3 ms·

Yea they were mostly rebuilding the physical world and not having to completely rebuild society from the ground. Small countries like the Nordics aren’t great e

Yea they were mostly rebuilding the physical world and not having to completely rebuild society from the ground. Small countries like the Nordics aren’t great examples because they’re so small and a massive part of their wealth came from selling oil to the wider world. The amount of oil revenue generated per person in those countries allowed them develop such a high standard of living along with really smart and egalitarian government policy and investment. That’s not really repeatable for a country as large as the US although money could certainly be used better. France invited large amounts of immigrants from Africa to help rebuild so it’s not like they didn’t see immigration. I think there are two main reasons that the poorest parts of the population are stagnating. One is poverty traps, and especially multi generational poverty traps are very hard to escape. Another is geographic location. Americans dont move as much as they used to, all around the world poorer people move to areas with more jobs and opportunity but today mostly richer people move and poorer people stay put in areas that are impoverished. Immigrants largely don’t come with a set geography or generational poverty weighing them down which is why their kids do so well.

haakonhr 5y ago
That's inaccurate at best about the Nordics. Norway, yes, and Denmark to some degree. Neither Finland or Sweden have or had any significant oil and gas reserves, but built their economies on industry (and mining to some extent).
- pastage 5y ago
  Agreed, but mining has historically been a big in Sweden (part of the reason why so many minerals were named by Swedish scientists). While we now have focus on other areas it has always been an important part of the economy.
ardit33 5y ago
This is pretty wrong. Most immigrants come from much poorer countries, and they themselves have to restart everything from scratch, with little saving and no home ownership. People coming from the Philipines, or India, or Eastern Europe, post communism from the 90s had to restart everything from scratch, including learning the language, yet over time they end up doing well. You have this weird mentality, that all immigrants are coming rich, and from rich countries, which is the opposite from the truth. I guarantee, that Someone in Bangladesh coming here, has had a much harder life, than the average minority living in Brooklyn or Queens. Yet, even the obstacles, they end up doing better than the locals. So, initial conditions are not the major hamperer of success.
- spothedog1 5y ago
  Not sure where you got that idea but I definitely don't think all immigrants coming here are rich, I'm a huge advocate for more poorer/low skilled immigration. I've outlined in a bunch of other comments why exactly but for them if their life struggling in the US is better than where they left and they are voluntarily here to give themselves and their children a better life it's good with me and a huge benefit to the USA.

haakonhr 5y ago

That's inaccurate at best about the Nordics. Norway, yes, and Denmark to some degree. Neither Finland or Sweden have or had any significant oil and gas reserves, but built their economies on industry (and mining to some extent).

pastage 5y ago
Agreed, but mining has historically been a big in Sweden (part of the reason why so many minerals were named by Swedish scientists). While we now have focus on other areas it has always been an important part of the economy.

ardit33 5y ago

This is pretty wrong. Most immigrants come from much poorer countries, and they themselves have to restart everything from scratch, with little saving and no home ownership. People coming from the Philipines, or India, or Eastern Europe, post communism from the 90s had to restart everything from scratch, including learning the language, yet over time they end up doing well. You have this weird mentality, that all immigrants are coming rich, and from rich countries, which is the opposite from the truth. I guarantee, that Someone in Bangladesh coming here, has had a much harder life, than the average minority living in Brooklyn or Queens. Yet, even the obstacles, they end up doing better than the locals. So, initial conditions are not the major hamperer of success.

spothedog1 5y ago
Not sure where you got that idea but I definitely don't think all immigrants coming here are rich, I'm a huge advocate for more poorer/low skilled immigration. I've outlined in a bunch of other comments why exactly but for them if their life struggling in the US is better than where they left and they are voluntarily here to give themselves and their children a better life it's good with me and a huge benefit to the USA.