Top 50 Most Stable & Prosperous Countries

[DWCAP]

I didnt look for it, but I didnt see how they came to this conclusion. However, dont you find it interesting that the top ten is DOMINATED by small, european culturally hemogioious nations dependent mostly on banking and trade with the much larger and more powerful nations that encompase them?
Let me see, 1,3,4,5,6,7 dont even have a military or have a military mostly consisting of an honor guard to wear funny uniforms and defend tourest attractions with 16th century pikes (here is looking at you Vatacan city). I am no military defender, and cant stand the war in Iraq, but there are alot of bad people in the world, and SOMEONE needs to be able to do something about it. Good old draft dodging GW obviously WASNT the man for the job.

Only the UK and Germany in the top 20 have populations over 50 million. The USA has 300+ million. Lets compare apples to apples here, put us with the other contries that have 100+ million people. China, India, Indonesia, Russia, Brazil, Mexico, Nigeria, Bangledesh, Pakistan, and Japan.
Japan is the only country on that list that even makes the list, #28. Usually these things are put out there by some interest group that is trying to make a point about something, but completly misses reality in doing so.

[RottedOak]

This is the sort of pseudo-statistic that makes me cringe. The headline-grabbing item is the standing of specific countries in the rankings, with virtually no information being given in the stories about what the rankings are supposed to mean or how they were determined. As best I can tell from the news coverage, the rankings are mostly about stability, with the economy being one element alongside “politics,” “society,” “military-security” and “external threats.” How these items are evaluated isn’t clear. Regardless of the missing details, once the focus on stability is recognized, the rankings become much easier to understand. I don’t see any shame in admitting that tiny semi-autonomous territories in the heart of Europe are more “stable” than the US. By the same standard, I expect that rural counties in Nebraska are more stable than New York City. That’s not a commentary on intrinsic goodness or even relative desirability.

[RottedOak]

This is the sort of pseudo-statistic that makes me cringe. The headline-grabbing item is the standing of specific countries in the rankings, with virtually no information being given in the stories about what the rankings are supposed to mean or how they were determined. As best I can tell from the news coverage, the rankings are mostly about stability, with the economy being one element alongside “politics,” “society,” “military-security” and “external threats.” How these items are evaluated isn’t clear. Regardless of the missing details, once the focus on stability is recognized, the rankings become much easier to understand. I don’t see any shame in admitting that tiny semi-autonomous territories in the heart of Europe are more “stable” than the US. By the same standard, I expect that rural counties in Nebraska are more stable than New York City. That’s not a commentary on intrinsic goodness or even relative desirability.

[RottedOak]

This is the sort of pseudo-statistic that makes me cringe. The headline-grabbing item is the standing of specific countries in the rankings, with virtually no information being given in the stories about what the rankings are supposed to mean or how they were determined. As best I can tell from the news coverage, the rankings are mostly about stability, with the economy being one element alongside “politics,” “society,” “military-security” and “external threats.” How these items are evaluated isn’t clear. Regardless of the missing details, once the focus on stability is recognized, the rankings become much easier to understand. I don’t see any shame in admitting that tiny semi-autonomous territories in the heart of Europe are more “stable” than the US. By the same standard, I expect that rural counties in Nebraska are more stable than New York City. That’s not a commentary on intrinsic goodness or even relative desirability.

[RottedOak]

This is the sort of pseudo-statistic that makes me cringe. The headline-grabbing item is the standing of specific countries in the rankings, with virtually no information being given in the stories about what the rankings are supposed to mean or how they were determined. As best I can tell from the news coverage, the rankings are mostly about stability, with the economy being one element alongside “politics,” “society,” “military-security” and “external threats.” How these items are evaluated isn’t clear. Regardless of the missing details, once the focus on stability is recognized, the rankings become much easier to understand. I don’t see any shame in admitting that tiny semi-autonomous territories in the heart of Europe are more “stable” than the US. By the same standard, I expect that rural counties in Nebraska are more stable than New York City. That’s not a commentary on intrinsic goodness or even relative desirability.

[RottedOak]

This is the sort of pseudo-statistic that makes me cringe. The headline-grabbing item is the standing of specific countries in the rankings, with virtually no information being given in the stories about what the rankings are supposed to mean or how they were determined. As best I can tell from the news coverage, the rankings are mostly about stability, with the economy being one element alongside “politics,” “society,” “military-security” and “external threats.” How these items are evaluated isn’t clear. Regardless of the missing details, once the focus on stability is recognized, the rankings become much easier to understand. I don’t see any shame in admitting that tiny semi-autonomous territories in the heart of Europe are more “stable” than the US. By the same standard, I expect that rural counties in Nebraska are more stable than New York City. That’s not a commentary on intrinsic goodness or even relative desirability.

[svelte]

Yeah. What he said.

[svelte]

Yeah. What he said.

[svelte]

Yeah. What he said.

[svelte]

Yeah. What he said.

[svelte]

Yeah. What he said.

[alarmclock]

OK, break the US into its 3000+ constituent counties, many of which are both larger and more populous than any of these countries (really, just kingdoms that successfully resisted amalgamation), then inject said counties into the list.

Which is it, the vatican, or monaco that has the big sign at the entry gate “Send us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses…”?

[alarmclock]

OK, break the US into its 3000+ constituent counties, many of which are both larger and more populous than any of these countries (really, just kingdoms that successfully resisted amalgamation), then inject said counties into the list.

Which is it, the vatican, or monaco that has the big sign at the entry gate “Send us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses…”?

[alarmclock]

OK, break the US into its 3000+ constituent counties, many of which are both larger and more populous than any of these countries (really, just kingdoms that successfully resisted amalgamation), then inject said counties into the list.

Which is it, the vatican, or monaco that has the big sign at the entry gate “Send us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses…”?

[alarmclock]

OK, break the US into its 3000+ constituent counties, many of which are both larger and more populous than any of these countries (really, just kingdoms that successfully resisted amalgamation), then inject said counties into the list.

Which is it, the vatican, or monaco that has the big sign at the entry gate “Send us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses…”?

[Author]

Posts