Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Norway Model: How the Scandinavian country became a literary powerhouse

thedial.world

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 125 posts

Re: The Norway Model: How the Scandinavian country became a literary powerhouse

#21

Post by riffraff »

tazu wrote: post #11
hilux wrote: post #7

This feels like over-analysis. Norway, with 0.07% of the world's population, has the world's best chess player ever. Two of the top ten bridge players. One of the very best soccer players under 25. And so on. Basically, it's a very oil-rich country that uses its wealth to invest in its people . And we see the results in every field of endeavor. Many other "rich" countries, whatever the source of their wealth, do not…

[flagged]

If that was the case you'd see the same outcomes from Sweden, but you don't. The obvious differentiating factor seem to be oil, Norway was a poor-isj country until a few decades ago.

Re: The Norway Model: How the Scandinavian country became a literary powerhouse

#22

Post by hilux »

greenhexagon wrote: post #18
hilux wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My comment points out that Norway has done something amazing that other countries have not come close to doing. Look at what the US (I am American) has done with our wealth: highest healthcare expenditure per capita (50% more than #2), 47th in life expectancy, fifth-highest incarceration rate. What is served by reflexively trying to diminish Norway's accomplishments with a "BUT Singapore is more impressive"? Why not…

Norway is projected to produce $122,421,000,000 worth of oil next year, against a population of only 5 million people. That's about $24,400 in annual oil revenue per citizen. Their sovereign wealth fund (profits from oil re-invested into the global stock market and real estate) is about $270,000 per citizen. Take the risk-free rate of putting that in US Treasuries and it's an additional $13,500 per citizen per year.…

And have UAE, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia achieved what Norway has? (Where did anyone say that social programs are the source of Norway's wealth?!)

No one is acknowledging the US data I posted. Even if the US is not as rich per capita as Norway is, can we learn something from Norway (about investment in education and healthcare) with the resources we do have?

BTW, US per-capita healthcare cost is much, much higher than Norway's, and US life expectancy is much lower.

Re: The Norway Model: How the Scandinavian country became a literary powerhouse

#24

Post by lnsru »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #17
tazu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This feels like after the fact reasoning. In an alternate timeline where Norway has no oil and is poor, I can imagine someone saying, "How could you expect them to succeed? Poor farming conditions, terrible winters, hardly any natural resources beyond fish." After all, Russia also has some awful climates, and it doesn't seem to have resulted in strong social cooperation.

Because in russia one bad word in good environment with some kgb buddy might get you a trip to gulag. So everybody was very careful choosing conversation partners and topics. That’s not the way to build strong social cooperation.

Re: The Norway Model: How the Scandinavian country became a literary powerhouse

#25

Post by js8 »

aurareturn wrote: post #9
hilux wrote: post #7

This feels like over-analysis. Norway, with 0.07% of the world's population, has the world's best chess player ever. Two of the top ten bridge players. One of the very best soccer players under 25. And so on. Basically, it's a very oil-rich country that uses its wealth to invest in its people . And we see the results in every field of endeavor. Many other "rich" countries, whatever the source of their wealth, do not…

Basically, it's a very oil-rich country that uses its wealth to invest in its people Agreed. It's done good for its people with its oil money - but the first thing it needed was oil. I think a more impressive country is Singapore, which has no natural resources, but projects well above its weight.

You don't actually need oil, you can invest into your people regardless. That the oil is somehow a prereq is just an excuse for not doing it.

Re: The Norway Model: How the Scandinavian country became a literary powerhouse

#26

Post by vidarh »

greenhexagon wrote: post #18
hilux wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My comment points out that Norway has done something amazing that other countries have not come close to doing. Look at what the US (I am American) has done with our wealth: highest healthcare expenditure per capita (50% more than #2), 47th in life expectancy, fifth-highest incarceration rate. What is served by reflexively trying to diminish Norway's accomplishments with a "BUT Singapore is more impressive"? Why not…

Norway is projected to produce $122,421,000,000 worth of oil next year, against a population of only 5 million people. That's about $24,400 in annual oil revenue per citizen. Their sovereign wealth fund (profits from oil re-invested into the global stock market and real estate) is about $270,000 per citizen. Take the risk-free rate of putting that in US Treasuries and it's an additional $13,500 per citizen per year.…

> enables them to have the government programs and society they currently enjoy, rather than mistakenly thinking those programs are the source of their wealth.

The person you replied to didn't seem to imply they were, but conversely asked why the US is performing as it is given its wealth compared to Norway.

Average salaries in the US are far higher than in Norway, and GDP per capita, so you would think the US could afford to do better on more metrics

I'll also note that many of the largest welfare reforms in Norway predate the oil wealth, with the largest chunk of the reforms towards the current welfare model being passed in 1966, a year before the first successful oil well in Norwegian sector.

Yet while some things are probably better in the US (average house sizes are larger, I think), as someone who grew up in Norway and has visited the US many times and enjoys being in the US as a visitor, and currently lives in the UK, the UK is as far towards "American conditions" I can stomach. Dysfunctional but at least still has somewhat functioning public services. Why can't the US even match UK public services? The US is certainly significantly richer than the UK.

"Amerikanske tilstander" - "American conditions" - is a term with decades of use in Norwegian politics to scare voters.

Even a lot of conservative voters have historically been worried about "American conditions" because it has a history of being seen as lacking - ironically given far higher levels of faith in the US - in Christian compassion, which has made it unpopular even far into the Norwegian right-wing (e.g. quite a few Norwegian welfare reforms were passed in the 1960s under a center-right government that included the four center-right and right-wing parties of the time)

Re: The Norway Model: How the Scandinavian country became a literary powerhouse

#28

Post by mongol »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #17
tazu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This feels like after the fact reasoning. In an alternate timeline where Norway has no oil and is poor, I can imagine someone saying, "How could you expect them to succeed? Poor farming conditions, terrible winters, hardly any natural resources beyond fish." After all, Russia also has some awful climates, and it doesn't seem to have resulted in strong social cooperation.

Russia had serfdom and dictatorship for most of its history.

Re: The Norway Model: How the Scandinavian country became a literary powerhouse

#30

Post by vegardx »

sira04 wrote: post #16
hilux wrote: post #7

This feels like over-analysis. Norway, with 0.07% of the world's population, has the world's best chess player ever. Two of the top ten bridge players. One of the very best soccer players under 25. And so on. Basically, it's a very oil-rich country that uses its wealth to invest in its people . And we see the results in every field of endeavor. Many other "rich" countries, whatever the source of their wealth, do not…

It's a common myth, but he wasn't drunk, and the deal didn't happen that day. Several meetings later with several more officials and the deal went through 2 years after that negotiation. They basically placed the line in the middle, and the norwegians got lucky.

It fits so well with the Norwegian stereotyping of Danish people, which is likely the reason why so many believe in it. It's also worth noting that Denmark also have quite a large oil industry.

Another myth seems to be that Norway was a very poor nation before the discovery of oil. According to Jan Eivind Myhre[0], professor emeritus in history at the University of Oslo, this isn't true. Norway has been one of the wealthiest countries in Europe for hundreds of years. We had, and to some degree still have, a huge merchant fleet. We've always been big in shipping insurance, probably a by-product of the merchant fleet. The fishing industry has always been a huge part of the economy, same with raw materials.

It's an interesting read, but perhaps a bit more debatable than the myth about a drunk danish minister.

[0] https://www.sciencenorway.no/economy-history/crushing-the-my...

Post reply on HN