Norse

3 ms·

1.
by Norse 16y ago
I am saying that all the advantages go to the country with the biggest size. Economics of size. Bigger market. One language. One set of regulations. There is far better economic opportunity in the larger country, whn you just look at the si
2.
by Norse 16y ago
The fact that Norway, followed by Denmark, has the highest rate of strtups in the world, according to the article, would seem to argue against the "one swallow" theory, and indicate full summer. And it is not reasonable to assume that his c
3.
by Norse 16y ago
It is possible for countries to be both more socialist and capitalist than the USA. If there is a lesson to be had from Scandianvia it is that cpaitalist is a way of earning money, and socialist is a way of spending it. Both dials can be tu
4.
by Norse 16y ago
I read the size argument a lot. But I never hear it. It crops up on the internet a lot, but never in the serious debate. You always compare countries. Iceland to Austria to Italy to Britain to Germany to Japan. That is a lot of what people
5.
by Norse 16y ago
Germany and Switzerland have insurance-based UHC systems. More market-oriented, and somewhat more expensive than the other European systems. In fact Switzerlands system is very expensive indeed, running at almost 66% of the USAs costs per h
6.
by Norse 16y ago
Didn't the article mention that Denmark was number 2 in startups after Norway? So not very different at all. And I suspect Finland is quite up there too. Along with the fact that Norway saves all its oil in a fund for a rainy day, I don't t
7.
by Norse 16y ago
Yet the rates of startups are higher in Norway. And "it is more expensive o fail"? With no risk of medical bankrupcy, guaranteed health care, free university for the kids, a generous safety net, pensions etc...how can it possibly be more di
8.
by Norse 16y ago
Because the risks are reduced far more than the rewards.
9.
by Norse 16y ago
Doctors are an extremly well-educated, mobile workforce. Few chose to leave the country, there are more coming in. There is more happiness in being well-off in a rich country, than being rich in a poor or troubled one. Especially if you hav
10.
by Norse 16y ago
5. You can opt out, and live in the wilderness, not being a part of the economic system, and paying no taxes. 6. You can stop working, and live on the mimimum amount you get off other peoples taxes. 7. You can move to a country with lower t
11.
by Norse 16y ago
Norway saves the oil income in an oil fund. The rest of Scandinavia gets the same results with no oil.
12.
by Norse 16y ago
Norway saves all it oil in a sovereign wealth fund. The only difference "no oil" would make would be a less stuffed bank account. Much like the case is with Sweden, Denmark, Finland...who run the same system without oil, and gets similar re
13.
by Norse 16y ago
If you're in it for the money, you won't succeed. That is for certain. If money motivates you, become a day trader, hedge fund manager, bank executive. Work with money. At the kind of shear stress you get at these levels, you need the edge
14.
by Norse 16y ago
Did you miss the bit of the article where it wsas pointed out that those countries have the highest number of startups in the world? Not "less on average" but "the most".