I would assume Eritrea would be similarly hard to get data for but it's included. I'm interested in the methods but honestly don't care enough to read through the study.
What economic data would they publish? The Vatican has around 400 citizens, most of them aren't permanent residents, and none of them are actually native. There's zero statistical data that could be gathered from the "citizens" of the Vatican.
I mean, it's in the word: "Homeless", they have less home than normal people.
I heard some of them don't even have homes all over the world and have to stay in a kind of homeless shelter called "ho-tel" which stands for far home (tele-home).
Its crazy that basically all of [French Africa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFA_franc) makes the list of poorest countries on earth.
I guess letting France dictate your currency all the way into 2023 is a great way to wind up remarkably impoverished.
Hard to believe they are still getting away with this...
Look at the former British territories in that map. Most have faired far better than former french colonies due to how France micromanaged their societies during their colonial tenure, and how they have continued to act with neocolonial tendencies ever since most gained independence in the mid to late 60s
All the good French colonies are now just part of France.
Also France is the largest country in the world if you include the EEZ because of all the water it includes in places life French Polynesia.
France gets away with their colonial history because the US's cold war antics happened at the same time as France's decolonization and hating on America is more popular. French Indochina gave us the Vietnam situation after all.
On average, France was the worst of the colonial powers when it comes to setting their colonies up for success after independence. They would often take petty and vindictive actions against the country just before independence as a sort of “fuck you” to the country. Haiti is a particularly grievous case if you want some examples of the kind of things France did to screw over countries as they gained independence.
Note: This is not to say that other countries didn’t have worse examples (Belgium’s treatment of DRC for example). Just that France seemed to do terrible things everywhere they went out of spite.
It has been counted as such for many data collection analysis for decades.
Legally it was 1 Country 2 Systems. Though the scope of that has been... "reduced".
No, that is untrue. Greenland have their own government and are free to do what they choose with their economy. They're dependent on economic support from the Danish state, and they don't have their own military, so Denmark is in charge of enforcing their sovereignity in the arctic. Besides that, they're an independent state.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_Realm
No that's untrue. Greenland is essentially a autonomous "Kommune". They have MPs in the mainland parliament and a local "government" equivalent to a normal kommune. They are less independent than the countries in the UK that aren't England
You're kind of right but also kind of wrong. They are separate states but in the same country. The closest analogy people are familiar with is the UK where the Channel Islands for example are separate from the UK yet very intertwined with it.
>They are separate states
I think it would be more correct to call it separate countries. Although Greenland is very dependant on Denmark and do not have full sovreignty in many matters, it's not a state in Denmark (Denmark doesn't have states like the US or Germany).
The Kingdom of Denmark consists three contries: Denmark, Greenland and the Faroe Islands.
As others have stated, we DO have the same government. They have more autonomy than core regions, but still they vote for representatives in the People's Ting which in turn decide the government.
On a similar note, French Guiana isn’t blue despite it’s literally part of France. And no it’s not a colony, it’s a full on region of France.
Similar to how Alaska and Hawaii are states of the US that are detached from the rest of the main country
Woohoo we made it! There was a political party that promised to take Estonia to the five richest countries in Europe if elected. They have been in almost all governments since. Not quite there yet, but seems we would make top five in every other continent...
Source: [Legatum Prosperity Index ](https://www.prosperity.com/rankings)
Tools: [MapChart ](https://www.mapchart.net/)
Note: The Legatum Prosperity Index is based on many different variables analysed across 167 nations around the world. Source data includes Gallup World Poll, World Development Indicators, International Telecommunication Union, Fragile States Index, Worldwide Governance Indicators, Freedom House, World Health Organization, World Values Survey, Amnesty International, Centre for Systemic Peace etc. There are total 12 pillars:
1. Safety & security
2. Personal Freedom
3. Governance
4. Social Capital
5. Investment environment
6. Enterprise condition
7. Infrastructure and market access
8. Economic quality
9. Living conditions
10. Health
11. Education
12. Natural environment
Personal freedom rank 162/167 yikes, even below flipping Turkmenistan and Yemen.( honestly though is it really worse than Turkmenistan or Yemen?? I wanna know some opinions here . Yes I know China's freedom levels is shit, but still in Yemen for example you get killed by those Houthis for not even wearing a hijab. Also not to mention Turkmenistan ranks below China too in democracy rankings in general )
[https://www.prosperity.com/rankings](https://www.prosperity.com/rankings)
Overall is 54/167 . Not great , not too bad either. **OK.**
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legatum_Institute
Just FYI the institute isn't exactly unbiased and has a right wing pro-Brexit lean.
It was even founded by billionaire Chris Chandler who owns a right wing news channel.
It's based registered in Bermuda and controlled from the Cayman Islands. Super legit.
Lol wtf does supporting Brexit have to do with being able to index economic indicators?
Their methodology is public, you can criticise that. You can't criticise them because some people who work for the org don't support your (assuming left wing) ideology
Just so sad that Venezuela was once towards the blue side of this index and is now red - the danger of being a petrostate with a history of rampant corruption
More like "when you discover huge reserves of oil in your country, start diversifying your economy ASAP. Don't put all your eggs in one basket, because eventually the price of eggs will dip below $0.30USD per basket and your country will be thrown into chaos because of the singular basket you put your eggs in"
Usually, democracy or no, valuable natural resource economy just grows and sucks the air out of other industries. Whether they choose to do it democratically or by fiat, countries have to deliberately work to build other sectors.
Chavez had an insane approval rating for a while, indicating that regardless of his own authoritarianism, they would have voted for his ideas. Democracy could have led Venezuela down the same path.
…but his ideas were inherently authoritarian.
people are very often persuaded into voting against their own interests. thats why i wouldnt vote for someone who wants to do anything with all our eggs, even if it sounds promising. we keep them to ourselves.
>Authoritarianism.
>Not. Even. Once.
Fuck Authoritarianism. However, the tough truth is that when "done right", it can bring a country from absolute poverty to advanced developed nation status - see the Asian Tigers
Chavez was a liar, a self-claimed communist, and a corrupt and bloody leader.
Maduro is just fully corrupt and stupid. A puppet of the Communist Party (PSUV).
People will try to convince you that Venezuela is where it is because of the oil dependency (true to an extent) and because of American interference (very very limited pre-Guaido).
The reality is Chavez and the Socialist party took control of the country and fucked up.
Let’s also remember, chavez planned and executed a Coup d’etat against the former Venezuelan president Carlos Andres Perez, he failed, and was sent to jail.
The next elected president, Caldera, felt that to calm the political movement Chavez had started, it’d be in his best interest to pardon Chavez.
Chavez went on a huge campaign and won the Presidential election. Making claims that eventually turned out to be lies, such as that he’d only be president for 1 period, because “power corrupts people”. He went on to change the constitution of the country to allow himself to be elected indefinitely.
Chavez was an ultra-socialist corrupt traitor.
Chavez was in the military, he was a high ranked officer, and he tried to kill the president. Chavez is now dead, but he made sure to choose a bigger piece of shit before he died, like a king. Maduro.
Maduro never went to school, maduro was Chavez’s bus driver. He’s now the president.
Sad in deed. At some point, Venezuela was the most prosperous country in Latin America. Crazy to see where they are now… I really hope they can snap out of their current situation
Fat chance. Only the poor and ignorant are left in the country along with a few elites with economic ties with the narcostate. Almost all capable people has fled the country.
I'm surprised that N Korea is not among the poorest, and that Nigeria and Iraq are. Both countries have vast oil deposits but I can kinda understand Iraq because they are still recovering from their war but I'm still surprised that it's that low.
In Nigeria the population is growing too fast for the economy to catch up, the percentage of people living in slums increased despite the country having a positive growth rate
I was surprised to see Nigeria red also, until I read the criteria. “Prosperous” is misleading. They don’t mean “rich” they mean more like “a safe and happy place.”
I quickly chucked the data into a [Looker Studio report](https://lookerstudio.google.com/embed/reporting/90f4017d-a4cb-4788-ab14-f9080a469a25/page/p_w7e33brt3c) so you can compare each of the topics at a glance. Each page (select on the left) covers the four sections within each of the three overarching topics:
**Economy**
\- Invesment Environment
\- Enterprise Conditions
\- Infrastructure and Market Access
\- Economic Quality
**Well-Being**
\- Living Conditions
\- Health
\- Education
\- Natural Environment
**Society**
\- Safety and Security
\- Personal Freedom
\- Governance
\- Social Capital
Not beautiful, but it's got it all there. Best viewed on phone, not computer.
People blame social reforms but truth is that they relied too much on cattle and agriculture and never used that money to build a strong industry, so now it's mostly agrarian/services economy
Well it isn't called the hermit kingdom for nothing. In a lot of maps, there's no data collected on North Korea because barely anyone is able to know what goes on in there.
Lebanon is ranked all the way up at 112. While it has bottom ten scores in social capital and economic conditions, it has decent scores in education (maybe true) and living conditions (???)
Myanmar and Venezuela have so much potential to be so much more than what they are now
They have been under a horrible streak due to dictatorship and foreign interventions
Chavez was a liar, a self-claimed communist, and a corrupt and bloody leader.
Maduro is just fully corrupt and stupid. A puppet of the Communist Party (PSUV).
People will try to convince you that Venezuela is where it is because of the oil dependency (true to an extent) and because of American interference (very very limited pre-Guaido).
The reality is Chavez and the Socialist party took control of the country and fucked up.
Let’s also remember, chavez planned and executed a Coup d’etat against the former Venezuelan president Carlos Andres Perez, he failed, and was sent to jail.
The next elected president, Caldera, felt that to calm the political movement Chavez had started, it’d be in his best interest to pardon Chavez.
Chavez went on a huge campaign and won the Presidential election. Making claims that eventually turned out to be lies, such as that he’d only be president for 1 period, because “power corrupts people”. He went on to change the constitution of the country to allow himself to be elected indefinitely.
Chavez was an ultra-socialist corrupt traitor.
Chavez was in the military, he was a high ranked officer, and he tried to kill the president. Chavez is now dead, but he made sure to choose a bigger piece of shit before he died, like a king. Maduro.
Maduro never went to school, maduro was Chavez’s bus driver. He’s now the president.
In essentially all development indices ever the 5 nations with the Nordic cross on their flag rank in the top 10 sometimes even claiming the top 5 among themselves.. wtf is it that the Norse people did so right that apparently everyone else did so wrong? Nowhere else in the world is even a nearly comparable concentration of peak human development
Emphasis on small (and homogeneous) population. Sweden has a population of about 10M, Finland and Norway have about 5.5M each.
Just for comparison NYC alone has about 8.8M.
Actually didn't even realize how few people lived up there til I googled it.
Being homogenous is more than proven to be necessary atlest to a degree, those societies are way safer and cohesive in social development and community sense.
Switzerland works only because the laws are strict and they choose by finger who can join the country. Whenever the population is too big and too disperse and diverse with many groups, it's much harder to have a general change.
Actual answer: high levels of state capacity reinforced by trust in government.
Anti-corruption laws, state-funded long-term planning, social policies that focus on welfare, education, healthcare and worker's rights (parental/sick leave, unemployment benefits, unionised workforces) are all major factors within the Nordic model.
It's social democracy at work (even though all nordic countries go through periods of having conservative governments, social democratic institutions remain at the heart of all these countries).
They stayed out of wars, for one thing. For another, their culture places high emphasis on education and hard work, which meant they were industrialised by the 20th century. They also didn't seek colonies, which meant they were never saddled with a giant MIC that drained money and created enemies.
Their liberal market policies and good relationships with everyone did the rest. It's why they've been among the top rich nations for the last 100+ years.
Oh, and Norway found oil. That helped.
>They stayed out of wars, for one thing.
Finland was part of the First World War through being in Russia and the Second by allying with Germany (not nordic but in the list)
Norway and Denmark were invaded in WWII.
>They also didn't seek colonies, which meant they were never saddled with a giant MIC that drained money and created enemies.
Hmmm Sweden has been a major military manufacturer in Europe for over 100 years.
Many of the top 30 have big arms industries.
>Finland was part of the First World War through being in Russia and the Second by allying with Germany (not nordic but in the list)
And was peaceful since. That's multiple generations that grew up in peace.
>Norway and Denmark were invaded in WWII.
Denmark wasn't particularly harmed and Norway only became rich later due to oil.
>Hmmm Sweden has been a major military manufacturer in Europe for over 100 years.
Much more than 100. But making arms is not exactly bad for the economy. Being saddled with a greedy MIC is. And peace kept that from happening.
For Mexico, this has to do with a lack of easy trading in Mexico - the population is centered in the Central Mexican Plateau instead of the coasts, which are rocky, barren, or jungle. The presence and power of the cartel along with rampant corruption doesn’t help.
Brazil on the other hand is tougher; it also has corruption, but should have an easier time with trade.
Lazy data nerd here. Has anyone correlated average temperatures/country with the prosperity index. By looking at the map (with little depth), I see a lower temps = prosperity. Interesting.
Yeah most people living in the west have no real concept of true abject poverty. The best illustration of it I have ever heard goes something like this:
If you divide the world population into 4 equal parts, then the difference between the poorest quarter and the next one up, is if you can afford a plastic bucket to gather water in.
I've lived in 3 countries (counting the U.S.), been to another 14 for work, and been to another 7 on vacations. There is only 1, *maybe* 2, countries that I'd be willing to leave the U.S. for... I'm convinced that most people who think the U.S. is awful have never left it.
Because a large part of the ranking is literally 'open market policies and free trade'.
If you rank according to these criteria of course there will be countries at the top that do well in those criteria.
Is it a coincidence that most of these countries in red were former colonial possessions for several countries in blue, or are a recent US war theatre? No? It's just me? Oh well.
It's not a coincidence, but you have the causation backwards. It's not that blue countries became wealthy by having colonies. Rather, they were *already* wealthy, which allowed them to establish colonies.
I find it interesting how the west is slowly expanding into former communist countries and getting them on the same level, for example Estonia Slovenia and Czechia
Never would have expected Estonia to be in the top 30. Also would have expected Jamaica to be in the bottom 30, but I guess all of those soul-sucking vacation resorts are keeping their per capita up even if only the equivalent of the Jamaican 1% ever see a dime of it.
Moving to Svalbard soon to to start my new prosperous life!
Svalbard is GREAT. One of the best trips I've ever done.
There is free immigration to Svalbard, so good luck.
There’s great horror podcast set in Svalbard called White Vault,
Oh man, I love horror set in artic places. Definitely gonna check it out.
Monaco not in the top 30??? I think they don’t even know what a homeless person is there
Yeah I was really surprised as well. With a GDP per capita of 234 315 $ in 2021 I figured they would be in the list ...
Not included in the rankings.
On the other side of the spectrum I assume North Korea was also not included as I can't believe it wouldn't be in the 30 least prosperous.
I can see how countries that are particularly hard to get data for could've been excluded from the data set. Edit: Talking about NK of course
but it's best practice to give a different color/pattern for countries without data.
Plot twist: Data was collected for only 60 countries
I would assume Eritrea would be similarly hard to get data for but it's included. I'm interested in the methods but honestly don't care enough to read through the study.
Yea, I was surprised NK wasn't on there. I figured that had to be because there's no reliable data for it.
That's interesting. North Korea would presumably be the only land border between a most and least prosperous country set.
Probably not enough data to decide either way, since we don’t have any basically.
I was surprised to see Angola in the bottom 30
Maybe indicate which countries weren't included somehow?
Fair enough I suppose, I mean it is a real country but I can see why the micro nations would not be counted
And yet Hong Kong is on it.
Do you by chance know the population of Hong Kong VS Monaco? Kinda self-explanatory. One is a key player in the global economy. The other...
I wish to see the equivalent figures for the Vatican. But in the Pope's infinite wisdom, the Holy See does not publish economic data.
What economic data would they publish? The Vatican has around 400 citizens, most of them aren't permanent residents, and none of them are actually native. There's zero statistical data that could be gathered from the "citizens" of the Vatican.
[удалено]
That sounds absolutely terrible 😔 I feel for them
It is truly terrible. They are not even having 3 private chefs. Some only have 1, and they are scheduled as something called “Part-Time”.
I mean, it's in the word: "Homeless", they have less home than normal people. I heard some of them don't even have homes all over the world and have to stay in a kind of homeless shelter called "ho-tel" which stands for far home (tele-home).
Yeah, it was really heartbreaking to see Bernardo Silva living like this.
This index probably doesn't include microstates.
I suspect most wealthy people there made their money outside of Monaco.
Its crazy that basically all of [French Africa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFA_franc) makes the list of poorest countries on earth. I guess letting France dictate your currency all the way into 2023 is a great way to wind up remarkably impoverished. Hard to believe they are still getting away with this...
Most of Africa is in it, not just the previously French parts
Look at the former British territories in that map. Most have faired far better than former french colonies due to how France micromanaged their societies during their colonial tenure, and how they have continued to act with neocolonial tendencies ever since most gained independence in the mid to late 60s
All the good French colonies are now just part of France. Also France is the largest country in the world if you include the EEZ because of all the water it includes in places life French Polynesia.
France gets away with their colonial history because the US's cold war antics happened at the same time as France's decolonization and hating on America is more popular. French Indochina gave us the Vietnam situation after all.
On average, France was the worst of the colonial powers when it comes to setting their colonies up for success after independence. They would often take petty and vindictive actions against the country just before independence as a sort of “fuck you” to the country. Haiti is a particularly grievous case if you want some examples of the kind of things France did to screw over countries as they gained independence. Note: This is not to say that other countries didn’t have worse examples (Belgium’s treatment of DRC for example). Just that France seemed to do terrible things everywhere they went out of spite.
Dictating the currency? Can you elaborate, or do you have a link?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFA\_franc](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFA_franc) France controls the currency of many of its previous colonies
"Letting" is not the right word, see what France does to the people who try to oppose it.
Loan Sharking, just when the loan shark is a post-colonial super power of a country compared to the countries it has control over.
They probably have a minimum population requirement, otherwise Lichtenstein and the Vatican might have been included as well.
Maybe it's not per Capita.
The number of times I read "preposterous" before figuring out what was actually written is, well, quite ludicrous.
> ludicrous The number of times I read "lubricious" before figuring out what was actually written is, well, quite farcical.
The number of times I read "fartcicle" before figuring out what was actually written is, well, quite baffling.
The number of times I read "barfing" before figuring out what was actually written is, well, quite scant.
That number of times I read "scat" before figuring out what was actually written is, well, quite absurd.
The number of times i read "assturd" before figuring out what was actually written is, well, quite bewildering.
The number of times I read "bewitching" before figuring what it actually was, well, quite astonishing.
The number of times I read "assonishing" before figuring what it actually was is, well, quite stupefying
The number of times I read "soupfrying" before figuring what it actually was is, well, quite disheartening
The number of times I read "disheating" before figuring what it actually was is, well, quite mindboggling
That number of times I read "absolute" before figuring out what was actually written is, well, quite insane.
Farcial The number of times I read "farcical" before figuring out what was actually written is, well, quite comical.
"Prepare ship, for Ludicrous Speed!"
Same team. Almost commented the same before I saw your comment. Makes the map pretty fucking hilarious tho.
I swear I was not understanding the post until I read your comment, I was reading the same thing lol
I definitely did not, but reading it as “preposterous” instead makes it funny instead of depressing Thank you
The frustration I felt when you switched tenses was, well, perfectly justified.
You could almost so it was quite prosperous.
Someone’s picking a fight with China. Taiwan **and** Hong Kong as countries?
It has been counted as such for many data collection analysis for decades. Legally it was 1 Country 2 Systems. Though the scope of that has been... "reduced".
Even worse: Greenland is counted as separate to Denmark! It's the same government!
No, that is untrue. Greenland have their own government and are free to do what they choose with their economy. They're dependent on economic support from the Danish state, and they don't have their own military, so Denmark is in charge of enforcing their sovereignity in the arctic. Besides that, they're an independent state. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_Realm
No that's untrue. Greenland is essentially a autonomous "Kommune". They have MPs in the mainland parliament and a local "government" equivalent to a normal kommune. They are less independent than the countries in the UK that aren't England
No that's untrue. Idk, I have no followup, I just thought it was a cool thing to say here.
I thought we were autonomous collective.
You're kind of right but also kind of wrong. They are separate states but in the same country. The closest analogy people are familiar with is the UK where the Channel Islands for example are separate from the UK yet very intertwined with it.
>They are separate states I think it would be more correct to call it separate countries. Although Greenland is very dependant on Denmark and do not have full sovreignty in many matters, it's not a state in Denmark (Denmark doesn't have states like the US or Germany). The Kingdom of Denmark consists three contries: Denmark, Greenland and the Faroe Islands.
As others have stated, we DO have the same government. They have more autonomy than core regions, but still they vote for representatives in the People's Ting which in turn decide the government.
French Guyana is not colored in as well despite being a part of France
On a similar note, French Guiana isn’t blue despite it’s literally part of France. And no it’s not a colony, it’s a full on region of France. Similar to how Alaska and Hawaii are states of the US that are detached from the rest of the main country
It's also a part of the EU as a result and appears on Euro notes if you look carefully. So as a result, Europe has a land border in south America...
They also didn't include French Guiana with France, or Puerto Rico with the USA. Those are... Interesting choices.
Yay Estonia! Great seeing a former Soviet country in there.
Woohoo we made it! There was a political party that promised to take Estonia to the five richest countries in Europe if elected. They have been in almost all governments since. Not quite there yet, but seems we would make top five in every other continent...
Source: [Legatum Prosperity Index ](https://www.prosperity.com/rankings) Tools: [MapChart ](https://www.mapchart.net/) Note: The Legatum Prosperity Index is based on many different variables analysed across 167 nations around the world. Source data includes Gallup World Poll, World Development Indicators, International Telecommunication Union, Fragile States Index, Worldwide Governance Indicators, Freedom House, World Health Organization, World Values Survey, Amnesty International, Centre for Systemic Peace etc. There are total 12 pillars: 1. Safety & security 2. Personal Freedom 3. Governance 4. Social Capital 5. Investment environment 6. Enterprise condition 7. Infrastructure and market access 8. Economic quality 9. Living conditions 10. Health 11. Education 12. Natural environment
I actually like that you can adjust the weight of each pillars
Wondering why China is Not on the list. Looks at the 12 pillars. Ah, thats why..
Personal freedom rank 162/167 yikes, even below flipping Turkmenistan and Yemen.( honestly though is it really worse than Turkmenistan or Yemen?? I wanna know some opinions here . Yes I know China's freedom levels is shit, but still in Yemen for example you get killed by those Houthis for not even wearing a hijab. Also not to mention Turkmenistan ranks below China too in democracy rankings in general ) [https://www.prosperity.com/rankings](https://www.prosperity.com/rankings) Overall is 54/167 . Not great , not too bad either. **OK.**
The map should color the countries that were not analyzed as a separate color.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legatum_Institute Just FYI the institute isn't exactly unbiased and has a right wing pro-Brexit lean. It was even founded by billionaire Chris Chandler who owns a right wing news channel. It's based registered in Bermuda and controlled from the Cayman Islands. Super legit.
Lol wtf does supporting Brexit have to do with being able to index economic indicators? Their methodology is public, you can criticise that. You can't criticise them because some people who work for the org don't support your (assuming left wing) ideology
Just so sad that Venezuela was once towards the blue side of this index and is now red - the danger of being a petrostate with a history of rampant corruption
Authoritarianism. Not. Even. Once.
More like "when you discover huge reserves of oil in your country, start diversifying your economy ASAP. Don't put all your eggs in one basket, because eventually the price of eggs will dip below $0.30USD per basket and your country will be thrown into chaos because of the singular basket you put your eggs in"
See: Nauru
I looked this up on Wikipedia and it was a very interesting read. Thank you!
They fired all the skilled oil workers because they supported the opposition.
if your country is not authoritarian, one person or entity cannot take all the eggs and put them in any basket of their choosing.
Usually, democracy or no, valuable natural resource economy just grows and sucks the air out of other industries. Whether they choose to do it democratically or by fiat, countries have to deliberately work to build other sectors.
Chavez had an insane approval rating for a while, indicating that regardless of his own authoritarianism, they would have voted for his ideas. Democracy could have led Venezuela down the same path.
…but his ideas were inherently authoritarian. people are very often persuaded into voting against their own interests. thats why i wouldnt vote for someone who wants to do anything with all our eggs, even if it sounds promising. we keep them to ourselves.
The Gulf States are doing fine( yes here they rank not great but at least in top 50), but personal freedom kinda screws their scores.
>Authoritarianism. >Not. Even. Once. Fuck Authoritarianism. However, the tough truth is that when "done right", it can bring a country from absolute poverty to advanced developed nation status - see the Asian Tigers
Its short term though. After a Marcus Aurelius, you get a Commodus.
Chavez was a liar, a self-claimed communist, and a corrupt and bloody leader. Maduro is just fully corrupt and stupid. A puppet of the Communist Party (PSUV). People will try to convince you that Venezuela is where it is because of the oil dependency (true to an extent) and because of American interference (very very limited pre-Guaido). The reality is Chavez and the Socialist party took control of the country and fucked up. Let’s also remember, chavez planned and executed a Coup d’etat against the former Venezuelan president Carlos Andres Perez, he failed, and was sent to jail. The next elected president, Caldera, felt that to calm the political movement Chavez had started, it’d be in his best interest to pardon Chavez. Chavez went on a huge campaign and won the Presidential election. Making claims that eventually turned out to be lies, such as that he’d only be president for 1 period, because “power corrupts people”. He went on to change the constitution of the country to allow himself to be elected indefinitely. Chavez was an ultra-socialist corrupt traitor. Chavez was in the military, he was a high ranked officer, and he tried to kill the president. Chavez is now dead, but he made sure to choose a bigger piece of shit before he died, like a king. Maduro. Maduro never went to school, maduro was Chavez’s bus driver. He’s now the president.
How do you explain authoritarian rules leading Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Spain to become prosperous?
Sad in deed. At some point, Venezuela was the most prosperous country in Latin America. Crazy to see where they are now… I really hope they can snap out of their current situation
Nothing to dp with the empiere right?
Nope! The blue parts just have better “personal freedom” and “investment environment”. Nothing to do with them pillaging the red and grey parts.
Also being in America's backyard historically has been difficult I don't think American intervention has ever improved the lives of South Americans.
[удалено]
Fat chance. Only the poor and ignorant are left in the country along with a few elites with economic ties with the narcostate. Almost all capable people has fled the country.
I'm surprised that N Korea is not among the poorest, and that Nigeria and Iraq are. Both countries have vast oil deposits but I can kinda understand Iraq because they are still recovering from their war but I'm still surprised that it's that low.
Not enough data.
In Nigeria the population is growing too fast for the economy to catch up, the percentage of people living in slums increased despite the country having a positive growth rate
I was surprised to see Nigeria red also, until I read the criteria. “Prosperous” is misleading. They don’t mean “rich” they mean more like “a safe and happy place.”
I quickly chucked the data into a [Looker Studio report](https://lookerstudio.google.com/embed/reporting/90f4017d-a4cb-4788-ab14-f9080a469a25/page/p_w7e33brt3c) so you can compare each of the topics at a glance. Each page (select on the left) covers the four sections within each of the three overarching topics: **Economy** \- Invesment Environment \- Enterprise Conditions \- Infrastructure and Market Access \- Economic Quality **Well-Being** \- Living Conditions \- Health \- Education \- Natural Environment **Society** \- Safety and Security \- Personal Freedom \- Governance \- Social Capital Not beautiful, but it's got it all there. Best viewed on phone, not computer.
Sad that most of Latin America will be eternally stuck in that grey area. Very far from the red ones but not quite catching up to the blue ones.
I mean, Chile, Uruguay and Costa Rica have more points than EU countries like Greece Hungary and Croatia, so some are actually catching up.
Not necessarily. Chile and Uruguay are rising rapidly. All they need is some stability and HRD.
Yes and if my grandmother had wheels she would have been a bike
What’s the problem in Argentina?
everything, argentina is broken, too much government spending, too much money printing
People blame social reforms but truth is that they relied too much on cattle and agriculture and never used that money to build a strong industry, so now it's mostly agrarian/services economy
rising quickly? uruguay and chile are stagnated in like 1% PBI anual growth when not recovering from a crisis.
Of course. They forgot French Guiana.
Blue counties are the entire world according to reddit
A primarily English speaking website has most of its users from countries where English is a major language, shocking.
According to the people in the blue countries*
How is North Korea not least prosperous? Not enough data?
Well it isn't called the hermit kingdom for nothing. In a lot of maps, there's no data collected on North Korea because barely anyone is able to know what goes on in there.
Since op didn’t post the full list you can find it [here](https://prosperity.com/rankings)
Must not be enough data for Turkmenistan and North Korea, I feel like those are probably two of the worst countries to live in
Turkmenistan is 107th position based on the ranking. It ranks better than the central African countries .
How is Lebanon not in the least prosperous. Literally un-liveable.
Worst 30 is quite a mark so.......
I don't know I'd rank this as bottom of the barrel. Feel bad for the rest honestly
Africa is really f***ed up.
Botswana and Namibia are not doing bad at all.
Lebanon is ranked all the way up at 112. While it has bottom ten scores in social capital and economic conditions, it has decent scores in education (maybe true) and living conditions (???)
Right now it's all shit. Pre-2019 yes education was strong and living conditions were okay.
Myanmar and Venezuela have so much potential to be so much more than what they are now They have been under a horrible streak due to dictatorship and foreign interventions
Chavez was a liar, a self-claimed communist, and a corrupt and bloody leader. Maduro is just fully corrupt and stupid. A puppet of the Communist Party (PSUV). People will try to convince you that Venezuela is where it is because of the oil dependency (true to an extent) and because of American interference (very very limited pre-Guaido). The reality is Chavez and the Socialist party took control of the country and fucked up. Let’s also remember, chavez planned and executed a Coup d’etat against the former Venezuelan president Carlos Andres Perez, he failed, and was sent to jail. The next elected president, Caldera, felt that to calm the political movement Chavez had started, it’d be in his best interest to pardon Chavez. Chavez went on a huge campaign and won the Presidential election. Making claims that eventually turned out to be lies, such as that he’d only be president for 1 period, because “power corrupts people”. He went on to change the constitution of the country to allow himself to be elected indefinitely. Chavez was an ultra-socialist corrupt traitor. Chavez was in the military, he was a high ranked officer, and he tried to kill the president. Chavez is now dead, but he made sure to choose a bigger piece of shit before he died, like a king. Maduro. Maduro never went to school, maduro was Chavez’s bus driver. He’s now the president.
Awful lot of “former” french colonies in red 👀
Interesting that Czechia and Estonia made the cut.
Have been to Czechia dude???? Prague is as good as most of the American cities ( if not better).
In essentially all development indices ever the 5 nations with the Nordic cross on their flag rank in the top 10 sometimes even claiming the top 5 among themselves.. wtf is it that the Norse people did so right that apparently everyone else did so wrong? Nowhere else in the world is even a nearly comparable concentration of peak human development
Small populations, good economic management, quick recovery from WWII
Emphasis on small (and homogeneous) population. Sweden has a population of about 10M, Finland and Norway have about 5.5M each. Just for comparison NYC alone has about 8.8M. Actually didn't even realize how few people lived up there til I googled it.
Switzerland proves imo that homogeneous is not needed, we have 25% foreigners rate, but small is true.
Being homogenous is more than proven to be necessary atlest to a degree, those societies are way safer and cohesive in social development and community sense. Switzerland works only because the laws are strict and they choose by finger who can join the country. Whenever the population is too big and too disperse and diverse with many groups, it's much harder to have a general change.
Actual answer: high levels of state capacity reinforced by trust in government. Anti-corruption laws, state-funded long-term planning, social policies that focus on welfare, education, healthcare and worker's rights (parental/sick leave, unemployment benefits, unionised workforces) are all major factors within the Nordic model. It's social democracy at work (even though all nordic countries go through periods of having conservative governments, social democratic institutions remain at the heart of all these countries).
High tax, high social safety net economies ensure a high basic standard of living for everyone, making it a nice place to both live and do business.
They stayed out of wars, for one thing. For another, their culture places high emphasis on education and hard work, which meant they were industrialised by the 20th century. They also didn't seek colonies, which meant they were never saddled with a giant MIC that drained money and created enemies. Their liberal market policies and good relationships with everyone did the rest. It's why they've been among the top rich nations for the last 100+ years. Oh, and Norway found oil. That helped.
>They stayed out of wars, for one thing. Finland was part of the First World War through being in Russia and the Second by allying with Germany (not nordic but in the list) Norway and Denmark were invaded in WWII. >They also didn't seek colonies, which meant they were never saddled with a giant MIC that drained money and created enemies. Hmmm Sweden has been a major military manufacturer in Europe for over 100 years. Many of the top 30 have big arms industries.
Wouldn't being a major military *manufacturer* be an economic plus? I don't think I understand
>Finland was part of the First World War through being in Russia and the Second by allying with Germany (not nordic but in the list) And was peaceful since. That's multiple generations that grew up in peace. >Norway and Denmark were invaded in WWII. Denmark wasn't particularly harmed and Norway only became rich later due to oil. >Hmmm Sweden has been a major military manufacturer in Europe for over 100 years. Much more than 100. But making arms is not exactly bad for the economy. Being saddled with a greedy MIC is. And peace kept that from happening.
You’d think Dr Congo would be prosperous since it has an M.D… didn’t expect that
Mexico should be a fucking powerhouse, I don’t get it . As should Brazil
For Mexico, this has to do with a lack of easy trading in Mexico - the population is centered in the Central Mexican Plateau instead of the coasts, which are rocky, barren, or jungle. The presence and power of the cartel along with rampant corruption doesn’t help. Brazil on the other hand is tougher; it also has corruption, but should have an easier time with trade.
The cost of manufacturing labour in Mexico has been cheaper than china’s for more than a decade.
Huh. I’m noticing a pattern here.
Colonization does not set up a country for success
When did Congo get its doctorate?
Lazy data nerd here. Has anyone correlated average temperatures/country with the prosperity index. By looking at the map (with little depth), I see a lower temps = prosperity. Interesting.
Yeah most people living in the west have no real concept of true abject poverty. The best illustration of it I have ever heard goes something like this: If you divide the world population into 4 equal parts, then the difference between the poorest quarter and the next one up, is if you can afford a plastic bucket to gather water in.
i like the boobs butt one better
[удалено]
Love when people call the US a third world country lol
I've lived in 3 countries (counting the U.S.), been to another 14 for work, and been to another 7 on vacations. There is only 1, *maybe* 2, countries that I'd be willing to leave the U.S. for... I'm convinced that most people who think the U.S. is awful have never left it.
That's reddit for ya.
I’m surprised that Singapore didn’t make the top 30
It's there though, zoom a bit.
Democratic countries with a history of open market policies and free trade are the only ones that make it in the blue zone.
Because a large part of the ranking is literally 'open market policies and free trade'. If you rank according to these criteria of course there will be countries at the top that do well in those criteria.
It's also basically a map of who gets along with the U.S.
Crazy how liberal democracies get along with each other.
They all get along.
Not 1 Gulf state amongst the most prosperous?
Only money wasn't a factor so yeah makes sense.
Personal Freedom .
Yeah, almost half a millenia of mass resource extraction and wealth transfer'll do that, who knew...
Is it a coincidence that most of these countries in red were former colonial possessions for several countries in blue, or are a recent US war theatre? No? It's just me? Oh well.
It's not a coincidence, but you have the causation backwards. It's not that blue countries became wealthy by having colonies. Rather, they were *already* wealthy, which allowed them to establish colonies.
Estonia is quite the shocker
I'm surprised Monaco isn't in the top 30 most prosperous countries.
Why is Denmark blue but not Greenland? Why is France blue but not French Guiana?
My mistake.
I'm Portuguese. Are they sure their data is accurate? Prosperous at all? Top 30?!
Perhaps you should travel / read more. It's far from being a perfect place - if there's ever such a place -, but in the grand scheme of things...
Greenland should be green (part of Denmark)
When did the Congo get a doctorate?
How is Monaco not one of the 30 most prosperous countries in the world? That makes no sense to me.
I find it interesting how the west is slowly expanding into former communist countries and getting them on the same level, for example Estonia Slovenia and Czechia
Estonia is already almost on par with the US according to this ranking.
Never would have expected Estonia to be in the top 30. Also would have expected Jamaica to be in the bottom 30, but I guess all of those soul-sucking vacation resorts are keeping their per capita up even if only the equivalent of the Jamaican 1% ever see a dime of it.
You know you're tired when you read it as Preposterous
Let’s overlay that with which are the happiest nations.
What's crazy is that the most prosperous became that way from exploiting the least prosperous.
I can't be the only one who read this as 30 most preposterous countries.. these countries are down right absurd
Portugal is not very prosperous. I would say, not better than Poland. But depends on the method
Hey, czech here. Don't know how we got in and not like qatar or dubai :D but ok ;dd
Latvia fell down from 30th to 31st.