And the most competitive economy in the world is....
 

Finland.

The United States is number two. All the other Scandinavian countries are in the top ten also, despite being both socialist and high-tax countries. Because, they're "in the forefront of technological innovation."

The link, and the article:
http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=2ede517b108de734

But socialism is "teh evil!!1" :D

seriously, I dont know how many of you look in the europe forum but there is a thread called " The "5 things you didn't know about my country" thread!" and alpha postetd this about finnland:

Go Iceland!!!

I'm curious--what has Finland come up with in the world of technology?

They're all over telecom and wireless, software in general, industrial machinery (especially for wood processing), alternative energy, and a bunch of other stuff. Nokia is a Finnish country, for example. Finland one of the most wired countries in the world, for both data and mobile communications. I can't remember exactly, but some vast number of Finns don't even bother with landlines anymore. And there's a ton of other stuff, too. If you're really interested, here's a bloody exhaustive website on the matter:

http://www.hightechfinland.com/2004/general.html

Surprises the hell out of me... just goes to show what I know about Finland. :/

we've had a number of Finnish representatives here on the TFP...

Linus Torvalds, the man who started Linux is from Finland :cool:

According to the CIA World Fact Book they've got a 100% literacy rate, pretty impressive. Lots of other neat stuff on that site.

Lets not forget their bitchin' viking heratige.

Thanks for the ammunition on how Scand.'s innovativness isn't crippled because everyone gets healthcare.

Here's a better article on the subject, from the International Herald Tribune. Sounds like the Scandinavian countries have an interesting approach: they tax individuals up the wazoo, but they don't tax businesses and business income (or stocks) much. And they invest a lot in an educated workforce:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2004/10/...s/compete.html

Scandinavian economies thrive despite high taxes

By Elizabeth Becker The New York Times

Thursday, October 14, 2004
WASHINGTON Forget the stereotypes about Scandinavian socialism and how its high taxes and expensive public health care system are destroying private enterprise.
.
It turns out nothing could be further from the truth.
.
The Nordic countries have bested some of the world's hottest economies and dominate the top ranks of the list of most competitive economies in the world in a new ranking of the best places to do business.
.
In the World Economic Forum's annual global competitiveness rankings released Wednesday, Finland retained its hold at the top of the world's economies, with Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland winning the third, fifth, sixth and 10th spots respectively.
.
In the World Bank's Doing Business Report, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland were ranked in the top as well.
.
Less surprising was that the United States was ranked No. 2 on both lists.
.
So why are Denmark and Finland absent when talk turns to development success stories or good financial bets?
.
"It's that old myth that social protection requires more business regulations and hurts business," said Caralee McLeish, a co-author of the World Bank survey. "In fact, we found that social protection is good for business, it takes the burden off of businesses for health care costs and ensures a well-trained and educated work force."
.
The World Economic Forum came up with the same answer, although it was couched in economic terms.
.
"The Nordic countries are characterized by excellent macroeconomic management over all," said Augusto Lopez-Claros, director of the global competitiveness program of the World Economic Forum. "They are all running budget surpluses, they have extremely low levels of corruption, with their firms operating in a legal environment in which there is widespread respect for contracts and the rule of law, and their private sectors are on the forefront of technological innovation."
.
Strong, honest, transparent public institutions fits with the clichés about the Nordic countries. But one of the keys to the business success is their supposed Achilles' heel: taxes.
.
The governments' philosophy is to leave businesses alone, taxing them at some of the lowest levels in the world so they are competitive and efficient. They then levy the high taxes on personal incomes to pay for those social services that underwrite their labor force, according to Simeon Djankov, the co-author of the World Bank study.
.
"You have to look behind the numbers, ignore the Nordic reputation for tax burdens and you'll see they have established a system that does not distort production, that gives people an incentive to invest in businesses and in stocks because the taxes are so low," he said.
.
Asian countries round out the ranks of success stories in the competitive line-up.
.
Taiwan, Singapore and Japan were in the top 10, a particular jump for Japan which just three years ago was ranked 21st in the world. China dropped to 46 from 44 on the list.
.
These Asian countries at the top of the list share some of the same attributes as the Nordic countries. They, too, place few obstacles for business enterprises and offer strong protection of property rights. They also place a high premium on education.
.
Jukka Valtasaari, Finland's ambassador to Washington, said that his country's 140-year old emphasis on education, promising the same opportunity regardless of wealth or geography, underpins much of his country's success. It is a big reason why Finland has done so well in research and development, especially in telecommunications.
.
"The ultimate economic statement we can make is to say we tap all of our talent," Valtasaari said.

I think alot of people are reading this without knowing what a competitive market is. To have a "perfectly competitive market" you must have what economists call "pure competition".

Pure Competition:

1) Many buyers and sellers in the market.
a) No one buyer or seller, or small groups of market participants can significantly influence/change the market.
b) All buyers and sellers have the option of trading with several others, in an organized or structured market.

2) Homogeneous product.
a) Firms in the market offer a uniform good or service for sale, standardized in terms of specific market grades or classes. Example: Grains or livestock.
b) Within this specific grade or class, buyers do not discriminate among sellers.

3) Freedom of entry or Exit.
a) Any new firm can enter the market, and any firm already in the market can exit the market without any prohibitions.
b) There are no barriers to entry or exit.
c) Entry barriers include patents, licensing requirements, entry quotas, extremely high capital requirements, or loyalties to the brands of other firms.
d) Exit barriers include approval from a government agency or commission for exiting the business.
e) Individual agricultural farms do not have entry or exit barriers, but many agribusiness industries do have (often substantial) barriers to enter the market.

4) Perfect information.
a) All buyers and sellers at all times know the prices of all other buyers and sellers.
b) Buyers and sellers are aware of the alternatives, especially the prices charged by many others in the market.

When the article says they are the most "competitive" it means their economy within itself is very competitive. Don't think for a second they come anywhere close to the U.S.A. in terms of GDP.

--------------

That being said, after reading the quoted article, I am very impressed. This seems to be a country ran by people that understand economic theory, quite unlike the American government.

I don't think anyone did. Or if they did think that, they didn't understand the article as you say.

Ireland is another good example. It actually produces more software than the US and its economy has historically (over the past 10 years) been more healthy than the American one. But it's no near as big.


Mr Mephisto

Long live Linus!! (and his blankie too) ;)

That sounds like a great place to live, if you don't mind freezing your ass off most of the year!

Seriously though, Finland is the size of Montana with only 5 million and some change people. I would think any country that size should be doing pretty well simply due to logistics. Vast countries like the US, Russia, Canada- they have to spend a lot of money just on infrastructure and shit. I just think a smaller scale country can probably accomplish things a little easier and quicker.

But obviously they all don't so I'm not saying this to detract from their props. The Finnish know how to carry out a plan and make things work. That's completely awesome and I wish the US would start acting that way!

I always say I'm moving to New Zealand if Bush gets re-elected here... maybe I'll have to look into moving to Finland instead!

If you combined all the non-oil exports from the Arab members of OPEC, it would be less than that of Finland.

Go Fins!