Norway shows where to invest

[Bigjohn69]

https://qz.com/1217026/apple-and-micros ... n-in-2017/

So it is clear Norway takes money from its oil and invests in tech companies to see the huge returns . Lesson there is do not invest in oil but invest in tech .

Norway says it will delete more oil company investments in the future so expect those investments around the world to lose more money as that is what happened the last time Norway did the same .

It is a fools game to invest in oil or gas as they have a limited future compared to tech

[CapitalB]

The scandinavian union in general has been making excellent choices in regards to how their countries have been treating their economies and the wealthy people that contribute to them. Not just excellent in my opinion, objectively excellent as evidenced by any form of measuring a country's success.

[christopher]

This doesn't look that good to me
/www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_countries_result.jsp?country1=Canada&country2=Norway
Indices Difference Info

Consumer Prices in Norway are 61.42% higher than in Canada
Consumer Prices Including Rent in Norway are 54.31% higher than in Canada
Rent Prices in Norway are 36.65% higher than in Canada
Restaurant Prices in Norway are 86.43% higher than in Canada
Groceries Prices in Norway are 53.71% higher than in Canada
Local Purchasing Power in Norway is 9.49% lower than in Canada

[CapitalB]

Norwegians are also the highest paid people on the planet which contributes significantly to balancing that. They also are the happiest people on the planet, have better healthcare, less crime, and probably the lowest recidivism rates in the developed world. They are by any measure one of the most successful countries on the planet.

http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/Norway Side by side comparison.

[The Green Barbarian]

Norwegians are also the highest paid people on the planet which contributes significantly to balancing that. They also are the happiest people on the planet, have better healthcare, less crime, and probably the lowest recidivism rates in the developed world. They are by any measure one of the most successful countries on the planet.
.

According to several people I know who have tried to work with companies in Norway, they are becoming quite rapidly the laziest country on the planet. They are a great example of socialism gone insane, without the corruption of Venezuela. When you take away all motivation to work and hook everyone on the morphine of the teat of the nanny-state, you slowly but surely die. Quoting insanely stupid made up statistics that measure "happiness" don't change that. How do you measure "happiness" exactly? This is just so dumb.

Also:

Norway's rape rate:
Ranked 15th. 11 times more than Canada

Why are Norwegians raping each other so much more than Canadians?

[Even Steven]

Why are Norwegians raping each other so much more than Canadians?

Because in Norway the definition of rape is drastically different from that of Canada. They include a lot of things in it that doesn't count as rape here. So, their stats look much worse.

[Snman]

Norwegians are also the highest paid people on the planet which contributes significantly to balancing that. They also are the happiest people on the planet, have better healthcare, less crime, and probably the lowest recidivism rates in the developed world. They are by any measure one of the most successful countries on the planet.
.

According to several people I know who have tried to work with companies in Norway, they are becoming quite rapidly the laziest country on the planet. They are a great example of socialism gone insane, without the corruption of Venezuela. When you take away all motivation to work and hook everyone on the morphine of the teat of the nanny-state, you slowly but surely die. Quoting insanely stupid made up statistics that measure "happiness" don't change that. How do you measure "happiness" exactly? This is just so dumb.

Also:

Norway's rape rate:
Ranked 15th. 11 times more than Canada

Why are Norwegians raping each other so much more than Canadians?

Probably gay rape. Then again, I could be wrong.

[The Green Barbarian]

So that is basically how it works. The number of reported rapes is high in Sweden because Swedish women faithfully report when they are raped, rather than assuming that it was their fault. It is lower in Norway and Denmark because we have less immigrants from rape cultures and the natives are more wary around them. Even so, the overwhelming majority of reported rapes here in Norway are by foreigners from non-Nordic cultures.

https://www.quora.com/Why-are-there-hig ... -the-world

[Omnitheo]

Scandinavia uses different definitions of rape from other countries, meaning things not considered rape here, would be in sweden. Additionally scandinavians are more likely to report it, where here, even victims are often shamed for allowed it to occur. And thirdly, in sweden, each instance of the rape is recorded, meaning that a husband who rapes his wife every night would be 365 separate rape cases.

lots of reasons for difference of statistics, but I'm not sure why we're on this subject in the first place. This is about investments in Norway. The same is actually true of many oil dependent economies, which understand that it is not a sustainable revenue generator, and are looking to invest the money elsewhere. Even Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, and other wealthy petrostates have sunk large amounts of money into other projects so that they can diversify the economy. This includes Tourism in Dubai, and in Saudi Arabia's case, even constructing a whole new high tech city to serve as a hub of knowledge and innovation. All things that major oil economies around the world have done to prepare themselves for the future, which Alberta foolishly ignored under the previous government.

[The Green Barbarian]

*removed*

[d0nb]

Norway is a beautiful but inhospitable land where the days of ‘success’ are numbered in barrels of oil - the long-term prospects are not great.

Global investment markets have risen as oil-rich countries and retirement funds have enjoyed a surfeit of cash, but when the oil flow decreases and aging populations force pension funds to switch from net buying to selling, countries, funds and individuals will find it hard to recoup their investments from falling markets. Meanwhile, most of us can look forward to ever-higher contributions to our “fully-funded” pension plans as governments attempt to delay the inevitable. Kind of a downer, huh?

Of course, if ’progressives’ are allowed to take control, they can repeal inconvenient little things like the law of supply and demand and everything will be right as rain.

[Dawggss]

Norway is a beautiful but inhospitable land where the days of ‘success’ are numbered in barrels of oil - the long-term prospects are not great.

Global investment markets have risen as oil-rich countries and retirement funds have enjoyed a surfeit of cash, but when the oil flow decreases and aging populations force pension funds to switch from net buying to selling, countries, funds and individuals will find it hard to recoup their investments from falling markets. Meanwhile, most of us can look forward to ever-higher contributions to our “fully-funded” pension plans as governments attempt to delay the inevitable. Kind of a downer, huh?

Of course, if ’progressives’ are allowed to take control, they can repeal inconvenient little things like the law of supply and demand and everything will be right as rain.

That’s the point of a fund, and investment in education and economic diversification.
Rather than gloom and doom everything being done to advance a population’s outlook - consider the self-serving approach you are advocating. Each to his own and cut taxes so I have more can be considered shortsighted, except for those in the minority that are advantaged.
Inheritance and family merger is not an option for most. Those models of ‘supply and demand’ are the venue of the top tier.

Of course ‘oil success’ is not infinite. That’s exactly why Norway is such an interesting exception to examine.
Imagine if Alberta, who actually initiated their Heritage Trust Fund more than a decade earlier, had the foresight to act and invest as Norway! Go ahead - research a comparison between the 2 - I will wait. Shocking results and wasted opportunity will strike you quickly. Alberta could have done so much ...
But No - the choice seems to be to maintain the corporate welfare system.

Reduce taxes, rollback wages of nurses and teachers, build boondoggles, ‘lose track’ of goals, fund insider ventures, neglect infrastructure, announce / ignore / reannounce / ignore / repeat social spending, and so on ... leadership for the benefit of population or not? You tell me!
Norway is not Utopia - but they do have strict anti-corruption laws, an accepted concept that taxes are not a penalty but a shared investment in society wellbeing and benefits, and if I dare suggest, a far more involved, educated, tolerant society than some of the Western corporate societies extolled here.

I seriously doubt ‘progressives’ would repeal supply and demand - however they might be open minded enough to understand, and address the flaws and drawbacks of slavish acceptance.
Hence the concept of ‘Progress’.

[d0nb]

That’s the point of a fund, and investment in education and economic diversification.
Rather than gloom and doom everything being done to advance a population’s outlook - consider the self-serving approach you are advocating. Each to his own and cut taxes so I have more can be considered shortsighted, except for those in the minority that are advantaged.
Inheritance and family merger is not an option for most. Those models of ‘supply and demand’ are the venue of the top tier.

I wasn’t really advocating anything. I simply have doubts about the long term viability of investment schemes. Fully-funded today can turn into pennies on the dollar tomorrow - it happens when there are more sellers than buyers.

One alternative to rampant exploitation would be to slow the rate of resource extraction to a manageable level. Oil left in the ground just might turn out to be the best form of investment.

Of course ‘oil success’ is not infinite. That’s exactly why Norway is such an interesting exception to examine.
Imagine if Alberta, who actually initiated their Heritage Trust Fund more than a decade earlier, had the foresight to act and invest as Norway! Go ahead - research a comparison between the 2 - I will wait. Shocking results and wasted opportunity will strike you quickly. Alberta could have done so much ...
But No - the choice seems to be to maintain the corporate welfare system.

Useful comparisons between an independent coastal country and a land-locked quasi-colony of Canada are few. But it’s safe to say that if Norway had no option other than to find a way to transport its oil by pipeline or rail through BC or the US while being forced to subsidize Ottawa’s profligate spending habits, they might be in even worse shape than Alberta. Unlike Norway, Alberta’s ability to fund education and social objectives is hampered by an inability to obtain full market value for its oil.

Pipeline shortage to cost the economy $15.6 billion this year: report http://business.financialpost.com/commo ... scotiabank

Reduce taxes, rollback wages of nurses and teachers, build boondoggles, ‘lose track’ of goals, fund insider ventures, neglect infrastructure, announce / ignore / reannounce / ignore / repeat social spending, and so on ... leadership for the benefit of population or not? You tell me!
Norway is not Utopia - but they do have strict anti-corruption laws, an accepted concept that taxes are not a penalty but a shared investment in society wellbeing and benefits, and if I dare suggest, a far more involved, educated, tolerant society than some of the Western corporate societies extolled here.

I doubt that many would assume the task of defending the spending choices made by Alberta’s politicians. And you are right to say that Norway is no utopia, but at least Norwegians don’t have to bear the additional burden of a federal government that saps their wealth while subverting their economic interests with an additional layer of bureaucratic incompetence and indifference.

I seriously doubt ‘progressives’ would repeal supply and demand - however they might be open minded enough to understand, and address the flaws and drawbacks of slavish acceptance.
Hence the concept of ‘Progress’.

I have no doubt that they would if they could. They just keep running out of other peoples' money to spend – a total downer for everyone.

[bob vernon]

When all else fails, try sexual innuendo.

[d0nb]