Slashdot Mirror
Unlike Most Millennials, Norway's Are Rich (bbc.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC: Best known for its Viking history, snow sports and jaw-dropping fjords, Norway is making a new name for itself as the only major economy in Europe where young people are getting markedly richer. People in their early thirties in Norway have an average annual disposable household income of around 460,000 kroner (around $56,200). Young Norwegians have enjoyed a 13% rise in disposable household income in real terms compared to Generation X (those born between 1966 and 1980) when they were the same age. These startling figures come from the largest comparative wealth data set in the world, the Luxembourg Income Database, and were analyzed in a recent report on generational incomes for the UK Think Tank The Resolution Foundation.
Compare this with young people in other strong economies: U.S. millennials have experienced a 5% dip, in Germany it's a 9% drop. For those living in southern Europe (the southern Eurozone suffered the brunt of the global economic crisis in 2008), disposable incomes have plunged by as much as 30%. Norway's youth unemployment rate (among 15- to 29-year-olds) is also relatively low at 9.4% compared to an OECD average of 13.9%. According to the BBC, this can be attributed to the country's rapid economic growth, thanks largely to their huge oil and gas sectors. "After seeing the biggest increase in average earnings of any large high-income economy between 1980 and 2013, it now leads multiple global rankings for wealth and wellbeing."
Compare this with young people in other strong economies: U.S. millennials have experienced a 5% dip, in Germany it's a 9% drop. For those living in southern Europe (the southern Eurozone suffered the brunt of the global economic crisis in 2008), disposable incomes have plunged by as much as 30%. Norway's youth unemployment rate (among 15- to 29-year-olds) is also relatively low at 9.4% compared to an OECD average of 13.9%. According to the BBC, this can be attributed to the country's rapid economic growth, thanks largely to their huge oil and gas sectors. "After seeing the biggest increase in average earnings of any large high-income economy between 1980 and 2013, it now leads multiple global rankings for wealth and wellbeing."
No, we don't have any free stipend or socialized income here in Norway.
Actually, Norway has been quite good about avoiding the temptation of spending like drunken sailors from that fund. Also, social democracies aren't Marxist. They're capitalist systems with a high tax rate and a strong social safety net. If you look at economic freedom ratings Norway (and other Scandinavian countries) are comparable to the U.S. as opposed to the countries that follow some form of Marxist philosophy (Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea). Those Scandinavian countries even have lower corporate tax rates than the U.S. as well.
Haha better Demographics in Australia? You must be new here. Australia has an aging population problem, high immigration, and crazy house prices. 80% of the ~280,000 new immigrants to Australia each year are settling in Melbourne and Sydney which now have median house prices of over $1 million. Combine this with worse than pre-GFC debt to income ratios and Australia is set up for a massive financial crisis in the next few years which many predict is already beginning to occur (watch the September/Spring clearance rates in the Australian property market for some entertaining viewing).
Denmark absolutely deserves to be on that list. It is a social democracy in the Nordic model. Denmark has a wide range of welfare benefits that they offer their citizens, from universal health care to free education and family leave.. As a result, they also have the highest taxes in the world. Equality is considered the most important value in Denmark. Small businesses thrive, with over 70 percent of companies having 50 employees or less.
When Denmark was named the happiest country in the world, there was an effort by right-wing jackoffs to try to paint Denmark as not really a social democracy. They are trying to bullshit you. It is listed as one of the most successful socialist countries in the world.
You are welcome on my lawn.
No, you idiot I kinda want to add, here in Sweden and in Finland and in Denmark too we also have not free but publicly funded education, generous parental leave and a blend of companies and also a mixture of government control and private companies if you want to add that as well.
Also neither Sweden or Norway have any minimum wage.
Even though we in Sweden, Finland and Denmark have all those other things you mention it's unlikely we have the same outcome as the Norwegians, at-least not here in Sweden thanks to massive shit-immigration instead ruining things.
But thanks for playing. But that isn't the reason and Norway just as Sweden likely already had all those things before too. Except minimum wage which we haven't had and don't have.
The difference between Norway and the rest of the Nordic nations is their oil and gas wealth which is stored into a fund which secure pensions and I think also other welfare things onward. In the 80s they found their oil and they have become richer because of the oil and gas not because of the stuff you likely are politically interested and make up is the reason they have become richer.
The oil and gas wealth is the difference.
Lots of European nations including the southern ones do have the other stuff you mention but clearly not the same development as Norway.
The thing to learn if anything is that if you sit on massive natural wealth resources don't let a private company and a few rich people get it all and the profits basically for free but rather invest it wisely into stock and only take some of the profits so that it can benefit everyone and last ~forever.
The one thing Norway have done differently is to wisely invest their money from natural resources and use it to fund their welfare / redistribute the profits to the population (in this case also by being able to have lower taxes than what we do in Sweden, Denmark and Finland, because here people have to WORK to generate all that money going into parliament spending and welfare.)
Find a valuable resource, give the gains to your people = they get richer. Amazing how that one worked? ...
Most of Norway's non-transportation energy use comes from renewable sources. And by “most”, I mean 99% (97% hydroelectric, 2% wind and other renewable sources).
In your judgement, is Tim Cook is worth the same as 400 Apple Genius in terms of contribution to the company and wealth creation?
Yes. That "Genius" can be replaced by literally tens of thousands of IT people here at /. alone, let alone across the US. Tim Cook has shown an extraordinary talent for supply chain management and operations and his decisions directly affect 100,000 people. Paying him 400 times what the "hipster Geek Squad" member makes is quite understandable.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
That's not what socialism means. Not at all.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Not by law ...
https://www.lifeinnorway.net/n...
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
That is socialism and it is theft, that is what is happening there. All of these social safety nets, income taxes, property taxes, all of this theft, which I am against, Norway is using it to prop up inefficiencies that lead to this perception discussed in the story. This is theft and wealth dissipation.
Criminals! They should do what they do in America instead and have heaps of homeless people and violent crime. That's the freedom we all aspire to...
This whole Denmark is the happiest country is a myth because the survey ignores cultural norms. Simple example, it is frowned upon in Denmark to say your unhappy while saying your happy in Japan is frowned upon.
Additionally, what works in Denmark won't work in the US. Why? Because the population of Denmark is 95%+ homogeneous and is about equal to the population of Brooklyn and Queens.
Oh, and those Scandinavian countries are not socialist countries but democracies with a social-welfare state (free enterprise, high tax, high social services).
The US has socialized medicine (Medicare, Medicaid, and ~45% of all healthcare spending is by the Federal Government), socialized education (free K-12 throughout the US, and highly subsidized/free universities/colleges in many places), socialized welfare (SNAP, Welfare, etc) socialized retirement (Social Security) and highly regulated corporations (SEC, FDA, EPA, IRS, etc). I guess we're socialist, too, comrade!
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
What is interesting is that the winner of the last election spent less in normalized 2016 dollars than any winner since 1960. And less than 75% of the losers, too.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
"The moment you conscript (yes) a doctor or teacher, and Require society to pay them a set wage, you'll find that they become in short supply, especially when considering the rest of the market is more or less open and free."
Except, of course, that's EXACTLY what happens in basically the whole of first world with the exception of USA without the ominous results you predict. By the way, even in USA, that's what happens to military personnel, which your country doesn't seem to be in short supply, either.
But, of course, don't let reality get in the way of your very well built rationalizations.
"Do they get to pick what you're having for supper or what products can be sold at the grocery store?"
Yes, at least, up to a point. In most countries there are in place one regulation or another regarding, i.e. the ability to sell (or not) tobacco, alcohol and/or prescription drugs.
"I suspect that if you tried to join the Socialist party in just about any country, the idea "capitalist economy with extensive social programs" would not be the platform of the party or one that they're likely to accept."
Where are you from? I say this because that's exactly what any Socialist party in any European country would support: "capitalist economy with extensive social programs". Maybe it is "communist party" what you are looking for, not Socialist. And even Communist parties, starting on the late 70's early 80's, had strong factions embracing what was called "eurocommunism" which is, basically, that: "capitalist economy with extensive social programs".
I think you should review your sources.