The 'Socialists' Win (Again)

[Harald]

Well, they're not socialists, but I still find it very funny.

Yup, Norway has the highest standard of living in the world, according to the UN (http://hdr.undp.org/statistics/highlights/) in it's human development index.

That other communist country in Europe, Sweden, comes in at number 2 ... thus proving that a 'socialist' society fails its citizens; in this case by ensuring a long, healthy, happy life with low crime, lots to do, loads of money and a clean environment.

Oh, and really long holidays in which to contemplate how terrible life is in 'socialist' countries.

America (huge economy, big army, 'American dream' and all that) comes in at number 8.

That'll show those commies, eh?

[Hassan i Sabbah]

Americans have bigger cars!

Vroom vroom!

[Anders]

Is it still possible to immigrate to Norway as a scandinavian?

I think we ended up on the 17th place :(

[Scott]

Of course these counties are no where near as large as the US. But let's forget that and pretend it's all equal.

[digitaldave]

Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Americans have bigger cars!

Vroom vroom!

Hassan,

Size isn't everything...

http://www.mini2.com/gallery/personal/17327/35306.jpg

Vroom vroom vroom!

Dave

[Aurora]

Boy did we go astray, that Mini is sweet, maybe ill replace my MG with one some day. Anyways if the U.S wasnt pooring billions into the military complex and throwing away billions in Iraq we could have a much better place to live and higher standard of living. someone has to be world police because if we were not the world would have fallen into chaos. sad but true.

[Scott]

Of course if the US hadn't spent so much on the military then Europe would be a communist country by now.

[segovius]

Originally posted by Scott
Of course if the US hadn't spent so much on the military then Europe would be a communist country by now.

Yeah - that ultra-left hard line commie Berlusconi jeez

And as for that pinko Aznar - thank God for the US, he made Stalin look like Ronald Reagan.

There's no right-wing racism in France either, that Le Pen is another fag liberal and Blair.....don't get me started.....it's socialist Maoist seperatist subversives like him that are committed to undermining the capitalist system and hacking away at the moral fabric of society.

We need to stamp out these commie subversives NOW !

:no:

[Aurora]

Originally posted by Scott
Of course if the US hadn't spent so much on the military then Europe would be a communist country by now. I agree, absolute power corrupts,hitler,stalin,saddam and this list goes on and on. The U.S. has made mistakes but overall freedom for many many places around this world came because we did get invloved. Democracy,Liberty & Freedom has never been cheap. If they were we would be #1 on the list.

[segovius]

Originally posted by Aurora
I agree, absolute power corrupts,hitler,stalin,saddam and this list goes on and on. The U.S. has made mistakes but overall freedom for many many places around this world came because we did get invloved. Democracy,Liberty & Freedom has never been cheap. If they were we would be #1 on the list.

I think we just found Common Man.....

[Harald]

Originally posted by Scott
Of course these counties are no where near as large as the US. But let's forget that and pretend it's all equal.

The point is that many people (and you know who you are) use these countries as a bye-word for socialist, and decry the way they approach their economy and society. Except there's NOWHERE that has a standard of living.

Put it another way, Scottyboy, pick any country with a similar size either in population or landmass. And it will have a lower standard of living, no matter how much you prefer its government.

Same goes for any individual state in the US by the way.

[Anders]

Originally posted by Aurora
Anyways if the U.S wasnt pooring billions into the military complex and throwing away billions in Iraq we could have a much better place to live and higher standard of living. someone has to be world police because if we were not the world would have fallen into chaos. sad but true.

US spends 3.9% of its BNP on the military.
Sweden 2.1%
Norway 1.9%


The GDP per capita:
US: $35,750
Sweden: $26,050
Norway: $36,600

So while the Norwegians have a higher GDP after reduction of the military expenses than US that is certainly not the case for Sweden.

I think you have to find some other excuse than the military. And remember military expenses doesn´t just dissapear from the economy. Its mostly used as salary for workers at factories and military personnel.

[Anders]

Originally posted by Scott
Of course these counties are no where near as large as the US. But let's forget that and pretend it's all equal.

Please tell me what difference that make. The pop/sq.miles is comparable between the three countries.

[ericg]

Originally posted by segovius
I think we just found Common Man.....

Nice... I can put him in my bozo bin

[Anders]

Originally posted by segovius
I think we just found Common Man.....

1: Based on my superhuman powers I can say that he most likely isn´t Common Man :)

2: Would Common Man say something like this: "The U.S. has made mistakes...". Thats treason :wow:

[ColanderOfDeath]

Same goes for any individual state in the US by the way

I don't know that that is true and I'm betting that you're guessing on that as well. I think you are probably wrong but I'm just talking out of my ass anyway. I know for example that Connecticut has a mean income somewhere above 50,000 and say Mississippi is more like 20,000. I'd love to see the figures without the Deep South included. For that matter, I'd love to see the United States without the Deep South in general. Rise Again, Pretty Please?

[Anders]

The mean income doesn´t mean that much. Look at sweden.

[ColanderOfDeath]

The mean income doesn´t mean that much. Look at sweden.

Yeah that is one of the shortcomings of their methodology of using percentiles rather than setting the max at 1.000. This does underplay income levels at the extremities. You'll note for example that Sweden's GDP factor is .93. Their mean income is only about 72.9% of the US's but it counts as 94.8% (.93/.98 ) when indexed. Likewise even though Luxembourgh is way ahead of everyone else in income they are only viewed as incrementally better than Norway even though Norwegians have 60% as much income. I understand hte political reasons why they don't want to way income in anything but percentiles but it undervalues income differences in some cases.

But anyway the point is that if you selected similar sized areas you could easily get similar results. It's not just income, life expectancy would vary a bit though not a ton and education levels would vary drastically. I don't know those figures off the top of my head but I'm pretty confident after looking at this that I could fine at least five states in the US that would exceed Norway and at least ten that would finish in second. There's a decent size gap between first and second; Sweden at #2 is closer to the US at #8 with a figure of .007 than to Norway at #1 with a differential of .010.

[trumptman]

Originally posted by Harald
Well, they're not socialists, but I still find it very funny.

Yup, Norway has the highest standard of living in the world, according to the UN (http://hdr.undp.org/statistics/highlights/) in it's human development index.

That other communist country in Europe, Sweden, comes in at number 2 ... thus proving that a 'socialist' society fails its citizens; in this case by ensuring a long, healthy, happy life with low crime, lots to do, loads of money and a clean environment.

Oh, and really long holidays in which to contemplate how terrible life is in 'socialist' countries.

America (huge economy, big army, 'American dream' and all that) comes in at number 8.

That'll show those commies, eh?

Come now Harald, you forgot the evil side of all that "good livin'" You need to mention what makes it all possible. The answer isn't socialism, but rather oil, oil, oil. Norway is the third largest exporter of oil in the world after Saudi Arabia (we all know how evil they are since they associated with the eeeeeeeeeeeeviiiiiillllllllllll President Bush) and Russia.

I mean both Norway and Sweden declined to use the Euro as well. They must be part of that evil petrodollar conspiracy as well.

:lol: ;)
Nick

[Anders]

That still doesn´t explain Sweden. And Denmark is well below US in the statistic and we have a netto export of energy.

[Powerdoc]

I think that the socialist model works better in Sweden, than in France. People are more respectful of the law and the moral here. In France too many people try to get advantages of every situations.

[ColanderOfDeath]

This study was tampered with by the unholy corporate trinity of the Sauna mafia, the long underwear cartels and the NHL. Look at all the cold ass countries who scored well: Norway, Sweden, Canada, Iceland and to a lesser extent Belgium and the Netherlands. I think those are all North of the 49th parallel. Only Australia was the exception among the top 7. Stupid new cold weather world order probably looked at the temps down under during July, saw it was chilly in Aussieland and not realizing that that time of year is winter in the Southern Hemisphere, they figured Australia is one chilly willy country and bumped Australia up with all of the other frozen countries. I mean really, I dunno how the UN can get by claiming the quality of life is all that great in a bunch of places where you have permanent icicles hanging from your testicles. That ain't right.

[Powerdoc]

Originally posted by ColanderOfDeath
. I mean really, I dunno how the UN can get by claiming the quality of life is all that great in a bunch of places where you have permanent icicles hanging from your testicles. That ain't right.

Somebody, should have warn you that wearing the kilt in the traditional way in this cold countries is not recommanded :D

[Outsider]

Originally posted by ColanderOfDeath
I mean really, I dunno how the UN can get by claiming the quality of life is all that great in a bunch of places where you have permanent icicles hanging from your testicles. That ain't right. That's the funniest f*cking thing I've ever read on the internet.

[Michael Wilkie]

Of course, it was the evil, capitalist United States that has given the world, amongst other things, the Macintosh.

Many of these smaller nations are so perfect only because they make good use of technologies we invent and medicines we develop or, at the very least, technologies and medicines developed elsewhere through the use of research by our universities.

Besides, do you honestly believe the UN would conduct a study that would put the US at the top of any list?

[soulcrusher]

If the standard of living is so high, how do you explain this?

http://www.fathersforlife.org/health/who_suicide_rates.htm

[Harald]

Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
Of course, it was the evil, capitalist United States that has given the world, amongst other things, the Macintosh.

Many of these smaller nations are so perfect only because they make good use of technologies we invent and medicines we develop or, at the very least, technologies and medicines developed elsewhere through the use of research by our universities.

Besides, do you honestly believe the UN would conduct a study that would put the US at the top of any list?

So the US can't use the technologies it invents? Those companies and colleges are profitable, but the rest of the world has an advantage? Riiiiiiiight.

Your second question: I believe the UN wouldn't turn a blind eye to the high rates of infant mortality and decreasing average health of US citizens; that's for certain.

[Michael Wilkie]

Originally posted by Harald
So the US can't use the technologies it invents? Those companies and colleges are profitable, but the rest of the world has an advantage? Riiiiiiiight.

Your second question: I believe the UN wouldn't turn a blind eye to the high rates of infant mortality and decreasing average health of US citizens; that's for certain.

It's not that we can't use technology. Being so large and so diverse, it is much more difficult to make dramatic changes to the infrastructure. More people live in Greater New York City than all of Norway, Finland, and Sweden combined. Oh, and who ever said American universities are profitable? Billions of tax dollars are poured into them every year. Without massive taxpayer funding, most universities would not exist.

As far as infant mortality rates and "decreasing average health," these have more to do with the vast number of impoverished minorities, many of which are first generation immigrants. In fact, the number of people who immigrate to the US totals at over 1 million each year. That's roughly 25% of the entire population of Norway. I'd like to see how these socialist health care programs would deal with growth like that. I'd also like to see if they could sustain the constant stream of litigation that's brought about in America's private health care system.

Maybe it would be possible to provide free health care and such to all Americans if we stopped giving away 15 BILLION in foreign aid per year.

[segovius]

Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
Maybe it would be possible to provide free health care and such to all Americans if we stopped giving away 15 BILLION in foreign aid per year.

Good idea - Sharon won't approve it though......

[spindler]

Originally posted by Scott

"Of course these countries are no where near as large as the US. But let's forget that and pretend it's all equal."

This is a bit of a double edged sword.

Why does the American military get to get to be aggressive and go into South American countries and everywhere else? The logic is that we are the world leader. How did we become the world leader? Mainly because we have a population four times larger than France, England, or Germany which helped us win WWII. With a large population we decided to collect a lot of taxes to start an arms race with the Soviet Union.

So when our large population allows us to do things other can't , which may be right or may be wrong, Scott will say they are justified because we are naturally the world leader that saved everyone in WWII. But when a smaller country does something better than us, he will say it doesn't really count because they are smaller.

[Michael Wilkie]

Originally posted by spindler
Originally posted by Scott

"Of course these countries are no where near as large as the US. But let's forget that and pretend it's all equal."

This is a bit of a double edged sword.

Why does the American military get to get to be aggressive and go into South American countries and everywhere else? The logic is that we are the world leader. How did we become the world leader? Mainly because we have a population four times larger than France, England, or Germany which helped us win WWII. With a large population we decided to collect a lot of taxes to start an arms race with the Soviet Union.

So when our large population allows us to do things other can't , which may be right or may be wrong, Scott will say they are justified because we are naturally the world leader that saved everyone in WWII. But when a smaller country does something better than us, he will say it doesn't really count because they are smaller.

The reason so many people immigrated here in the first place is because we lead the world in individual and commercial liberties. It was those freedoms that made us powerful.

[Anders]

[i]
Maybe it would be possible to provide free health care and such to all Americans if we stopped giving away 15 BILLION in foreign aid per year. [/B]

Which is below both norway and sweden in percent of BNP.

Denmark gives 2% of the BNP in foreign aid, or 1.6 billion, with a population of 5 million. Multipied with 58 it gives 82 billion

[spindler]

"The reason so many people immigrated here in the first place is because we lead the world in individual and commercial liberties. It was those freedoms that made us powerful."

This is nonsense and comes straight from the stories told in U.S. high schools.

The reason so many people came to America was because we were the only ones that had the door open. They would have gone to anywhere else that they could get a job and be free from persecution. All the Chinese people that come here would happily go to England, France, or Germany, if the door was open.

So you can give the U.S. credit for having the door open, which was partially from self interest anyway, but people don't come here because we have some sort of freedoms or economic system that they don't have in Germany. Mexicans don't choose the U.S. because they prefer American Capitalism over Swedish Socialism. This is another vague argument some Americans use to decide the U.S. is superior to everywhere else and therefore free to act against the ideas of everyone else whether it's the Kyoto Protocol or the Iraq war.

When I go into the supermarket, the National Enquirer proclaims "Whitney Houston beaten up by drug dealers". There's pictures of recently murdered women and children on the cover of People Magazine. It's right there in front of eight year old children to see. If we're so superior, why can't we get people to understand Citizenship and Human Decency 101?

People from poor countries like India and China risk their lives just to get to semi-poor places like Peru or Argentina. Americans make it out like our immigrants carefully considered each possible country and chose the U.S. because it was the creme de la creme.

[Powerdoc]

Originally posted by spindler
"The reason so many people immigrated here in the first place is because we lead the world in individual and commercial liberties. It was those freedoms that made us powerful."

This is nonsense and comes straight from the stories told in U.S. high schools.

The reason so many people came to America was because we were the only ones that had the door open. They would have gone to anywhere else that they could get a job and be free from persecution. All the Chinese people that come here would happily go to England, France, or Germany, if the door was open.

So you can give the U.S. credit for having the door open, which was partially from self interest anyway, but people don't come here because we have some sort of freedoms or economic system that they don't have in Germany. Mexicans don't choose the U.S. because they prefer American Capitalism over Swedish Socialism. This is another vague argument some Americans use to decide the U.S. is superior to everywhere else and therefore free to act against the ideas of everyone else whether it's the Kyoto Protocol or the Iraq war.

When I go into the supermarket, the National Enquirer proclaims "Whitney Houston beaten up by drug dealers". There's pictures of recently murdered women and children on the cover of People Magazine. It's right there in front of eight year old children to see. If we're so superior, why can't we get people to understand Citizenship and Human Decency 101?

People from poor countries like India and China risk their lives just to get to semi-poor places like Peru or Argentina. Americans make it out like our immigrants carefully considered each possible country and chose the U.S. because it was the creme de la creme.

Immigration is important in the US due to the attractive power of the american dream, the dream, that everybody in USA is able to reach, the uppest social class (even if the % of success is low, the important thing, is that it's possible).
There is not such dream in France, even if it's truly possible to do the same, it's more complicated here.

[Michael Wilkie]

"They would have gone to anywhere else that they could get a job and be free from persecution."

That's exactly my point. Our economic and civil liberties made the US the only place to "get a job and be free from persecution."

You should ask someone from the old soviet block how great socialism is sometime. Free health care? They were lucky to have food and water much of the time. That's what happens when a massive population puts all its stakes in a single, monstrous bureaucracy. If a hospital or HMO goes under, we still have several competitors who will pick up the slack. If the Norwegian health care system goes bankrupt, or experiences an untimely surge in demand, they're fucked.

This is why population makes a big difference. America is simply too large and dynamic to put all its eggs in one basket. Small countries with relatively flat populations may do very well with their socialism. That does not mean it could work here in the States. Chances are, a free health care system in the States would be a complete disaster. Have you ever been to the DMV? Do you really want those assholes running the health care system?

"which was partially from self interest anyway"

That's too funny. Do you discredit everything done out of self-interest? Who else's interest would we be looking out for? Frances?

[New]

Actually, the norwegian health-care system is already partly privatized. What's ironic is that the state-run hospitals are in general better and more cost efficient than the private ones...

[Powerdoc]

Originally posted by New
Actually, the norwegian health-care system is already partly privatized. What's ironic is that the state-run hospitals are in general better and more cost efficient than the private ones...

In France it's just the contrary.

[Harald]

Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
That's too funny. Do you discredit everything done out of self-interest? Who else's interest would we be looking out for? Frances?

Who's Frances?

[spindler]

Michael Wilkie wrote:

"That's exactly my point. Our economic and civil liberties made the US the only place to "get a job and be free from persecution."

This is not true. They have almost exactly the same civil liberties in France as they do in the U.S., except for small things like banning nazi memorabilia. They have approximately the same economic liberties in Germany. The more talented you are, the more money you make eventually, even if you have to prove yourself more slowly.

Immigrants come here for one main reason: they can get in without being arrested and sent back. That's a great thing for humanity but it does not imply that the U.S. gets to make decisions for the world because we know more about civil liberties or economic systems.

I'm not sure if you are getting the point of my post, so let me make it clearer.

Americans seems to think that because 100,000,000 Mexicans or Chinese or Kenyans would like to come here, that means that we somehow have a better system or way of life than other free countries.

Mexicans come here because they can work and make money, not because they think Americans know anything about how to really live life in a beautiful way, like Italians do.

Mexicans come here because they can work and make money, not because they think the two party system in the U.S. is a more efficient form of democracy than a multiparty parliamentary system.

Mexicans come here because they can work and make money, not because they agree philosophically that it's great that American CEOs make 400 times as much as the average worker, whereas it's like 15 times as much in Germany.

Mexicans come here because they can work and make money, not because they think that listening to crappy rap music and watching The Bachelor is as nice a way of life. They'ed probably agree that watching much less TV and spending more time with your family like French people do is much more sensible than spending your life in a cubicle.

If you believe that the U.S. is above all of Europe just because people would rather be here than be brutalized by a dictator you have been brainwashed. If you throw a party and hand out free Hennessey, that's great, but people are coming for the free Hennessey, not because they think your house is nicer or your parties are better or the coolest people will be at your parties.

As for what you said about socialism working differently for smaller niche countries, I can't really argue one way or the other because I haven't thought about it

[Michael Wilkie]

Small things like banning Nazi propaganda, huh? I don't know about that. How about banning Muslim head scarfs in schools? I happen to feel free speech and expression are pretty big things.

Look, I don't think America is or Americans are "above" Europeans...or anybody else, for that matter. What I believe to be true, is that for a plethora of reasons, many of them circumstantial, the US has created an environment that fosters economic/intellectual opportunity and technological innovation in ways the world has never seen. One reason is our rich, diverse culture.

Bad music and food is part of that diversity but so is great music and great food. Not everybody eats potato chips and listens to Eminem, you know. A great number of us eat sushi and listen to Miles Davis. Many Americans do "spend their lives in cubicles" but many others, myself included, work at home on the porch, in sunny Florida with WiFi and Dominican cigars. No one is going to give you a job like that. You have to make it yourself. And America makes it relatively easy to do so if you're motivated and seize opportunities that come your way.

90% of American corporations are small businesses. I chose to incorporate in Florida because there's no State income tax. That frees up nearly 30% more resources that I use to grow my business. There are very few places in the world that allow for the type of growth my business has seen over the last few years, especially in the midst of a cyclical economic slow down. I am very grateful for that opportunity.

[spindler]

"Small things like banning Nazi propaganda, huh?"

On the surface, I agree that any sort of ban on expression seems very dangerous. However, I don't know the situation in France and their democracy is still going strong. They never banned being gay or interracial marriage or something like that so there doesn't seem to be any long term detrimental effects.

"The US has created an environment that fosters economic/intellectual opportunity and technological innovation in ways the world has never seen"

True the U.S. has something very unique that leads to a Microsoft, but let's not discount that for quality things like cars or luggage, Europeans are probably more able to maintain a tradition of quality.

" A great number of us [Americans] eat sushi and listen to Miles Davis"

Here's where the problem is. While there is quality in some things here and there and some people with taste here and there, things have gone downhill quickly in the last 20 years in every category. This is because taste must be passed on and Americans don't seem to care, whereas passing on tradition is important in other cultures. Everything mainstream, that 80% of Americans care about stinks. Today's cartoons are so stupid and meaningless compared to the Bugs Bunny or Tom and Jerry. Almost all mainstream music stinks. Comedy is not funny. People are so dulled by today's wild humor that when I saw There's Something About Mary in the theater, people couldn't get most of the jokes. Almost everything on TV is idiotic besides HBO. The "news" is hype delivered by supermodel anchorwomen. Americans don't seem to care that the more subtle things are getting washed away and that practical result is that people just get used to junk.

"That frees up nearly 30% more resources that I use to grow my business"

While the U.S. may have the best business climate, this usually only helps people that are both smart and had solid, professional parents to teach them how to be capable. If your mother was single and a waitress and you grew up in front of the TV then probably do better in Germany where everyone gets an internship and there is more on the job training. After all, 20% of Americans live in poverty whereas it's a much smaller percentage in Europe. So I'm not ignoring that for certain people you can go farther in the U.S. but for certain people you will most likely go farther elsewhere in a more supportive environment.

"Look, I don't think America is or Americans are "above" European"

Alright then our disagreements are relatively small then.

[Michael Wilkie]

One more round, just for kicks....

Originally posted by spindler
True the U.S. has something very unique that leads to a Microsoft, but let's not discount that for quality things like cars or luggage, Europeans are probably more able to maintain a tradition of quality.

Believe me, I'm a freak for British motorcars and French leather goods. That's stuffs all great. I would never try to say Americans make the best luggage.


Here's where the problem is. While there is quality in some things here and there and some people with taste here and there, things have gone downhill quickly in the last 20 years in every category.

I don't think things have gone downhill in the last twenty years. Hammer Pants? Hair Bands? ;)

Seriously though, America has such a diverse population that it's still struggling to find a cultural identity. The French, British, Italians and Germans have had hundreds, if not thousands of years to develop their respective cultural traditions. But they only got there because each of them was, at one point or another, the Global Superpower that everybody else in the world hated. Give us another century or two...we'll catch up.


While the U.S. may have the best business climate, this usually only helps people that are both smart and had solid, professional parents to teach them how to be capable. If your mother was single and a waitress and you grew up in front of the TV then probably do better in Germany where everyone gets an internship and there is more on the job training. After all, 20% of Americans live in poverty whereas it's a much smaller percentage in Europe. So I'm not ignoring that for certain people you can go farther in the U.S. but for certain people you will most likely go farther elsewhere in a more supportive environment.

That's actually not true. Over 80% of millionaires in America are first generation millionaires. Most of them are not smart necessarily...just hard working and thrifty. May I recommend "The Millionaire Next Door" available on the iTunes music store? It's a great read/listen.


"Look, I don't think America is or Americans are "above" European"

Alright then our disagreements are relatively small then.

I think every developed country has something unique and important to offer to the World. As I sated above, I think America is just struggling to find itself culturally. In the first few hundred years of the Roman empire, they were seen as a very vulgar people by the Greeks, Egyptians and Persians. Maybe the reason Americans like reality TV so much is because it gives us a chance to try to figure ourselves out. Just a thought.

Oh, and its not fair at all to compare "Tom and Jerry" and "Bugs Bunny" to modern cartoons. They were produced for adults, so its logical that modern cartoons made for children seem "stupid" by comparison.

[Anders]

Originally posted by Michael Wilkie

Seriously though, America has such a diverse population that it's still struggling to find a cultural identity. The French, British, Italians and Germans have had hundreds, if not thousands of years to develop their respective cultural traditions. But they only got there because each of them was, at one point or another, the Global Superpower that everybody else in the world hated. Give us another century or two...we'll catch up.

Huh? The Irish, the Danes, the Pole etc also have their distinct culture. And none of them has ever been a global superpower.

And what is the mechanism that gives a country a cultural identity through the combination of power and outside hatred? Distinct identity is normally aquired through if you are made the scapegoats and are prosecuted. What is always in the center of the common history of nations? Never their victories but always when there wasws done wrong to them.

[Michael Wilkie]

Ever hear of the Celts, Vikings, and Huns?

Not "global superpowers" exactly. But they each controlled the majority of their known world at their peaks.

Power yields culture because it also yields money. Money creates refined culture by financing the arts, luxury goods, fine food and technology.

Its not that other countries hating your influences culture. I was simply stating that you have to start somewhere. It takes time. And at some point, every society known for its cultural achievements was ridiculed by its predecessor(s).

[ColanderOfDeath]

That's what happens when a massive population puts all its stakes in a single, monstrous bureaucracy. If a hospital or HMO goes under, we still have several competitors who will pick up the slack. If the Norwegian health care system goes bankrupt, or experiences an untimely surge in demand, they're fucked.

This is why population makes a big difference. America is simply too large and dynamic to put all its eggs in one basket.

Dunno that I agree with that. The last decade or so has seen increasing consolidation of mature industries. There may be relatively few industries where there is only (Boeing and commercial jet airplanes) American competitor in a literal sense, but the number of mature industries seeing companies who absolutely dominate a market (Microsoft, Intel etc) and the number where the options are down to just a couple of choices seems to be increasing to levels perhaps not seen since the late 19th or early 20th century. Lack of competition is seen in the US as unacceptable when created by govts but not when created by massive multinationals even though to a great extent the results are rather similar.