Posted on 07/15/2004 9:40:30 PM PDT by El Conservador
As to how they "measure" education, the measures are completely nebulous; at one place in the explanation section, they mention a standard wherein a person is considered literate if the person can read a simple sentence at age 15. I read the Japanese indicators section in detail, and they "guess" that 85% percent of Japanese are literate at age 15. Well, that must be a surprise to the CIA, who have been lead to the conclusion based on actual figures that Japan's literacy level is actually 99%, as it should, because Japan is famous for its 99% literacy rate. Heck, this is a famous figure because it is quite an achievement for a language that is quite challenging to read and write (Francis Xavier reportedly called it "the devil's language" because of its difficulty.) Not that this report singles out Japan: this report also uses this same bizarre 85% for France, Luxembourg, Spain, and Italy with no justification other than it is an "average":
For purposes of calculating the HPI-2 an estimate of 15.1%, the unweighted average of countries with available data, was applied. (You can find this in footnote 3 at the bottom of this page. )
Almost as surreal is that the report doesn't even consistently apply this bizarre fictional figure to several other first-world nations, including Switzerland, Iceland, or Austria, for which the report just gives no figure.
Then the report has bizarre breakdowns of educational progress in all types of ways, that don't clearly factor back into HDI or GDI (the Gender-Related Development Index.) If you want a headache, read the various "Gender" sections (there is also that gem of a GEM, Gender Empowerment Measure) of this "report."
In my humble opinion, this "report" is total GIGO. Swill. PC nonsense. I am not going to take the time to read all of it, but I did read several sections, including those where I feel have some grip on the situation, and this report is way out in cloud-cuckoo-land.
Maybe the best bit was the section in the back which explained that one cannot compare reports year-over-year -- that the only "valid" comparisons are those cited within a report. "Validity" wasn't the first word that came to mind when sifting through this tripe.
errr... Kenya does NOT have tigers.
Actually Canada and Australia have pretty large immigrant populations and native populations too.
[Norway and Sweden (highly socialist countries where something like 70% of your income gets taken as tax)....]
Right! You touched on an important point that makes you wonder who's conducting the study. Most of those "top countries" have high marginal tax rates. I wouldn't want to live in a country (e.g., Sweden) that has such confiscatory tax policies.
"Norway, Sweden, Australia, Canada and the Netherlands ranked as the best five countries to live"
As an Australian who's been living in Sweden for the past 14 yrs, I'ld personally say that Australia should be in front of Sweden. Sweden may be better in some things (like 1 yr paid maternity leave, 80% of last wage for 1 yr as unemployment benefit, free dental care up to 21 yrs old, etc) but overall Australia is better when it comes to a sense of freedom in society. Plus you can buy alcohol in Australia in any bottle shop, not just in government run "systembolaget" (bottleshops), petrol is cheaper (almost 11 Swedish Kronor = 1.46USD per liter in Sweden at the moment) price of living in general is much cheaper in Australia. On top of all that you have a much better climate in Australia.
Watch the video, and you'll see that they do! ;0
Norway, and I can explain you why.
I personally know Norwegian people and stayed there for awhile.
The first thing I asked myself was how could they support such really massive welfare state and high labor cost.
Notice that taxes are not SO high, for Scandinavias standards.
Easy answer. Norway has 4.5 million people and produces 4.5 million barrel of oil a day. A sort of geographically displaced Persian Gulf country. But unlikely Kuwait and Saudi Arabia,it's very well managed, whith excellent universities (albeit small),advanced industries and people serious about legality.
The Norwegian state is the only country of the world that detains much more other government's bonds than the amount of bonds issued by itself. The Norwegian state coffers are awash of assets: they use the procceds of oil sales top buy other goverment's debt (including tens of billions of US goverment's). Once the oil in the North Sea will finish, they will have:
1)No debt
2)Lots of assets
Hence they will be comfortable about increasing their non-oil economic activities.
By contrast, Persian Gulf nations would all die starving,if oil finished overnight.
I question the accuracy of the rankings. I live 21 miles due north of Canada and my wife worked in a hospital for over 20 years. Newsweek ranks Canadian healthcare better than the United States. Yet, Michigan sees Canadians regularly coming here for medical treatment, but I know of no one from Michigan going to Canada. Further, the Canadian doctors and nurses my wife knew all moved to the states as soon as they could.
Just about the time Mikey Moore released a film praising Cuban medicine, Castro had to fly in a doctor from Spain to operate on him. BS talks and truth walks.
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.