i lived in Norway for a little over one year; for anyone who has every lived there, you become aware of the outrageously high cost of just about everything. During my time there i felt like i everything i purchased was from a New York City hotel mini-bar.<p>The high cost is largely due to the very steep VAT (unlike the US, but like almost most everywhere else, the prices of goods in the shops include VAT) which is 25%.<p>the cost of a private university is prohibitive for many if not most families.<p>in addition, the personal income tax has a high lowest-rate (which i believe is 28%, and a max rate of 50%).<p>personal accounts for frequent-flier points are taxed; the tax paid on a new car can easily exceed 85% (that's 80 + 5 not 8.5!); gasoline prices are silly--about $13 per gallon (if i did my maths correctly).<p>i just checked a cost-of-living Site (Numbeo.com) and sure enough, Norway is #1 in Consumer Price Index with 173.85, over 22 points above second place Switzerland.<p>How does this compare with other countries of similar oil wealth? For instance, Kuwait's oil annual oil exports are about the same as Norway's (though the lifting costs differ significantly).<p>In Kuwait, education is free, all the way through university and there is no VAT (sales tax).
The title is misleading. While an amazing milestone, Norwegians can't head down to their local central bank branch and draw down their share of the fund. It's a bit like saying every man, woman, and child in the United States owes $200K because of the national debt.
>Still, in Norway, oil wealth may have made the state reluctant to make reforms or cut subsidies unthinkable elsewhere. Farm subsidies allow farmers, for instance, to keep dairy cows in heated barns in the Arctic.<p>and the alternative? Milking polar bears?<p>To compare, Canada has 1M dairy cows for 35M population, Norway - 300K for 5M population (Norway is self-sufficient milk producer and exporter of dairy products). Giving the health benefits of dairy (incl. in cold climate areas, for children and elderly) i'd say it is good investment, not "unthinkable subsidy".<p>More on the Canada's (usually one would think of it as a pretty reasonable country) "subsidy-less" approach - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dairy_farming_in_Canada#Supply_management" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dairy_farming_in_Canada#Supply_...</a> :<p>"Dairy farming has been subject to the system of supply management since the 1970s. It restricts the supply of milk by limiting and controlling the amount produced domestically and starkly limiting imports with high tariffs. With a restricted supply, the prices increase, increasing profits for the farmers.[4] Though this system allows the federal and provincial governments to avoid subsidizing the farmers directly, consumers instead subsidize dairy farmers in through artificially high prices paid for groceries.<p>...<p>To keep supply low and prices high, it has been made deliberately difficult to become a new dairy farmer in Canada. Because the dairy industry is so lucrative, the right to own a single dairy cow is worth $28,000 (this does not include the actual price or value of the cow itself)<p>"
Not related to Norway. But when I went for a tour in the salt mine in Hallstatt it was explained that this much has been mined, this much for now, and this large amount here is for our children.
In stark contrast to what I see in Australia where they'll rape the environment for short term gain and an elite few benefit.
Is anyone familiar with emigrating to these countries, especially if you have a tech skillset? Good idea, bad idea, horrid idea?<p>EDIT:<p>Let me refine that query--emigrating as an English-speaking American software engineer and tech, without dependents.
Am I the only one amazed at the level of foresight the Norwegian politicians are displaying here?<p>In comparison, the US government seems so....mismanaged.
There was a great podcast by NPR's Planet Money[1] about how Norway avoided the "resource curse"[2], or paradox of the plenty, whereby countries with bountiful resources tend to be less developed than vice-verse. Highly recommended! Please comment below if you would like to discuss.<p>[1] <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/09/06/140110346/how-to-avoid-the-oil-curse" rel="nofollow">http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/09/06/140110346/how-to-a...</a><p>[2]<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse</a>
If they want to create a fund to save their future, why are they drilling and pumping their oil like crazy and exchanging it for world's financial junk? They should leave the oil in the earth, it would make much better investment.
This is impressive. They may want to work on being a little more secretive about it. Or else we will hear of a group of extremist Norwegian terrorists forming a scary group that will kill Americans, hate god, hurt children, etc etc. which will of coarse force the US to invade.<p>I kid, I kid, but no really, I am glad someone is getting it right.
"It may also have made some Norwegians reluctant to work. "One in five people of working age receives some kind of social insurance instead of working," Doerum said, despite an official unemployment rate of 3.3 percent."<p>20% unemployment rate or 3.3%? Can't figure that one out.
Hesitate before drawing broad conclusions - they discovered oil in their back yard, are now rich. Not a reflection on their great foresight or thriftiness.
That's what would happen in most african countries if wealth from natural resources were managed correctly (oil,gold,uranium,...).<p>Unfortunatly it will NEVER happen.
They're like the dwarves of Erebor. I would be very worried if I were them, considering the fact that they're the home of the Norwegian Ridheback.
I hate to be the bad guy, but they earn that money from the people who pay the price of the high oil prices. A real act of altruism is to actually do something to reduce those prices.