Posted on 07/15/2004 10:45:07 AM PDT by adam_az
For the fourth year in a row, the United Nations has ranked Norway as having the highest standard of living in the world. Sweden, Australia and Canada are next in line, while the United States is further down the scale.
The annual ranking is based largely on average levels of education and income, combined with expected length of lifetime.
The report measured standards of living in 177 countries around the world. Other Nordic countries also ranked high, with Iceland in 7th place, Finland 13th and Denmark 17th.
Norway's gross national product per person amounted to USD 36,600, beaten only by Luxembourg. Its men and women are expected to live to an age of 78.9 years and Norway is one of 19 countries in the world with no measurable rates of illiteracy.
Researchers for the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) also weighed countries' degrees of cultural freedom in their analysis. They called cultural freedom a "basic human right," and awarded high scores in this year's UN Human Development Report to countries that accept immigrant cultures in addition to their own.
Norway's cultural diversity has blossomed in recent years, and public policies are aimed at integrating various ethnic groups and promoting tolerance.
Norway also was lauded for its high literacy rate in addition to educational levels and material wealth. Norwegians themselves generally point to their country's scenic beauty, recreational opportunities, clean water and fresh air.
The United States landed in eighth place on the list, while France, for example, was 16th.
The worst countries in which to live are all in Africa, according to the UN report. All 23 nations at the bottom of the list were African, with war-torn Sierra Leone in last place.
Aftenposten English Web Desk Nina Berglund/NTB
I still like lutefisk.
In that case these ratings should be immediately sent to Mexico, Korea, and the middle East and perhaps some of those people will chose NOrway instead of cluttering us up here.
Big impact from a small population. Consider.
Home of Lief Ericsson, founder of North America. About 1,000 AD he sailed to NewFoundland.
Home of the Normans (later of France). In 1,066 AD they invaded Britain. William the Conqueror.
William's brother ruled southern Italy and part of the Holy Lands.
Hey, when you got a population that small, sardines and oil are all you need!
Can someone show which country has the most people trying to emigrate to it, both illegally and legally? To me, that would obviously show which country has the best standard of living? Anyone? Bueller?
Yeah. Yeah, Norway. It's so great the Vikings left and discovered America!
What would it look like if you selected states in America with populations of about 4 million and compared them to Norway?
They have oil money, but it doesn't seem to help much. Gas is still about 5$ a gallon, housing is expensive, tax rates are high, and they don't get what they used to get via socialism. That is, they now have to pay for things that they used to get for free.
In addition, there doesn't seem to be much economic advancement for individuals. One of my best friends is a Norwegian and we often talk/argue about the differences in our systems. She's told me that there's very little chance of a regular guy eventually becoming wealthy as is often the case over here. In fact, before she left Norway to pursue the doctorate over here, she was told she shouldn't, because she doesn't come from an educated family. So much for pulling yourself up and improving your lot in life. Once a peasant, stay a peasant, huh?
The constant refrain I hear is, "You should pay more taxes so you would get more." Sigh. So much for freedom.
I won't even go into how the Scandanvian sexual 'equality' and socialism has screwed the relationship between the sexes. It seems to be hard to get these guys to marry because they don't have to. Like here, they can get what they want sexually w/o marriage, but unlike here, the woman can get so many benefits w/o the stigma of being on welfare, she doesn't really need the man for anything but sperm donation.
I'd like to visit, but I'm glad I'm American.
They left out a key fact.
That is, that the Norwegian capital of Oslo is the world's most expensive city to live in.
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/text8-21-2003-44468.asp
Not to mention the 60% tax rate.
Lutefisk makes the whole country unihabitable.
Oh yeah, I forgot. Apparently Norway doesn't have the snacks we do, either. My friend has spent an inordinate amount of her time here performing taste tests on American snacks. I have felt it my duty as an American to help her in this endeavor.
And it ain't stinking Norway!
Thoughts...?
Translation: 'cultural freedom' is a euphemism for the mindset of a toddler. I wanna do what I wanna do and don't tell me I can't do what I wanna do. Oh, and you get to pay for my mistakes when I ***k up.
If this were true, wouldn't the UN be moving there?
"Not to mention the 60% tax rate."
One of my dad's cousins in Norway is a pretty wealthy guy. Years ago my dad said his cousin paid MORE in taxes than he earned in a year. I was young and not too interested so don't know the particulars. I wonder now if Norway has (had?) a property tax where they tax not only your income but all the stuff you have too. Taxes on your business equipment, three houses, nice cars, etc. might add up to more than you make a year. Especially if you're a small businessman that has a variable income year to year.
Norway sure is a pretty place to visit though - and very nice people. Just wouldn't want to live there. Neither did any of my grandparents (my ancestry is all Norwegian going back at least 800 years). My grandmother on my mom's side left Norway at the age of 16 years for America. By herself. Didn't know English. Didn't know anyone in America. That was guts!
I vëri sørry büt messæges cønserning Møøsë müst be skreened für cøntent by Der Elite Møøsënspåånkængrüppen ØberKømmändø.
Yu will receive å visit frøm the Møøsë-in-Blåck wen you leåst expect it tø instrüct you fürther on Møøsë etiqüæt.
They have never used any metrics which represents REAL reasons people would want to live in a place in these stupid UN surveys. Its always been a running joke, back when Canada was always #1 every year, that this was a backhanded complement. Fools always lauded it though.
Any survey like this should include at the minimum, how many people migrate in vs how many migrate out, and what the composition of those people are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.