means that Brussels as a city-state would be through the roof

(I'm sure those HDI factors are about "how likely a country is eager to suck EU's dick" though)
You can replace EU with the FED, IMF or the US army accordingly.

[Comte Arnau]

What relevance has Iceland? And Switzerland it's a different and special case.

And what kind of relevance do you want? An Imperial one? To fill what, an absurd sort of "collective ego"? There's already football and cheaper stuff for that.

If citizens of a country live in wealthy and peaceful conditions, what sort of "relevance" do they need? It is relevant for them. And people do know they exist.

[Empecinado]

And what kind of relevance do you want? An Imperial one? To fill what, an absurd sort of "collective ego"? There's already football and cheaper stuff for that.

If citizens of a country live in wealthy and peaceful conditions, what sort of "relevance" do they need? It is relevant for them. And people do know they exist.

Relevance nowadays means have a voice in the international arena. International law is based on power, and if your country is a bird poop, the chances of a big fish treating you like its bitch or impose their particular conditions over yours are more possible.

This was known for centuries and the trend was to create strong countries, but now some of you believe to be much more intelligent than them and want to go back to the time of the medieval fiefdoms.

[Ouistreham]

Small countries are more successful: Cher Comte, avec tout le respect qui vous est dû, all that is pure horseshit.

The Success of Small States, the latest study by the Credit Suisse Research Institute, sheds light on an important trend: the rise of small countries. Covering a variety of factors from the age of countries to trade openness, the report determines the features that make small, independent countries successful on their own.

The HDI rank in particular includes how Catalonia, Flanders, Quebec, Scotland and Wallonia would rank if they were independent countries.

HDI (Human Development Index)

01. NORWAY 0.955
02. AUSTRALIA 0.938
03. USA 0.937
04. NETHERLANDS 0.921
05. GERMANY 0.92
06. NEW ZEALAND 0.919
07. IRELAND 0.916
07. SWEDEN 0.916
09. SWITZERLAND 0.913
10. JAPAN 0.910
11. CANADA 0.911
12. SOUTH KOREA 0.909
13. QUEBEC 0.906
13. HONG KONG SAR 0.906
13. ICELAND 0.906
16. DENMARK 0.901
17. ISRAEL 0.900
18. BELGIUM 0.897
19. FLANDERS 0.895
19. AUSTRIA 0.895
19. SINGAPORE 0.895
22. CATALONIA 0.894
23. FRANCE 0.893
24. FINLAND 0.892
24. SLOVENIA 0.892
26. SCOTLAND 0.887
27. SPAIN (with Catalonia) 0.885
28. LIECHTENSTEIN 0.883
29. ITALY 0.882
30. SPAIN (Ex-Catalonia) 0.880
31. LUXEMBOURG 0.875
31. UNITED KINGDOM (with Scotland) 0.875
33. CZECH REPUBLIC 0.873
34. UNITED KINGDOM (Ex-Scotland) 0.871
35. WALLONIA 0.869
36. GREECE 0.86
37. BRUNEI DARUSSALAM 0.855
38. CYPRUS 0.848
39. MALTA 0.848
40. ANDORRA 0.846
40. ESTONIA 0.846
42. SLOVAKIA 0.84

Notice how almost all of them are small or rather small countries. Only 8 or 9 can be considered large, and only 3 of the large ones are in the top 10.

The study notes that small countries have been among the economic success stories of the past twenty years. "In the case of Europe, older small counties, such as Switzerland and Sweden, fared much better during the Eurozone crisis," write Credit Suisse's Mike O'Sullivan and Stefano Natella, authors of the study. "Furthermore, while a great deal of attention is given to the impressive growth of the Chinese economy and its neighbouring Tiger economies, the development of economies in the Gulf in a short space of time is equally extraordinary," they add.

Small countries perform the best on most metrics


So, what is it that makes small countries so successful?

If interested, you can read the whole report here: https://publications.credit-suisse.c...5AD96D67EE1210

I clicked the link. Datas were provided by the World Bank. In other word, frigging New World Order propaganda.

Most successful nations in the UE: small Portugal and tiny Greece perhaps?
How comes Albania isn't scoring high in the list?
If Catalonia and Scotland are ranking higher than the states they belong to, do they really need to go independent?
If the global banking dictatorship wants our countries to be split in smaller units, how come they don't suggest the bloody U.S. of A. should also undergo a similar process?

My opinion:
• Ukrainia back to Russia
• Time to revive the Swedish-Norwegian union
• Re-establish Yugoslavia (including Bulgaria)
• Split Belgium between her neighbours,
• For Catalonia, all the self-government they're longing for, but within an Iberian Union that shall also include Portugal (with one Foreign Affairs ministry, one Army, one navy)
• Greece under Italian administration,
• A re-United Kingdom including Ireland.

[Comte Arnau]

Relevance nowadays means have a voice in the international arena. International law is based on power, and if your country is a bird poop, the chances of a big fish treating you like its bitch or impose their particular conditions over yours are more possible.

You are always going to get more than if your country doesn't exist at all.

And there are large third-world countries which are considered much more 'bird poop', as you put it, than small/medium European ones.

This was known for centuries and the trend was to create strong countries, but now some of you believe to be much more intelligent than them and want to go back to the time of the medieval fiefdoms.

On the contrary, it's the 21st century. It's that belief that larger is stronger the one which belongs to the past.

The irony is that, if someone told you to really be strong and form one single European country to rival the US, China, Russia, or emerging Brazil and India on a foot of equal size, then you'd be the first to say 'no way' and defend your small 40-million-people State.

[Empecinado]

You are always going to get more than if your country doesn't exist at all.

And there are large third-world countries which are considered much more 'bird poop', as you put it, than small/medium European ones.

Third World countries are Third World countries regardless of their size.

On the contrary, it's the 21st century. It's that belief that larger is stronger the one which belongs to the past.

The irony is that, if someone told you to really be strong and form one single European country to rival the US, China, Russia, or emerging Brazil and India on a foot of equal size, then you'd be the first to say 'no way' and defend your small 40-million-people State.

Now the belief is the smallest, the better...to be controlled by supranational institutions like EU And Spain is enough big to have a word in international scenario, as long we could build again our dismantled industry, establish the alliances that better fit with our interests and have nukes.

[Smaug]

Yes. Independence for São Paulo now!

[Catkin]

It's dangerous to start ripping apart countries based on transient unsatisfactory/niggling political conditions. It's foolish to think that the peace and prosperity we have now will last forever. Are we just bored because we have stopped fighting our neighbours for a while, so we have started bickering within our own families because we have nothing bigger to focus on? We'll need our families when peace breaks. It's short-sighted.