Comments by "looseycanon" (@looseycanon) on "Why Small Countries Are Getting Insanely Rich" video.

  1. Here are some counterarguments. Bereaucracy: Czechia. Just look at our construction permit lead times. We're some of the worst on Earth. New Brno railway station has been in the plans for over a 120 years, and it's only now beginning to get build... European Union and other democracies are making doing business harder and harder, when it comes to The Dutch Curse: Sweden. I believe, it was your video, where "it is important, what was in the country before the discovery of oil.". Everybody marvels about local way of life and civil development, but that would have been impossible to achieve without inflow of currency for oil and natural gass exploited there. Trade as source of wealth: Historically, trade was with closest neighbours. Nowdays, we can do everything over much larger distances. Zetor earned itself such a recognition in arab world, that it became synonymous with the very idea of a tractor. Shoes and clothes we wear are seldom made outside of Southeast Asia. It was the momentary unionisation of the world in terms of trade, that allowed for greater specialization and sea access became paramount. Just look at any world wealth map. You'll find the wealthiest regions near coasts or on rivers navigable by big ships. Think Hamburg, Los Angels, New York City or Tokyo, which had basically eaten Yokohama and several other cities. Meanwhile, lnadlocked countries, or countries bordering seas with no access to the ocean, tend to be on the poorer side. No, it's lack of trade interdiction, brought up by USA's dominance on the seas and formation of the European project, which eventually culminated into European Union, which removed arbitrary trade barriers, which would be more common, if, say Germany were devided into it's historical constituent states. Exporting goods would have been near impossible for, for instance from France to Croatia, because, Italy with it's own interests would stand in the way. What you'll see, if larger countries begin to break apart, trade, thanks to individual national customs, inspections and bearaucracies. Trade would get interdicted. Democracy: Democracy is NOT the best kind of governance, when it comes to resource deveilopment, which is, what you need to trade. A single party government simply sais and does, no matter the human lives, it destroys. Meanwhile, a democracy, thanks to "not in my backyard" principle, will, majority of the time, refuse to develop the resource. Case and point, Czech Republic and Lithium. There is in CĂ­novec mountain, as well as waste material from the old mine there (tin was mined there back in a day). Introducing the Communist party, who completely derailed joint venture with Australians, causing the venture to collapse. Another example, Iceland. Minerals needed for energy transition were found in vast quantities. A referrendum was held, and mining had been rejected over local natural beauty... which has 0 intrensic value (no tourism is not viable counterpoint, just watch the video about different types fo tourism). Now, we're waiting on just how will the Nordics (can't remember now, which scored this one) decide about phosphate mining in their country, there has not been news, that would indicate large scale mining planned. Specialization: You can't overspecialize either. Look at economies, that are severely dependent on single resource, like Russia, for which it's energy resources, all of which had been sanctioned, the Gulf states, also heavily dependent on hydrocarbons, had to create cartel to ensure, that they won't get bankrupt and now are scrambling for all kinds of investments and diversification, because, due to ideological distaste for fossil fuels currently reigning in the West, their primary, in some cases near SOLE, pinacle of specialization, export is going the way of dynasaurs, pun intended. Specialization always needs to be wheighed against domestic price security and ability to produce things to some extent domestically. If not for other reasons, to preserve the technology.
    1