12 ms·

It's refreshing to click on a headline in the form of a question and have the article explain why it's the right question to be asking, and not just following B

It's refreshing to click on a headline in the form of a question and have the article explain why it's the right question to be asking, and not just following Betteridge's Law. I lived in New Zealand for about 5 or 6 years, and I saw huge numbers of people just living on welfare because they could - that's probably got a lot to do with low GDP. Normally, I would see that as a bad thing, but I think New Zealand's relative lack of corruption and the friendly disposition of almost everyone illustrates there is more to life than productivity, and the results of the atmosphere and culture speak for themselves. As fiscally conservative as I may be, I had to admire that. Additionally, I hate frivolous lawsuits, and having the government compensate you so readily for injuries really seemed to reduce the way people would resort to "just sue them". Perhaps there's moral hazard and I'm not smart enough to know how one would quantify that, but again - I had to admire that.

atmosx 13y ago
So what you're saying basically is that although the avg income is low, the quality of life is generally (way?) higher than the OECD?
- grecy 13y ago
  I would say yes, from my experience. I genuinely think it's time for an overhaul of how we rate standard of living. Consumption is not a good measure, and it's too closely tied to "more money means better"
- monochr 13y ago
  Not necessarily higher but at least equal to the best. According to its HDI[1] New Zealand is ranked 6th, bellow the USA but above Japan, Switzerland and South Korea. This is similar to the way that European countries seem to lose out to the US in wages yet when you take into account the time spend on holidays and lack of overtime you see that the gap essentially disappears. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index
- TallGuyShort 13y ago
  Right. I used to criticize New Zealand a lot because it doesn't jive with my mind's ideas of how government should work, until a friend pointed out how much New Zealand was #1 in many areas that are considered signs of an ideal society. Makes me question my ideas :)
JPKab 13y ago
A good friend of mine studied abroad in Australia, and then met and moved in with a Kiwi and then lived in New Zealand with him for a while. He has now moved to the US with her. Her brother is a good friend of mine, and is incredibly irritated with his lack of drive and motivation. I've hiked with the guy, and I don't think he's lazy at all. He just doesn't value money, and his view on life is that he's going to teach school, and do whatever it takes to make his lifestyle match his income, rather than the other way around. He told me that this is a cultural thing in New Zealand. Nobody pressures you to achieve a certain level of material success. The view is that if you are self-sufficient, then you've arrived. Nobody judges you for not being a "good provider." Me, as an American, I envy this. I have tremendous pressure from my extended family to make money, so I do. (Plus, in this country, you can't have a decent school system and/or health insurance unless you have a good job)
- cryoshon 13y ago
  There's also the related phenomenon that in the US, the rich are in the spotlight of society and the poor are decidedly disliked.
  - grecy 13y ago
    ...and those who realize they have enough ignore the rich and are out living how they want to be (camping, hiking, taking photos, etc.)
    - thathonkey 13y ago
      I think what you're describing is generally just known as "the middle class"
    - HarryHirsch 13y ago
      and those who realize they have enough ignore the rich If you only could. The problem is that in the US a great portion of taxes are locally raised and spent, and the way of dealing with poverty is to price the poor out of areas where they aren't wanted. To get access to halfway decent schools you need to move to the suburbs, and what's available there in housing is hugely outsized. You cannot save on heating, cooling, cleaning and enclosed space, nevermind the commute, because that economic option does not exist. So you bite the bullet with everyone else and you cannot choose not to play the game.
Goosey 13y ago
I had not heard of Betteridge's Law, so I had to look it up [0]. Given I only just became aware of it due to your comment (thank you, by the way: good comment) it feels strange to be pedantic about it, but the question in the headline is not a yes/no question and therefore seems immune to Betteridge's Law. :) [0] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines
- thathonkey 13y ago
  I went through the same exercise and came to the conclusion that the commenter just name-dropped Betteridge to sound smart. (At least that is what I would have done.)
- TallGuyShort 13y ago
  Right - Betteridge's Law does not apply very well. My point was more that an article that presents an open question is interesting food for thought - as opposed to articles devoid of substance that seek to answer everything in their headline. Now that you know the term, look in the comments every time you see a '?' on the front page, and you'll see the law mentioned. It is not a claim to be smart, as the peer claims, it is an indication that I spend too much time on HN.
ThomPete 13y ago
Reminds me of the nordic countries. Edit: Huh? Why the down vote?
- toddan 13y ago
  because the nordic countries has showed being capable of excelebt inovation and entreprenourahip
  - ThomPete 13y ago
    In what sense? The nordic countries are known for high taxes, excellent social welfare benefits, free healthcare, free education, low crime, low corruption, high quality of life and so on. Sure they have some big companies but with a few exceptions they aren't build on innovation nor entrepreneurship. Most large companies in the nordic countries are quite old and the new ones that start there quickly move to the US, England or Asia if they want to scale. Pretty much sounds like NZ.
- cowsandmilk 13y ago
  Because you are so off-base The point of the post is that NZL has 20% below OECD average GDP per capita, when it would be predicted for them to be 20% above. The key figure is Figure 3 from http://www.productivity.govt.nz/sites/default/files/international-perspective-working-paper.pdf http://www.productivity.govt.nz/sites/default/files/internat... In that, you can see NZL at the far bottom right. On the other hand, Norway, Sweden, and Finland are all above the line, meaning they have higher GDP per capita than predicted. The only nordic country below the line is Denmark, and they are barely below the line. So, you are saying that the nordic countries are similar, but the very paper this blog post is based on shows they are not at all economically similar.
  - ThomPete 13y ago
    I was saying that NZ sounds like the Nordic countries. With that I meant the way it's structured.
  - CamperBob2 13y ago
EdwardDiego 13y ago
> I saw huge numbers of people just living on welfare because they could Where were you living? The hardcore 'bludgers' are a minority of our welfare claimants. Your portrayal of NZ strikes me as lopsided, considering we're working longer and longer hours : http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/7841749/No-rest-for-the-wicked http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/7841749/No-rest-for-th...

atmosx 13y ago

So what you're saying basically is that although the avg income is low, the quality of life is generally (way?) higher than the OECD?

grecy 13y ago
I would say yes, from my experience. I genuinely think it's time for an overhaul of how we rate standard of living. Consumption is not a good measure, and it's too closely tied to "more money means better"
monochr 13y ago
Not necessarily higher but at least equal to the best. According to its HDI[1] New Zealand is ranked 6th, bellow the USA but above Japan, Switzerland and South Korea. This is similar to the way that European countries seem to lose out to the US in wages yet when you take into account the time spend on holidays and lack of overtime you see that the gap essentially disappears. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index
TallGuyShort 13y ago
Right. I used to criticize New Zealand a lot because it doesn't jive with my mind's ideas of how government should work, until a friend pointed out how much New Zealand was #1 in many areas that are considered signs of an ideal society. Makes me question my ideas :)

JPKab 13y ago

A good friend of mine studied abroad in Australia, and then met and moved in with a Kiwi and then lived in New Zealand with him for a while. He has now moved to the US with her. Her brother is a good friend of mine, and is incredibly irritated with his lack of drive and motivation. I've hiked with the guy, and I don't think he's lazy at all. He just doesn't value money, and his view on life is that he's going to teach school, and do whatever it takes to make his lifestyle match his income, rather than the other way around. He told me that this is a cultural thing in New Zealand. Nobody pressures you to achieve a certain level of material success. The view is that if you are self-sufficient, then you've arrived. Nobody judges you for not being a "good provider." Me, as an American, I envy this. I have tremendous pressure from my extended family to make money, so I do. (Plus, in this country, you can't have a decent school system and/or health insurance unless you have a good job)

cryoshon 13y ago
There's also the related phenomenon that in the US, the rich are in the spotlight of society and the poor are decidedly disliked.
- grecy 13y ago
  ...and those who realize they have enough ignore the rich and are out living how they want to be (camping, hiking, taking photos, etc.)
  - thathonkey 13y ago
    I think what you're describing is generally just known as "the middle class"
  - HarryHirsch 13y ago
    and those who realize they have enough ignore the rich If you only could. The problem is that in the US a great portion of taxes are locally raised and spent, and the way of dealing with poverty is to price the poor out of areas where they aren't wanted. To get access to halfway decent schools you need to move to the suburbs, and what's available there in housing is hugely outsized. You cannot save on heating, cooling, cleaning and enclosed space, nevermind the commute, because that economic option does not exist. So you bite the bullet with everyone else and you cannot choose not to play the game.

Goosey 13y ago

I had not heard of Betteridge's Law, so I had to look it up [0]. Given I only just became aware of it due to your comment (thank you, by the way: good comment) it feels strange to be pedantic about it, but the question in the headline is not a yes/no question and therefore seems immune to Betteridge's Law. :) [0] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines

thathonkey 13y ago
I went through the same exercise and came to the conclusion that the commenter just name-dropped Betteridge to sound smart. (At least that is what I would have done.)
TallGuyShort 13y ago
Right - Betteridge's Law does not apply very well. My point was more that an article that presents an open question is interesting food for thought - as opposed to articles devoid of substance that seek to answer everything in their headline. Now that you know the term, look in the comments every time you see a '?' on the front page, and you'll see the law mentioned. It is not a claim to be smart, as the peer claims, it is an indication that I spend too much time on HN.

ThomPete 13y ago

Reminds me of the nordic countries. Edit: Huh? Why the down vote?

toddan 13y ago
because the nordic countries has showed being capable of excelebt inovation and entreprenourahip
- ThomPete 13y ago
  In what sense? The nordic countries are known for high taxes, excellent social welfare benefits, free healthcare, free education, low crime, low corruption, high quality of life and so on. Sure they have some big companies but with a few exceptions they aren't build on innovation nor entrepreneurship. Most large companies in the nordic countries are quite old and the new ones that start there quickly move to the US, England or Asia if they want to scale. Pretty much sounds like NZ.
cowsandmilk 13y ago
Because you are so off-base The point of the post is that NZL has 20% below OECD average GDP per capita, when it would be predicted for them to be 20% above. The key figure is Figure 3 from http://www.productivity.govt.nz/sites/default/files/international-perspective-working-paper.pdf http://www.productivity.govt.nz/sites/default/files/internat... In that, you can see NZL at the far bottom right. On the other hand, Norway, Sweden, and Finland are all above the line, meaning they have higher GDP per capita than predicted. The only nordic country below the line is Denmark, and they are barely below the line. So, you are saying that the nordic countries are similar, but the very paper this blog post is based on shows they are not at all economically similar.
- ThomPete 13y ago
  I was saying that NZ sounds like the Nordic countries. With that I meant the way it's structured.
- CamperBob2 13y ago

EdwardDiego 13y ago

> I saw huge numbers of people just living on welfare because they could Where were you living? The hardcore 'bludgers' are a minority of our welfare claimants. Your portrayal of NZ strikes me as lopsided, considering we're working longer and longer hours : http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/7841749/No-rest-for-the-wicked http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/7841749/No-rest-for-th...