[Mikey_1962]

Does this really mean anything? It looks like stability factors very heavily in their determination of rankings.

[rightinthemiddle]

Dreams of the Left:

In a report released Tuesday, the World Economic Forum said Washington's huge defense and homeland security spending commitments, plans to lower taxes further, and long-term potential costs from health care and pensions were creating worrisome fiscal strains.

[ClearCase_guy]

Apparently, our lack of competitiveness is caused by our low taxes. Darn!

[Chi-townChief]

Sounds like the problem is not enough socialism.

[Dracian]

plans to lower taxes further

We must keep raising taxes until we are competitive [/sarcasm]

In other news, the beatings will continue until morale improves.

[Always Right]

Switzerland was deemed the most competitive economy in 2006, followed by Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Singapore. After the United States, which had topped the 2005 index, Japan, Germany, the Netherlands and Britain rounded out the top 10.

So we are ranked behind a few peons???

[MNJohnnie]

a report released Tuesday, the World Economic Forum said Washington's huge defense and homeland security spending commitments, plans to lower taxes further, and long-term potential costs from health care and pensions were creating worrisome fiscal strains.

In other words a bunch of Socailists got together and created a propaganda report that demonstrates their total ignorance of Economics or Competivness. Notice how Domestics Social spending or Tax INCREASES are NEVER a cause of supposed "strain" to these clowns. More nonsense propaganda.

[facedown]

"With a low savings rate,...

Doesn't include 401K's and a bunch of other ways that real people prepare for their future.

[Bommer]

Switzerland was deemed the most competitive economy in 2006, followed by Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Singapore.

So exactly what do these countrys produce that make them so competitive?

[Obadiah]

...the World Economic Forum said Washington's huge defense and homeland security spending commitments, plans to lower taxes further, and long-term potential costs from health care and pensions were creating worrisome fiscal strains.

Lower taxes...oh, that's a shame! A large military budget, unlike, say, GERMANY or FRANCE, or CANADA, or any other sponge-country living off of the protection afforded by Uncle Sam!

Socialist creeps!

[Red6]

Trash-

[jveritas]

Let the people of Switzerland or Sweden or Denmark or Finland or Singapore have half of our standards of living and then we can argue about who is more competitive.

[Lekker 1]

The word "competitiveness" implies that there is a mutually agreed-upon "competition". I am not sure what the sought-after "prize" is in this so-called competition, but as in the NFL, we let the debate get settled on the field, not some pencil-jockey's desk.

My money is, and will always be on the U.S. of A.

[rightinthemiddle]

I say we buy Switzerland, then we'll be number one.

I'll chip in $20.

[Verginius Rufus]

Their top ten list includes 7 European countries, but only 3 of them use the Euro.

[skr]

From World Factbook--U.S.:

US business firms enjoy greater flexibility than their counterparts in Western Europe and Japan in decisions to expand capital plant, to lay off surplus workers, and to develop new products. At the same time, they face higher barriers to enter their rivals' home markets than foreign firms face entering US markets.

Couldn't have anything to do with how the ranking turned out, could it?

[MadIvan]

I believe Switzerland would be in the top 5, and Singapore is definitely very competitive - the others in the top 5, I seriously question.

Regards, Ivan

[truth_seeker]

"Switzerland was deemed the most competitive economy in 2006, followed by Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Singapore. After the United States, which had topped the 2005 index, Japan, Germany, the Netherlands and Britain rounded out the top 10."

This can't be correct. Muslims are, according to them, the chosen and best among us all.

And based on things I've gleaned, Ireland has enjoyed fantastic economic progress.

[Dick Holmes]

Does this really mean anything? It looks like stability factors very heavily in their determination of rankings.

I just saw this Forbes article on it.

The U.S,, which would have ranked at the top last year on the new methodology (although it was second on the old one), continues to score well for being business-friendly, having efficient markets, and for its world-class technology development. But the overall score was pulled down to sixth this year, by its budget and trade deficits. Any disorderly adjustment of such macroeconomic imbalances, the WEF warns, risks knocking the U.S. further down the ranks.

So, last year's U.S. performance would have given us first place, but we dropped to sixth on budget and trade deficits? Deficit's going down again, so we should be back on top next year.