Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why some nations are successful and some are not?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why some nations are successful and some are not?

    There`re a certain amount of countries which are considered to be successful in different spheres of life including the economy
    Amongst those countries we usually name the USA, Germany, the UK, France, Canada and so forth. Usually, African countries are at the bottom of the list. Why it is so?
    1. Does mentality impact it or not? If yes then how?
    2. Does climate impact it?
    3. Does religion impact it?
    4. Does geography impact it?
    5. Does language impact it?
    6. Does political system impact it?
    7. Does history impact it?

  • green3apple
    replied
    it's not that important whether our nation is success or not.
    what's more important is whether we are success or not.
    there are unsuccessful peoples in successful country.
    there are successful peoples in unsuccessful country.
    certain societies teach their children how to prepare the death and not how to prepare the life, at very early stage.
    some teachings like "when you are dead, you won't be able to bring your money along" are echoed right after they were born.
    as if those children will all manage to become next rockefeller if those grown ups do not nurture them, while being not aware life is already difficult enough without that man made inhibitors.
    certain peoples have no faith in their own heredities, hope their children to carry forward their own fear of reaching out their mundane dreams.
    but still, it depends soley on those children ownself whether to make their parents / nation as excuses, or as reasons.

    Leave a comment:


  • look4swissmiss
    replied
    Originally posted by CaymanWolvon View Post
    im Eurozionist, so I support any kind of re-emigration of Jewish to Europe promised land = Europe
    Don't mention the War
    Ergo: might have mentioned it once and I think we got away with it!


    Leave a comment:


  • CaymanWolvon
    replied
    Originally posted by Hades91x View Post


    I told you I'm pro zionism, so I support any kind of jewish emigration to Israel. ( Zion, promised land = Israel )
    You told me that I want to see burning corpses (hell = hades = my nick)
    Ergo: You seam to be an anti-zionist Jew, Zion must be the hell in your opinion. hahahaha

    im Eurozionist, so I support any kind of re-emigration of Jewish to Europe promised land = Europe

    Leave a comment:


  • Hades91x
    replied
    Originally posted by Elishar View Post

    In Greek mythology Zeus received the heavens Poseidon the oceans ,,,and Hades the underworld ..
    According to Polands most dominant religion the fires of hell are in Hades..

    I told you I'm pro zionism, so I support any kind of jewish emigration to Israel. ( Zion, promised land = Israel )
    You told me that I want to see burning corpses (hell = hades = my nick)
    Ergo: You seam to be an anti-zionist Jew, Zion must be the hell in your opinion. hahahaha

    Leave a comment:


  • look4swissmiss
    replied
    Some good points. Certainly quoting Spinoza is fully consistent with the loss of DRC mining assets (see above).

    Leave a comment:


  • Sancta_Lux
    replied
    Originally posted by look4swissmiss View Post

    My EQ was: "Who'd/Would you become a politician?"
    On UK TV there was a famous case where a politician was asked the same question twelve times and avoided giving any meaningful answer. 'PAXMAN ASKS HOWARD x12: 'Did you threaten to over-rule...(Mr Lewis) ?'

    Ergo: if 'not' answering the question or answering a completely different question is what politicians do best, then you'd do well in politics. As a teen, I once suggested to Imran Khan in recognition of his diplomatic skills: 'that when he was too old to play cricket he should become a politician.' (following a cricket match - that's another story). At that time IK was an Oxford undergraduate. Momentarily he stopped chewing gum and look what's happened!
    It's understandable, after all, you are asking a very difficult question! Taking Georges Orwell as example, you see how finding a "good politician" is difficult as it's easy for any people to turn into a pig or to be expelled from political life.

    My personnal answer to this would be to first change the political system from a democracy, which is insanely bad to form politicians to a monarchy(into a kingdom or an empire... that's more matter of nations and size) with a mix between artistocracy and meritocracy to support it. This way, the politicians or, to be exact, the leaders you get have been raised and educated in the purpose of ruling a country.

    Then, following Spinoza whom I think had a very good analyze over this point at least (and that's why meritocracy is a bit important here to me), puting more men than necessary to rule a country following those words:
    2. Let it be supposed, then, that for a dominion of moderate size it suffices to be allowed a hundredof the best men, and that upon them has been conferred the supreme authority of the dominion, andthat they have consequently the right to elect their patrician colleagues, when any of the number die.These men will certainly endeavour to secure their succession to their children or next in blood.And thus the supreme authority of the dominion will always be with those, whom fortune has madechildren or kinsmen to patricians. And, as out of a hundred men who rise to office by fortune,hardly three are found that excel in knowledge and counsel, it will thus come to pass, that theauthority of the dominion will rest, not with a hundred, but only with two or three who excel byvigour of mind, and who will easily draw to themselves everything, and each of them, as is the wontof human greed, will be able to prepare the way to a monarchy. And so, if we make a rightcalculation, it is necessary, that the supreme authority of a dominion, whose size requires at least ahundred first-rate men, should be conferred on not less than five thousand. For by this proportion itwill never fail, but a hundred shall be found excelling in mental vigour, that is, on the hypothesisthat, out of fifty that seek and obtain office, one will always be found not less than first-rate, besidesothers that imitate the virtues of the first-rate, and are therefore worthy to rule.

    Leave a comment:


  • look4swissmiss
    replied
    Originally posted by RogerCarmel View Post

    I have no problem with politicians who push legislation to suit themselves and their powerful friends. That's the way things have always been done, whatever the political system. You can't change human nature. As I've pointed out before, Lenin had his own Rolls Royce. Power comes with privilege.

    As long as the legislative and judiciary powers are separate, it's good for everyone. Problems come about when legislators are the judiciary, when police and military serve the interests of the privileged few, as so often happens in developing countries.
    My EQ was: "Who'd/Would you become a politician?"
    On UK TV there was a famous case where a politician was asked the same question twelve times and avoided giving any meaningful answer. 'PAXMAN ASKS HOWARD x12: 'Did you threaten to over-rule...(Mr Lewis) ?'

    Ergo: if 'not' answering the question or answering a completely different question is what politicians do best, then you'd do well in politics. As a teen, I once suggested to Imran Khan in recognition of his diplomatic skills: 'that when he was too old to play cricket he should become a politician.' (following a cricket match - that's another story). At that time IK was an Oxford undergraduate. Momentarily he stopped chewing gum and look what's happened!
    Last edited by look4swissmiss; 03-10-2019, 09:10 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Elishar
    replied
    Originally posted by Hades91x View Post

    Burning bodies, ovens... etc?
    Well, you're watching too much Israeli TV man.
    In Greek mythology is Hades land of rivers NOT ovens.
    In Greek mythology Zeus received the heavens Poseidon the oceans ,,,and Hades the underworld ..
    According to Polands most dominant religion the fires of hell are in Hades..

    Leave a comment:


  • RogerCarmel
    replied
    Originally posted by look4swissmiss View Post

    It doesn't take George Orwell to point out that (as you say) Countries where the rule of law prevails are <edited> ALSO good for those in power. Another case of snouts-in-the-trough and champagne quaffing at other people's expense. But then (looking at Trump) who'd become a politician?
    I have no problem with politicians who push legislation to suit themselves and their powerful friends. That's the way things have always been done, whatever the political system. You can't change human nature. As I've pointed out before, Lenin had his own Rolls Royce. Power comes with privilege.

    As long as the legislative and judiciary powers are separate, it's good for everyone. Problems come about when legislators are the judiciary, when police and military serve the interests of the privileged few, as so often happens in developing countries.
    Last edited by RogerCarmel; 03-10-2019, 02:52 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • look4swissmiss
    replied
    Originally posted by RogerCarmel View Post

    You bring up an excellent point. Countries where the rule of law prevails are the most successful. Countries where nepotism and corruption are the rule only good for those in power.
    It doesn't take George Orwell to point out that (as you say) Countries where the rule of law prevails are <edited> ALSO good for those in power. Another case of snouts-in-the-trough and champagne quaffing at other people's expense. But then (looking at Trump) who'd become a politician?

    Leave a comment:


  • RogerCarmel
    replied
    Originally posted by look4swissmiss View Post
    Unless I'm mistaken, no one's mentioned the corruption factor. Once DRC mining assets (2013) were resold via various relations (president's brothers-in-laws) it needed lawyers to sort out who owned what....
    You bring up an excellent point. Countries where the rule of law prevails are the most successful. Countries where nepotism and corruption are the rule only good for those in power.

    Leave a comment:


  • look4swissmiss
    replied
    Unless I'm mistaken, no one's mentioned the corruption factor. Once DRC mining assets (2013) were resold via various relations (president's brothers-in-laws) it needed lawyers to sort out who owned what. In the meantime mining assets fell into a state of dangerous disrepair and an entire country's wealth disappeared into other people's pockets. Seven years later there's been an exodus of tens of thousands of foreign miners and mining engineers moving to find work elsewhere. Not easy to find work in Central Africa. Still not sorted out and the civilians (who were promised new infrastructure like schools hospitals etc) are no better off. Ergo: only people that benefit were (Canadian in this case) lawyers and attorneys.
    Last edited by look4swissmiss; 03-09-2019, 11:59 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hades91x
    replied
    Originally posted by Elishar View Post

    What's not to believe someone whos pen name Hades brings to mind burning bodies...Out of sight , out of mind..
    Burning bodies, ovens... etc?
    Well, you're watching too much Israeli TV man.
    In Greek mythology is Hades land of rivers NOT ovens.

    Leave a comment:


  • aussieinbg
    replied
    Originally posted by Elishar View Post
    You should have heard what Samuel Clements (mark twain ) said about it....
    I'd already read Mark Twain's account some time back. Here's an exert:

    Renowned Jerusalem itself, the stateliest name in history, has lost all its ancient grandeur, and is become a pauper village; the riches of Solomon are no longer there to compel the admiration of visiting Oriental queens; the wonderful temple which was the pride and the glory of Israel, is gone, and the Ottoman crescent is lifted above the spot where, on that most memorable day in the annals of the world, they reared the Holy Cross.
    https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/t/twa...chapter56.html

    I can summarise in far fewer words than Mark Twain the state of Jerusalem when he saw it - Islamic shithole.

    Mark Twain discusses in depth Palestine as he travelled through it. I can summarise that also - Complete Islamic shithole.

    Almost always, Mark Twain was an honest and objective observer of what he saw and tended to report reality much better than just about any author of that era. Therefore, I trust his accounts far more than those of Islamist fanboys who are obliged to lie and bullshit "if of benefit to Islam".

    The real fun fact is that Jerusalem was under the "care and protection" of the Ottoman Empire during the 19th century. Yet they allowed the supposed 3rd most important city of Islam, Jerusalem, to fall into disrepair and decay. I guess the Ottoman Sultans aka Caliphs were too busy making Jannah on Earth and spending their money filling up their harems with small boys and women sex slaves to deal with maintaining Islamic holy places.

    Similarly, Mecca and Medina also decayed into shitholes under Ottoman rule...


    Leave a comment:

Working...
X