# Is Scandinavia Wealthy? NYT article/propaganda?



## Petronius (Mar 4, 2004)

Rigadon said:


> In Norway or all of scanadanvia? The other Scandanvian countries are part of the EU and therefore allow unlimited migration from the rest of the EU - which might not include very poor countires but does include significanlty poorer countries like Greece and Portugal.


do you really think a Portuguese man would need , or want, to immigrate to Sweden or Norway?? First of all they arent' significantly poorer. The difference in PPP is no longer that wide, since the 90s. So please, before using my country's name, revise your knowledge on it. The only trips I've been told the POrtuguewse do to Norway is to visit the fjords. Or Codfish exports.


----------



## Petronius (Mar 4, 2004)

As much as I thikn this article feels biased and bitter, (it actually seems like the author is trying to sell Americans their own way of life (?) ) , I do think Europe is losing a lot of Purchase Power. Strong euro, economic stagnation, etc. The Norwegians are no exception, as sometimes they seem to want to be.


----------



## Grollo (Sep 11, 2002)

Yet more neo-con propoganda. Maybe we should invade Scandinavia to free the poor idiots who live there from the evils of socialism and high taxes?

United Nations Human Development Report 2004 

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX:
1. *Norway*
2. Sweden
3. Australia
4. Canada
5. Netherlands
6. Belgium
7. Iceland
8. *United Sates*
9. Japan
10. Ireland

HUMAN POVERTY INDEX FOR HIGH INCOME OECD COUNTRIES:
1 Sweden 6.5%
2 *Norway* 7.1%
3 Netherlands 8.2%
4 Finland 8.4%
5 Denmark 9.1%
6 Germany 10.3%
7 Luxembourg 10.5%
8 France 10.8%
9 Spain 11.00%
10 Japan 11.1%
11 Italy 11.6%
12 Canada 12.2%
13 Belgium 12.4%
14 Australia 12.9%
15 United Kingdom 14.8%
16 Ireland 15.3%
17 *United Sates* 15.8%


----------



## rocky (Apr 20, 2005)

^grollo summed it well. I wish france was like scandinavia


----------



## Rigadon (Mar 3, 2003)

Pedrocid said:


> d First of all they arent' significantly poorer. The difference in PPP is no longer that wide, since the 90s.



The difference is hopefully closer and there's no doubt Portugal has taken great strides forward since the 90s but it IS significantly poorer than Norway. Most countries are.

Even in PPP terms Norwys GDP per head is over double Portugal's.


----------



## Petronius (Mar 4, 2004)

Rigadon said:


> The difference is hopefully closer and there's no doubt Portugal has taken great strides forward since the 90s but it IS significantly poorer than Norway. Most countries are.
> 
> Even in PPP terms Norwys GDP per head is over double Portugal's.


I know, Norway still isn't attractive.. I just didn't like the fact that he had to use Portugal' name. People often seem to, forgetting that it is no longer a poor country. People eem to associate POrtugal with poverty, there are so many countries poorer than Portugal!


----------



## NorthStar77 (Oct 8, 2003)

^I agree. I'm pretty confident there are alot more people migrating *from* Norway *to* Portugal (but especially Spain), than the other way. 

It's different with people from the new EU countries however. Many of them, especially Poles, are used to our climate. Wich is one of the reasons they are the biggest immigrant group now.


----------



## Petronius (Mar 4, 2004)

NorthStar77 said:


> ^I agree. I'm pretty confident there are alot more people migrating *from* Norway *to* Portugal (but especially Spain), than the other way.
> 
> It's different with people from the new EU countries however. Many of them, especially Poles, are used to our climate. Wich is one of the reasons they are the biggest immigrant group now.


I still admire Norway and the rest of Scandinavia's achievements in Social Welfare, but not just! You seem to be leading nations in everything you do! You only lose points with your weather  And thanks for the cod, by the way!!


----------



## Küsel (Sep 16, 2004)

I don't know - There are a lot of Portuguese also in Switzerland, one of the biggest group of foreigners. 

If you want to hear it or not, but before joining the EU Portugal was a developping country, especially in the the 50s to 70s and a lot emigrated to center and northern Europe to work there especially on construction sites and in hotels (a lot changed but it is still a "poor" country for European "standards"). And a lot of them stayed and still emigrate. Here for example you should know portuguese if you work in construction. Also a high percentage of maids in hotels are Portuguese. The farms look more for Eastern Europeans now, they are "cheeper". 

So why should it be different in Norway - I personally met several Lusitanians there. I don't say that Portugal is still a very poor country, but the disparities are still quite big!


----------



## NorthStar77 (Oct 8, 2003)

Even so, there are only 718 people from Portugal living in Norway, fewer than from most countries in Europe. http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/02/01/10/innvbef_en/tab-2004-05-26-12-en.html. In 2004, 92 Portugese moved to Norway, while 48 Norwegians moved to Portugal. Hmm, okay, so we have *some* immigration from Portugal
immigration:http://www.ssb.no/emner/02/02/20/innvutv/tab-2005-03-31-07.html
migration:http://www.ssb.no/emner/02/02/20/innvutv/tab-2005-03-31-08.html

I only know one Portugese myself. He moved here over 30 years ago, but have now moved back to Portugal for a period, together with his Norwegian son



Pedrocid said:


> And thanks for the cod, by the way!!


No problem, I don't want it! Quite funny how it was the Portugese that became so fond it.


----------



## chiccoplease (Jun 26, 2003)

I partly agree with the article even though it seems exaggerated. Scandinavia certainly doesn't *look* rich. But neither does the US.


----------



## Petronius (Mar 4, 2004)

NorthStar77 said:


> Even so, there are only 718 people from Portugal living in Norway, fewer than from most countries in Europe. http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/02/01/10/innvbef_en/tab-2004-05-26-12-en.html. In 2004, 92 Portugese moved to Norway, while 48 Norwegians moved to Portugal. Hmm, okay, so we have *some* immigration from Portugal
> immigration:http://www.ssb.no/emner/02/02/20/innvutv/tab-2005-03-31-07.html
> migration:http://www.ssb.no/emner/02/02/20/innvutv/tab-2005-03-31-08.html
> 
> ...


According to INE(portuguese Statistics Bureau) data, there are 1317 Suedes living in Portugal officially, and 572 Finns. No data for Norwegians.. 


It's historical, we used to go fish it ourselves over there before the EU.


----------



## Petronius (Mar 4, 2004)

NorthStar77 said:


> Even so, there are only 718 people from Portugal living in Norway, fewer than from most countries in Europe. http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/02/01/10/innvbef_en/tab-2004-05-26-12-en.html. In 2004, 92 Portugese moved to Norway, while 48 Norwegians moved to Portugal. Hmm, okay, so we have *some* immigration from Portugal
> immigration:http://www.ssb.no/emner/02/02/20/innvutv/tab-2005-03-31-07.html
> migration:http://www.ssb.no/emner/02/02/20/innvutv/tab-2005-03-31-08.html
> 
> ...


According to INE(portuguese Statistics Bureau) data, there are 1317 Suedes living in Portugal officially, 841 Danes, and 572 Finns. No data for Norwegians.. 


It's historical, we used to go fish it ourselves over there before the EU.


----------



## Petronius (Mar 4, 2004)

Kuesel said:


> I don't know - There are a lot of Portuguese also in Switzerland, one of the biggest group of foreigners.


and?






> If you want to hear it or not, but before joining the EU Portugal was a developping country, especially in the the 50s to 70s and a lot emigrated to center and northern Europe to work there especially on construction sites and in hotels (a lot changed but it is still a "poor" country for European "standards").


no it isn't. most of what you're saying is not true. I'm not surprised though, since that's got to be the image most Swiss will have on Portugal, due to the immigration. I suggest you come and see Portugal, I'm sure your opinion will change. I met a lot of people who changed their opinion like that. Switzerland was also a developping country in the 19th century, so what?



> And a lot of them stayed and still emigrate.


Portugal is a country of IMMIGRATION. 2000 Portuguese people left the country in 2004 , and some 20.000 saw their situation legalised as foreigners residing in Portugal



> Here for example you should know portuguese if you work in construction. Also a high percentage of maids in hotels are Portuguese. The farms look more for Eastern Europeans now, they are "cheeper".


so what, a lot of them give their nationality to their kids. i personally don't know of anyone who may be interested in moving to Swilzerland. Maybe in the more rural areas. But the more urban Portuguese isn't really interested in Switzerland.






> So why should it be different in Norway - I personally met several Lusitanians there. I don't say that Portugal is still a very poor country, but the disparities are still quite big!


well as we can see, it isn't. Can you prove your statement about the disparities?? Or is it just in your head?


----------



## eusebius (Jan 5, 2004)

The number of Portuguese immigrant workers proves any point instantly.

</how can you be so stupid to deny decades of welfare support from amongst others the Netherlands :you silly ****: :hammer you all the way back into your recipient cave/>


----------



## Petronius (Mar 4, 2004)

eusebius said:


> The number of Portuguese immigrant workers proves any point instantly.
> 
> </how can you be so stupid to deny decades of welfare support from amongst others the Netherlands :you silly ****: :hammer you all the way back into your recipient cave/>


what do you mean?


----------



## 1st Division Marine (Nov 29, 2004)

yes Scandinavia wealthy very wealthy if that.


----------



## Diboto (Oct 20, 2004)

Scandinavia is very wealthy as a whole, even if there are not as many millionaires or billionaires as in countries like UK, USA or Japan or whichever applies to the case.

Wealth should also be associated with high standards of living for the entire population, not just very high for some, and "ok" for most.


----------



## HirakataShi (Feb 8, 2004)

Grollo said:


> Yet more neo-con propoganda. Maybe we should invade Scandinavia to free the poor idiots who live there from the evils of socialism and high taxes?
> 
> United Nations Human Development Report 2004
> 
> ...



Just a side note: The difference between the number 1 country and number 10 country on the UN HDI is less than 0.01. The "dollar" level that is used by governments to determine poverty in different countries is not the same. And ALL governments set "dollar" levels to determine poverty WAY to low.


----------



## HirakataShi (Feb 8, 2004)

The gini coefficient for Nordic countries is very low, compared to Anglo-American countries. If Norway or Sweden have an average income of like 35,000 Euros for example, the majority of people earn around that level. If Canada or the USA or Australia or the UK have an average income of USD35,000 on the other hand, this says absolutely nothing since 60% of the population might be earning less or maybe only 40% is earning less. We have absolutely no way of knowing without seeking additional info due to the higher gini coefficient.


----------



## Küsel (Sep 16, 2004)

@Pedrocid: don't get too mad about the posts! I know Portuguese here, I was in Portugal, I know immigrants to Portugal and I know that Switzerland only became a wealthy country in the 1880s. That's not the point and it was not meant to put your country down. But there are facts that have to be accepted and you can't change with patriotism (I have the same problem with my country, believe me). Lisboa and Porto are nowadays modern and quite wealthy cities and no one would deny that. But I only was talking about the past and the immigration to my country and these are facts, if you like it or not - and have nothing to do with the country nowadays!


----------



## Petronius (Mar 4, 2004)

Kuesel said:


> @Pedrocid: don't get too mad about the posts! I know Portuguese here, I was in Portugal, I know immigrants to Portugal and I know that Switzerland only became a wealthy country in the 1880s. That's not the point and it was not meant to put your country down. But there are facts that have to be accepted and you can't change with patriotism (I have the same problem with my country, believe me). Lisboa and Porto are nowadays modern and quite wealthy cities and no one would deny that. But I only was talking about the past and the immigration to my country and these are facts, if you like it or not - and have nothing to do with the country nowadays!


I didn't say there weren't. I admire and thank Swilzerland for welcoming all these citizens from Portugal. But we tend to build stereotypes on nationalities. We tend to regard citizens from a certain nationality, especially if they constitute an immigrant community,in all the aspects that are more "mediatised" and easy "catchs".. common grounds.. . You think of POrtuguese people as conciérges and builders because that's an easy image to retain. Certainly there are Portuguese immigrants in Switzerland with other jobs, or even Portuguese students, or etc.. (I studied there for a week for instance). Some Portuguese will do the same with Brazilians (Prostitutes and Transvestites) or Ukranians (drug dealers, builders, mafia) which would be extremely unfair! It's just what the television and press try to tell us because it's easier to sell!! Don't yo uthink? 
Portugal isn't a country of emigration any more really... Just to give you a clue, last year , the immigrant population in Portugal increased by 7% . It now constitutes roughly 5% of the population, and 12% of "active" workers. I know it's still low compared to Swiltzerland, but still quite impressive for a country that 30 years ago saw 1/5th of its population emigrating to other nations...


----------



## AcesHigh (Feb 20, 2003)

Jonesy55 said:


> I think your 'perspective' is just as inaccurate as the New York Times article! No country in the world with more crime than the USA, really???? How about Iraq, Somalia or Nigeria??


You are comparing the richest country in the world to Iraq, Somalia and Nigeria??? Compare its violence level with other developed countries!




> If education in the US is so terrible why do they have a higher proportion of people with university degrees than virtually anywhere else and why do people from all over the world send their kids to Harvard, Yale etc?


I guess people are not talking about university education, but about basic education. 




> Most of the US population live in middle class Suburbia which is hardly 'really bad conditions' even it isn't exactly exciting


very true. On the other hand you have to drive an infinity to your work place... one of the reasons US is the largest polluter in the world.




> Healthcare in the USis also very good (but expensive) for those who can get it. It's just bad that large numbers of the population don't have access to it.


healthcare ANYWHERE in the world is very good for people who can pay for it. We have awesome hospitals in Brasil for people who can pay for them. What really matter is healthcare for who cant pay for it!!! It is just ridiculous that in US there is no PUBLIC healthcare.


----------



## AcesHigh (Feb 20, 2003)

Kuesel said:


> I don't know - There are a lot of Portuguese also in Switzerland, one of the biggest group of foreigners.
> 
> If you want to hear it or not, but before joining the EU Portugal was a developping country, especially in the the 50s to 70s and a lot emigrated to center and northern Europe to work there especially on construction sites and in hotels (a lot changed but it is still a "poor" country for European "standards"). And a lot of them stayed and still emigrate. Here for example you should know portuguese if you work in construction. Also a high percentage of maids in hotels are Portuguese. The farms look more for Eastern Europeans now, they are "cheeper".
> 
> So why should it be different in Norway - I personally met several Lusitanians there. I don't say that Portugal is still a very poor country, but the disparities are still quite big!



things always change. The nordic countries were poor before the 20th century. Portugal was powerful in the 16th century.


----------



## LooselogInThePeg (Nov 20, 2004)

This article doesn't look like propaganda so much as some sort of personal rant to me. Having said that though, it does bring up some interesting points concerning the socialist state of mind. Seems to me that based on the postings in this thread there are as many misconceptions about the US as there are perceived misconceptions about Europe.


----------



## earthJoker (Dec 15, 2004)

NorthStar77 said:


> I've often been wondering why we are considered so liberal myself...it's partly a mythkay:


Americans and European don't understand the same thing under liberal!


----------



## Küsel (Sep 16, 2004)

And European social parties would be banned in the US  Kerry which has been considered as liberal and even half communist in the US (what a joke) whouldn't even be considered "left" here. The American and European political systems and values are not compareable.


----------



## Justadude (Jul 15, 2004)

AcesHigh said:


> It is just ridiculous that in US there is no PUBLIC healthcare.


There is public healthcare in the US, just not universalized public healthcare.


----------



## earthJoker (Dec 15, 2004)

Kuesel said:


> And European social parties would be banned in the US  Kerry which has been considered as liberal and even half communist in the US (what a joke) whouldn't even be considered "left" here. The American and European political systems and values are not compareable.


Well that's not what I meant. The therm liberal doesn't mean the same, it's not a matter of perspective but of definition.


----------



## Küsel (Sep 16, 2004)

I think it's a misunderstanding - I started the sentence with AND, because I agreed with you (I know that there are totally different definitions abou "liberal") and just wanted to give a further perspective. Sorry, that was not clear as it seems. The first time I was in the US I also was very confused by the term liberal


----------



## Ringil (Jul 28, 2004)

i can't complaine  .......


----------



## earthJoker (Dec 15, 2004)

Kuesel said:


> Sorry, that was not clear as it seems. The first time I was in the US I also was very confused by the term liberal


Americans tend to redifine words (like liberal and football)


----------



## Lee (Jun 2, 2003)

Jonesy55 said:


> Even when PPP has been taken into account Norway comes out as one of the richest countries in the world.


Of course, but what is a lot of money good for if it cannot buy as much?


----------



## Lee (Jun 2, 2003)

AcesHigh said:


> healthcare ANYWHERE in the world is very good for people who can pay for it. We have awesome hospitals in Brasil for people who can pay for them. What really matter is healthcare for who cant pay for it!!! It is just ridiculous that in US there is no PUBLIC healthcare.


The US does have public healthcare, actually. The Gov't spends a TON of money in programs like Medicaid and many other programs giving free healthcare (in most cases) to the most needy people.


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

Lee said:


> Of course, but what is a lot of money good for if it cannot buy as much?


Er, in case you hadn't noticed PPP means taking into account the price levels in each country. I could have equally said 'Even when prices have been taken into account Norway comes out as one of the richest countries in the world.'


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

Lee said:


> The US does have public healthcare, actually. The Gov't spends a TON of money in programs like Medicaid and many other programs giving free healthcare (in most cases) to the most needy people.


So why does the USA still have lower life expectancy, higher chance of dying before the age of 60 and higher infant mortality than virtually any other developed country?


----------



## HirakataShi (Feb 8, 2004)

Jonesy55 said:


> So why does the USA still have lower life expectancy, higher chance of dying before the age of 60 and higher infant mortality than virtually any other developed country?


Unhealthy lifestyles. The USA has a MUCH higher rate of obesity than anywhere else on this planet. There are many health complications associated with obesity. The lower life expectancy in the USA is a reflection of Americans' less healthy lifestyles.


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

HirakataShi said:


> Unhealthy lifestyles. The USA has a MUCH higher rate of obesity than anywhere else on this planet. There are many health complications associated with obesity. The lower life expectancy in the USA is a reflection of Americans' less healthy lifestyles.


What about Infant mortality, that isn't to do with obesity surely? More likely the lack of access to healthcare by the poor.


----------



## Justadude (Jul 15, 2004)

HirakataShi said:


> Unhealthy lifestyles. The USA has a MUCH higher rate of obesity than anywhere else on this planet.


Not true. The highest rate of obesity is in the Pacific. http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1118529.htm

Australia's obesity rate is neck-and-neck with the United States, and probably higher: http://www.katelundy.com.au/obesity.htm

Atlantic Canadians have an obesity rate of 61%: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/9318/obese.html

Broad-based look at worldwide obesity via clips from many newspapers: http://www.worldpress.org/Mideast/1961.cfm

Americans bear the stereotype of being fat, but the fact is that it's rapidly becoming a worldwide problem. Instant-gratification lifestyles are spreading around the globe, especially in post-industrial societies. Not to mention that Americans smoke and drink considerably less than their European and Asian counterparts, which are much higher factors in disease than obesity: 









(Note that being *under*weight is a higher risk factor than obesity)

I see no reason to attribute the United States' healthcare problems strictly to unhealthy lifestyles. 



> So why does the USA still have lower life expectancy, higher chance of dying before the age of 60 and higher infant mortality than virtually any other developed country?


Surely it has something to do with the sheer instability of the American population. For every immigrant family that rises to the middle class and becomes healthier, two more families immigrate from somewhere else... usually third-world countries. And many of those immigrants have no access to public healthcare anyway. It seems pretty natural that after nearly two centuries of high immigration, the USA would be behind most other developed countries in that sort of statistic. The healthcare system is crap, but it's not clear to me that it's _entirely_ its fault that we score so statistically low.


----------



## _keen_ (Nov 27, 2004)

All those tax, state protection and also unreasonable powerfull trade-unions have their price. People in north are not that smart, work-loving and honest - they are far from acomplishing socialistic utopia. Actuall proportion of salaries and prices is low (lower than in western europe) - that is true in this article.


----------

