April 17, 2005

MISSISSIPPI WITH FJORDS:

We're Rich, You're Not. End of Story (BRUCE BAWER, 4/17/05, NY Times)

THE received wisdom about economic life in the Nordic countries is easily summed up: people here are incomparably affluent, with all their needs met by an efficient welfare state. They believe it themselves. Yet the reality - as this Oslo-dwelling American can attest, and as some recent studies confirm - is not quite what it appears.

Even as the Scandinavian establishment peddles this dubious line, it serves up a picture of the United States as a nation divided, inequitably, among robber barons and wage slaves, not to mention armies of the homeless and unemployed. It does this to keep people believing that their social welfare system, financed by lofty income taxes, provides far more in the way of economic protections and amenities than the American system. Protections, yes -but some Norwegians might question the part about amenities. [...]

All this was illuminated last year in a study by a Swedish research organization, Timbro, which compared the gross domestic products of the 15 European Union members (before the 2004 expansion) with those of the 50 American states and the District of Columbia. (Norway, not being a member of the union, was not included.)

After adjusting the figures for the different purchasing powers of the dollar and euro, the only European country whose economic output per person was greater than the United States average was the tiny tax haven of Luxembourg, which ranked third, just behind Delaware and slightly ahead of Connecticut.

The next European country on the list was Ireland, down at 41st place out of 66; Sweden was 14th from the bottom (after Alabama), followed by Oklahoma, and then Britain, France, Finland, Germany and Italy. The bottom three spots on the list went to Spain, Portugal and Greece.

Alternatively, the study found, if the E.U. was treated as a single American state, it would rank fifth from the bottom, topping only Arkansas, Montana, West Virginia and Mississippi. In short, while Scandinavians are constantly told how much better they have it than Americans, Timbro's statistics suggest otherwise. So did a paper by a Swedish economics writer, Johan Norberg.

Contrasting "the American dream" with "the European daydream," Mr. Norberg described the difference: "Economic growth in the last 25 years has been 3 percent per annum in the U.S., compared to 2.2 percent in the E.U. That means that the American economy has almost doubled, whereas the E.U. economy has grown by slightly more than half. The purchasing power in the U.S. is $36,100 per capita, and in the E.U. $26,000 - and the gap is constantly widening."


And given their Protestant heritage and small and homogenous populations the Scandanavian nations start out with huge advantages. It takes a herculean effort to squander them.

Posted by Orrin Judd at April 17, 2005 9:31 PM
Comments

Change the names "Sweden" or "Scandenavia" to "Soviet Union" or "Eastern Europe" and the stories being told about the economic/social horrors in the United States today could be the same as were being told on the other side of the Iron Curtain 20-30 years ago. Apparently, even the ability of the Swedes to travel freely and see reality for themselves isn't enough to offset their belief in what the nanny state tells them reality actually is.

Posted by: John at April 17, 2005 9:47 PM

Given that Scandinavia is 90% Lutheran, what does this suggest about the Reformation?

Posted by: ghostcat at April 17, 2005 10:58 PM

That it worked.

Posted by: oj at April 17, 2005 11:03 PM

No extrapolating beyond the data there. Were it ever so.

Posted by: ghostcat at April 17, 2005 11:17 PM

That is the data. They're some of the wealthiest and most decent nations in the world. Had they retained more of a religious sense and eschewed statism they'd even have futures.

Posted by: oj at April 17, 2005 11:29 PM

Weimar was Lutheran, too, was it not? And then there's Sweden's "neutrality".

(Mississippi w/o Fords would be like Hanover w/o Volvos and Saabs, i.e. unimaginable.)

Posted by: ghostcat at April 18, 2005 12:02 AM

No, socialist.

Posted by: oj at April 18, 2005 12:33 AM

Redundant. Look no further than Minnesota for proof.

Posted by: ghostcat at April 18, 2005 1:01 AM

MN is trending Red.

Posted by: oj at April 18, 2005 1:09 AM

MN Lutherans aren't reproducing fast enough, eh?

Posted by: ghostcat at April 18, 2005 1:12 AM

Having read that article, and in honor of my Norweigian grandmother, I pulled out my trusty krumkake iron and whipped-out about twenty or so of those tasty treats. My paternal grandparents emigrated from Norway for a reason. Sounds like there are even better reasons to emigrate today. Why aren't the Minutemen fending off squareheads assaulting our borders?

Posted by: Fred Jacobsen (San Fran) at April 18, 2005 3:24 AM

This appeared in the New York Times!? What planet am I on?

Posted by: Tom at April 18, 2005 9:19 AM

Sweden has 11 nuclear power plants, providing about 50% of the nation's electricity. After Chernobyl, the leftists promised to close them. About every 3 or 4 years, this promise gets amended because no suitable replacement source can be selected. One older plant was shut down around 1998, but no new developments since.

The Finns are building a new one now.

The Greens in Germany have made the same promises, but they can't follow up on them, either. About 33% of German electrical generation is nuclear-powered.

Posted by: jim hamlen at April 18, 2005 1:01 PM
« NO HEROES: | Main | THE PAINFUL AWARENESS: »