How much do you use each week? Click here nerds.

[PH]

How much do you use each week? Click here nerds.

[PH]

How much do you use each week? Click here nerds.

[genocidal]

Alright, I know this effort is probably futile, given that we're talking about RATTY... here, but I'm going to do it anyway.

Per capita GDP is a poor indicator of how economies compare to one another. The reason is obvious and has been stated numerous times in this thread. Countries like Norway and Lebanon with a small population obviously are skewed towards. America has 280 million plus people - so per capita averages are not a very good way to determining which economy or standard of living is better - though it is a factor in judging it. Given that the difference is negligible between USA and Norway, you can look to other indicators.

One way to look at it is the country's GDP. The simple fact that Norway's entire GDP is less than our defense budget proves GDP might not be the best way either to judge how these economies compare. So we look elsewhere yet again.

Growth rate, also not so good of an indicator given the significant advancement of the US's economy over Norway. Norway is largely dependent on the export of oil and other minerals while US's economy is extremely diversified. The growth rate will naturally be higher for Norway since the oil market is currently favourable. 3.8% is Norway's growth and 3.5% is USA's - the difference is, again, negligible but but USA definitely has a more steady rate of growth than Norway's which is based much on speculation of a few prodcuts.

Unemployment rates: 4.1 in Norway and 5.1 percent in USA. Pretty negligible difference here again, mostly accounted for the vast difference in population between these countries. (I haven't stated it yet but Norway doesn't even have 5 million people while USA has almost 300 million - that is a giant difference).

A good way to determine standard of living is advancement of economy. But geno, how do you know if an economy is more advanced than another? By looking at how diversified its sectors are, silly! The bottom-most countries are largely agriculturally based. As they advance, they develop industry. As they develop more, they diversify their industrial sector. Even further, as in the case of USA and parts of western Europe, the services sector of the economy grows and industry begins to be exported to other countries - in USA's case usually to Mexico, Taiwan, China, or Thailand (think about the guys who make T-shirts, basic electronics, plastic goods, etc).

So, let's compare Norway's sectors to USA's. Norway's sectors are divided as such:
agriculture: 2.2%
industry: 37.2%
services: 60.6% (2005 est.)
while USA's is this:
agriculture: 1%
industry: 20.7%
services: 78.3% (2005 est.)

From this, it's evident that the USA is further from agricultural and industry based economy and moved on to a service economy. Norway has a large service economy but not any where near as large as USA's (again, account for population). Industry makes up nearly twice the percetage of the economy in Norway as it does in USA. That means that Norway is still working on diversifying their economy.

Oil makes up one third of Norway's exports (which is the only real place it makes its money because 5 million is not enough people to have the level of consumption that USA does). So, pretty much Norway is fucked if the oil market gets messed up with things like solar power or other alternate fuel sources. The USA, despite being the most diverse economy, has the poplution base to consume every single thing made in America (which is why we don't need to export really at all).

In conclusion, enjoy life in the oil refinery RAT man.

EDIT: Oh yeah, I'll cite my shit so RATTY... can't just say, "I don't have no what talking about your information all just numbers only in my head."

Norway: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/...s/no.html#Econ
USA: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/...k/geos/us.html

All the information there is submitted by the country.

[Vykromond]

How much do you use each week? Click here nerds.

[Galleleo]

You can't really say that the level of agriculture means that much, I don't have exact numbers, but in the netherlands we still have alot of agriculture, but we are also very developed in the rest of our sectors. We have the largest haven/port/dock whatever you wanna call it, in Europe. We have ONE of the largest airports. But still agriculture is still done alot, and to I don't know, I am almost sure it's more then 1%.

[genocidal]

Did you read my post? 2.2% is Norway's and I didn't make any conjectures about that percantage. I was just giving background on how I judge economies. I was commenting on the services sector of the economy compared with industry.

[Galleleo]

But you also stated that the Bottom-most countries are largely agricultural based.

[genocidal]

And they are. The Netherlands is not largely agricultural based. I'm talking about mostly African and some Asian and South American countries.

[Galleleo]

ok, then I understand you.

[RATTY...]

Alright, I know this effort is probably futile, given that we're talking about RATTY... here, but I'm going to do it anyway.

Per capita GDP is a poor indicator of how economies compare to one another. The reason is obvious and has been stated numerous times in this thread. Countries like Norway and Lebanon with a small population obviously are skewed towards. America has 280 million plus people - so per capita averages are not a very good way to determining which economy or standard of living is better - though it is a factor in judging it. Given that the difference is negligible between USA and Norway, you can look to other indicators.

One way to look at it is the country's GDP. The simple fact that Norway's entire GDP is less than our defense budget proves GDP might not be the best way either to judge how these economies compare. So we look elsewhere yet again.

Growth rate, also not so good of an indicator given the significant advancement of the US's economy over Norway. Norway is largely dependent on the export of oil and other minerals while US's economy is extremely diversified. The growth rate will naturally be higher for Norway since the oil market is currently favourable. 3.8% is Norway's growth and 3.5% is USA's - the difference is, again, negligible but but USA definitely has a more steady rate of growth than Norway's which is based much on speculation of a few prodcuts.

Unemployment rates: 4.1 in Norway and 5.1 percent in USA. Pretty negligible difference here again, mostly accounted for the vast difference in population between these countries. (I haven't stated it yet but Norway doesn't even have 5 million people while USA has almost 300 million - that is a giant difference).

A good way to determine standard of living is advancement of economy. But geno, how do you know if an economy is more advanced than another? By looking at how diversified its sectors are, silly! The bottom-most countries are largely agriculturally based. As they advance, they develop industry. As they develop more, they diversify their industrial sector. Even further, as in the case of USA and parts of western Europe, the services sector of the economy grows and industry begins to be exported to other countries - in USA's case usually to Mexico, Taiwan, China, or Thailand (think about the guys who make T-shirts, basic electronics, plastic goods, etc).

So, let's compare Norway's sectors to USA's. Norway's sectors are divided as such:
agriculture: 2.2%
industry: 37.2%
services: 60.6% (2005 est.)
while USA's is this:
agriculture: 1%
industry: 20.7%
services: 78.3% (2005 est.)

From this, it's evident that the USA is further from agricultural and industry based economy and moved on to a service economy. Norway has a large service economy but not any where near as large as USA's (again, account for population). Industry makes up nearly twice the percetage of the economy in Norway as it does in USA. That means that Norway is still working on diversifying their economy.

Oil makes up one third of Norway's exports (which is the only real place it makes its money because 5 million is not enough people to have the level of consumption that USA does). So, pretty much Norway is fucked if the oil market gets messed up with things like solar power or other alternate fuel sources. The USA, despite being the most diverse economy, has the poplution base to consume every single thing made in America (which is why we don't need to export really at all).

In conclusion, enjoy life in the oil refinery RAT man.

EDIT: Oh yeah, I'll cite my shit so RATTY... can't just say, "I don't have no what talking about your information all just numbers only in my head."

Norway: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/...s/no.html#Econ
USA: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/...k/geos/us.html

All the information there is submitted by the country.

Good job on repetating what I already said some weeks ago.

Can you find a post from me in this thread where it says that Norway is a gigant industrial nation?

I've already said that Norway is dependent on the oil and fish.

The oil isn't a problem, they've found a new place, but needs new technology, and we happen to be the ones who have the most advanced technology at this area.

Not only that, they found 3 times the amount of extractable (translated from norwegian) coal in the whole world under a place

http://www.adressa.no/nyheter/okonomi/article600184.ece

It's gonna last long after I'm dead, and the industry will grow strong by then.

The future is bright.

Try to post something new next time, ok?

EDIT: Another reason why Norway is small, 2/3 of the population died of the plague in 1349.

[genocidal]

The future is bright.

Good for your useless country, the point was we are better.

EDIT: Another reason why Norway is small, 2/3 of the population died of the plague in 1349.

Uh, I think it's possible to re-populate in over 650 years. Potato famines killed much of Europe (what America is populated from) and we still managed to squeeze out 300 million in 230 years. Your country just sucks at fucking as well as being rich.

[DoTheFandango]

We still made the light bulb, so fuck all y'all.

[RATTY...]

Good for your useless country, the point was we are better.

Actually, we are better. The moment theres no oil left, maybe you will be better, but that won't happen until far in the future.

[PH]

How much do you use each week? Click here nerds.

[Galleleo]

Maybe not.. with the whole Iran situation atm, it is very possible that Iran will cut off their oil supply to the rest of the world, wich means more pressure on other oil distributors and it has been said that atm, we are not ready for that, there won't be enough oil if Iran closes his borders for the oil export.