Live data from Hacker News

Uruguay is the Economist's Country of the Year

economist.com

11–20 of 112 posts

Re: Uruguay is the Economist's Country of the Year

#11
post #7

Uruguayan here, be prepared to face security issues, bad education quality and very high prices in general if considering moving here.

Agreed, but compare it to Argentina of Brazil and the difference is clear. Everything is relative, and despite significant critiques, it seems to me that a lot of things are being done properly with a long-term outlook.

Re: Uruguay is the Economist's Country of the Year

#13
post #2

About cannabis regulation: "This is a change so obviously sensible ... that no other country has made it."

I don't know how "sensible" the change is, other than you're not going to automatically be treated like a criminal. It is a step in the right direction only due to the latter. If we treated other things (alcohol, for instance) the way that Uruguay is treating cannabis, I think there would be outrage. A national registry of drinkers? Limits on the amounts that one can purchase? That's some heavy-handed bureaucracy at work, and shows that just because something is legal, doesn't mean that it is free-as-in-freedom.

Re: Uruguay is the Economist's Country of the Year

#14

I'm from uruguay, and i don't really see this as a good thing. And don't }ook at our president Mujica as a great leader, he killed douzens during his youth.

You just proved the power of good PR and the most ppl forget the past very quickly.

"Those who cannot remember the past ..." are doomed. Full stop.

Re: Uruguay is the Economist's Country of the Year

#15
Apparantly Scotland is "foolhardy" if it opts for "secession", but Ireland, which already did opt for secession (less pejoratively, secession is typically known as independence once it is acheived), is a resiliant example to us all, with its HDI and economy miles above that of Scotland, and that despite a total lack of oil, and despite a bad housing bust.

Funny, that. You have to be very careful with the Economist because they nearly always seem to have utterly transparent motiviations for the nonsense they peddle. In this case it seems like it benefits them to prop up the city of london and UK with a nice secure oil supply, and they have to perform weird intellectual handstands to justify why Scotland would be a basketcase while Ireland is inspirational.

Re: Uruguay is the Economist's Country of the Year

#16

Apparantly Scotland is "foolhardy" if it opts for "secession", but Ireland, which already did opt for secession (less pejoratively, secession is typically known as independence once it is acheived), is a resiliant example to us all, with its HDI and economy miles above that of Scotland, and that despite a total lack of oil, and despite a bad housing bust. Funny, that. You have to be very careful with the Economist be…

You're saying it's hypocritical to oppose the independence of Scotland, because there are examples of countries who have done well after their independence?

Re: Uruguay is the Economist's Country of the Year

#17
post #13
post #2

About cannabis regulation: "This is a change so obviously sensible ... that no other country has made it."

I don't know how "sensible" the change is, other than you're not going to automatically be treated like a criminal. It is a step in the right direction only due to the latter. If we treated other things (alcohol, for instance) the way that Uruguay is treating cannabis, I think there would be outrage. A national registry of drinkers? Limits on the amounts that one can purchase? That's some heavy-handed bureaucracy at…

I think you're right about the outrage that would follow a registry of drinkers. However, the degree of outrage something causes is not decided only by how sensible or not it is.

We tend to compare new developments with the status quo. "Sensible" is not used here as an absolute, but to congratulate a step in the right direction.

Re: Uruguay is the Economist's Country of the Year

#18
post #16

Apparantly Scotland is "foolhardy" if it opts for "secession", but Ireland, which already did opt for secession (less pejoratively, secession is typically known as independence once it is acheived), is a resiliant example to us all, with its HDI and economy miles above that of Scotland, and that despite a total lack of oil, and despite a bad housing bust. Funny, that. You have to be very careful with the Economist be…

You're saying it's hypocritical to oppose the independence of Scotland, because there are examples of countries who have done well after their independence?

Not hypocritical, just demonstrating poor judgement due to a lack of objectivity. As a relatively right wing, conservative English publication they're opposed to independence for Scotland but of course express this in terms of it being a bad idea for Scotland. this despite all the evidence that smaller countries do better. I'll now most likely be down voted for pointing that out.

Re: Uruguay is the Economist's Country of the Year

#20

Apparantly Scotland is "foolhardy" if it opts for "secession", but Ireland, which already did opt for secession (less pejoratively, secession is typically known as independence once it is acheived), is a resiliant example to us all, with its HDI and economy miles above that of Scotland, and that despite a total lack of oil, and despite a bad housing bust. Funny, that. You have to be very careful with the Economist be…

Ireland has been independent for 95ish years? It's economy only really became something to be envious of around 20 years ago. 20 years out of 95 isn't a great record.
Post reply on HN