An Iraqi who saved Norway from oil (2009) • Hacker News Board

Re: An Iraqi who saved Norway from oil (2009)

#51

Post by soperj » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 6:15 AM UTC

thedmstdmstdmst wrote: post #47

ayngg wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A big difference is that Norway is a sovereign state and didn't have to deal with federal and inter-provincial politics like Alberta did. I have my doubts about whether or not a federal government that has done something like the National Energy Program would allow a province within their country to hold a sovereign wealth fund worth hundreds of billions, or even over a trillion dollars.

> would allow a province within their country to hold a sovereign wealth fund worth hundreds of billions, or even over a trillion dollars. This is Alberta we are talking about? If in your hypothetical the Federal Government didn't mess it up the Province would.

They're the only province to run a balanced budget for last 50 years.

Re: An Iraqi who saved Norway from oil (2009)

#52

Post by heurisko » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 6:19 AM UTC

The UK also benefitted from North Sea oil, but unlike the Norwegians, we don't have a sovereign wealth fund.

Some suggest the money raised went towards tax cuts and contributed to house price inflation. [1]

Although I'm not sure about house price inflation, as there has been similar inflation in Canada and Australia.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/13/north-...

Re: An Iraqi who saved Norway from oil (2009)

#53

Post by conz » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 6:48 AM UTC

simorley wrote: post #38

somedangedname wrote: post #6

As a citizen of resource rich Australia this story of foresight and self-determination in a nation just about makes me weep.

What are you talking about? Australia hasn't had a recession in decades. Australia has done well with all the resources it stole from the aborigines. Most people living in australia has never experienced an economic downturn. https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/why-australia-hasnt-had-a-... Australia hasn't had a recession since the early 90s and you are complaining?

  Australia hasn't had a recession since the early 90s and you are complaining?

The point that was being attempted was this: Yes, Australia has done well. But it could have done much better if it didn't squander its mineral wealth and hadn't removed an actually-beneficial-to-society mining tax.

Just look at Norway as the example of how much better we could have done.

In turn, we wouldn't be lumbered with egregious mining billionaires like Clive Palmer and Gina Rinehart, who - among other monstrosities - heavily back climate-disruption denial.

Re: An Iraqi who saved Norway from oil (2009)

#54

Post by webmobdev » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 7:20 AM UTC

codetrotter wrote: post #20

adventured wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada, US, China Three of the six largest oil producers. Norway's lack of suffering from the so called resource curse isn't that special. What's special about Norway is their privilege to control so much oil with such a small population, quite similar to the sheiks of the Middle East (who have often made their people quite wealthy compared to their less oil fortunate neighbors, as in the case of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait…

> still a backwards monarchy that installs a king as head of state Our royal family is there mostly just for show. Lots of us walk past the castle on our constitution day and wave to the king and the rest of his family and they wave back. Over the remainder of the year they hold some speeches, attend some openings and other events. We are a democracy, and the power that is given to our king in the Norwegian constitut…

People don't seem to understand the concept of constitutional monarchy, and mistakenly believe that the King or Queen in such setups wield power. They are just titular heads of states in a democratic state where the elected representatives and the government hold the real power.

However, I'd say the United Kingdom is an exception here as the Queen still has a lot of power, legally, many of which they have never exercised (atleast in a public manner).

Some weird quirks include not needing a license to drive or not requiring a passport for international travel. She doesn't need to pay taxes (but does pay some). Apparently the Queen of England also owns all Swans in around river Thames and all the Whales / Dolphins in British waters.

More serious powers include being immune to prosecution, exception from Freedom of Information Request, the ability to over rule ministry decisions (in case of emergency or constitutional crisis), the ability to dismiss a government and call for an election. Any law affecting the monarchy requires the "Queens consent" before it can be debated in Parliament or the Queen can also refuse her assent to discuss a particular bill in parliament. She is the Commander-in-Chief of the entire UK military and has the power to order a nuclear strike.

(Ofcourse, in recent decades, it is understood that most of these powers should only be exercised under the advice of the elected government, but that is not how the laws are written and framed. All in all, I'd say she is the most brilliant politician of the 20th century to hold on to power for so long.)

Re: An Iraqi who saved Norway from oil (2009)

#55

Post by eirki » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 10:06 AM UTC

alexitorg wrote: post #27

somedangedname wrote: post #6

As a citizen of resource rich Australia this story of foresight and self-determination in a nation just about makes me weep.

I am not sure that comparing only sovereign wealth funds per capita tells the whole story. For instance Australia has a lot more private wealth saved up than Norway. At a lower GINI coefficient as well! I am also not sure that the major resource exports like iron ore and coal have the same ability to extract cartel rent extraction of oil, which is a lot more concentrated in the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li…

> For instance Australia has a lot more private wealth saved up than Norway. At a lower GINI coefficient as well!

This is demonstrably false: https://data.oecd.org/chart/6tTs

Re: An Iraqi who saved Norway from oil (2009)

#56

Post by qw » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 10:37 AM UTC

adventured wrote: post #5

Rendello wrote: post #4

Related, a recent video from PolyMatter titled Why Oil Doesn't Corrupt Norway: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zu8ClwrTpbA

Canada, US, China Three of the six largest oil producers. Norway's lack of suffering from the so called resource curse isn't that special. What's special about Norway is their privilege to control so much oil with such a small population, quite similar to the sheiks of the Middle East (who have often made their people quite wealthy compared to their less oil fortunate neighbors, as in the case of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait…

Canada and Norway are constitutional monarchies and can not be compared to countries where the monarchs have real power.

Re: An Iraqi who saved Norway from oil (2009)

#57

Post by seventhtiger » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 10:55 AM UTC

wintermutestwin wrote: post #18

yunohn wrote: post #16

Norway is a European country, that no Western gov would colonize or disrupt. This is the primary factor around avoiding “corruption” by oil. Developing countries get baited and coerced into extractive economies that benefit the developed ones - modern colonialism. All this talk around foresight and smarts painfully ignores reality.

Compare and contrast US/Brit actions when: a) Norway nationalizes their oil b)Iran nationalizes their oil.

Saudi Arabia also nationalized its oil with only positive consequences. How you do it is important. Seizure within weeks vs acquisition over years.

Re: An Iraqi who saved Norway from oil (2009)

#58

Post by ceejayoz » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 1:02 PM UTC

bobthepanda wrote: post #26

AlexCoventry wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's meant to convey grief that Australia has allowed itself to be exploited by foreign miners, and waste the wealth that its natural resources could have generated.

hasn't Australia consistently had uninterrupted economic growth? Australia has the highest median household wealth of any country in the world. https://www.statista.com/chart/19651/countries-with-highest-...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_property_bubble

Re: An Iraqi who saved Norway from oil (2009)

#59

Post by dredmorbius » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 1:26 PM UTC

AlexCoventry wrote: post #7

How could al-Kasim be so sure that Norway would find oil?

North Sea oil exploration dates to the 1850s. The modern era began ~1964 with commercial offshore drilling.

That was four years before al-Kasim stopped by the office in 1968.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_oil

Re: An Iraqi who saved Norway from oil (2009)

#60

Post by billyruffian » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 3:14 PM UTC

webmobdev wrote: post #54

codetrotter wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> still a backwards monarchy that installs a king as head of state Our royal family is there mostly just for show. Lots of us walk past the castle on our constitution day and wave to the king and the rest of his family and they wave back. Over the remainder of the year they hold some speeches, attend some openings and other events. We are a democracy, and the power that is given to our king in the Norwegian constitut…

People don't seem to understand the concept of constitutional monarchy, and mistakenly believe that the King or Queen in such setups wield power. They are just titular heads of states in a democratic state where the elected representatives and the government hold the real power. However, I'd say the United Kingdom is an exception here as the Queen still has a lot of power, legally, many of which they have never exerc…

Some of that is correct, the Queen has soverign immunity (a bit wider in scope than, say, the immunity afforded US presidents), and her household has excemption from some laws.

Some of the power you are referring to is the Royal Perogative in which the monarch is important constitutionally but not practically because the use of the Perogative is reserved for the Prime Minister.

Some of the things you mention, such as 'owning' swans and dolphins are not the possession of the Queen as a person (she can't sell them) but the Crown which is almost a deliberately confusing term that means the state. We'd talk about Crown buildings rather than government buildings for example.

Britan has a deliberately confusing unwritten constitution which works well much of the time and while we like to use language which makes it seem that the monarch has lots of power they really don't. The Queen absolutely does not have a nuclear button nor can she nuke anyone. The power to go to war used to be a Royal Perogative (the PM could declare war) but even this is now lost after adventures in Iraq and requires assent by parliament. Here you are confusing a symbolic role for a commanding role.