Very interesting! Thanks for posting.

 

I think MF was enamoured of the Thomas Freidman quote in the comments

I'd agree that globalization and foreign investment has raised wages for workers. But I strongly believe that our neoliberal based system is unsustainable, and that corporations cannot be relied upon to provide development that is in the best interest of the underdeveloped world.

Mr. Tulk, you mentioned Friedman based policy... I thought I'd leave you with a little quote.

"For globalism to work, America can’t be afraid to act like the almighty superpower that it is.…The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist—McDonald’s cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley’s technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps."

— Thomas Friedman, What the World Needs Now, New York Times, March 28, 1999. Quoted from Backing Up Globalization with Military Might

Gee China and Vietnam featured..... and Cuba still the highest in health and close to the top in life span.

Pretty good pitch for Communism and one party - central planning .....

The big blob moving top left to overwhelm the west is China with a $1 trillion US dollar credit cad open to buy.

'course Hans is Swedish and their very high taxation there and social programs promote a very healthy GINI index and progressive attitude. Just coincidentally of course they lead the world in Green progress.

......odd that VD and MF get so "champagny" over this.

 

I didn't post this for some political reason. I posted it to show that there is hope for places like Africa. The world is slowly moving ahead.

And yes, his data seems to suggest that investing in health and education eventually result in GDP gains down the road. A focus solely on GDP in the short term might not raise the standard of living for everybody as quickly as long term investment in health and education. Seems like common sense to me.

Trade is obviously a big factor in bringing the standard of living up for your centrally planned economies. Trade is the reason why China and Vietnam have advanced while North Korea has not.

 

A focus solely on GDP in the short term might not raise the standard of living for everybody as quickly as long term investment in health and education. Seems like common sense to me.

Swaziland has a rising per capita GDP... and the reason is that the average lifespan is 30 years. A huge proportion of young people are infected with AIDS, deaths between 16 years and 30 years of age are 50% of the national mortality rate (where you'd normally expect this cohort to be the healthiest, and the 50+ cohort to be the highest death rate). There is only a 1 in 4 chance of living beyond 40 years.

But the per capita GDP is rising --- a successful measure for an economist, if you ignore the fact that the reason it is rising is the people are dying faster than the economy is cratering, so what money there is, is divided by fewer people.

 

.

 

Oh I think I can safely refer to this in the future when you get on the "market uber alle" rant again.

Indeed it IS a good resource...

 

MacDoc: I found the presentation of the data very interesting. To imply that anyone who found it interesting agrees 100% with your extrapolations is a logical fallacy.

Example: If you spend money on people's health care, they become healthier--regardless of whether the money is spent publicly or privately. Sadly, you are trying to read too much in the data without a firm grasp of what is being presented.

 

CanadaRam--certainly there are data anomalies, but I don't think you can create a single way of representing all such anomalies.