• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sweden officially the 'goodest' country in the world, study says

SocialD said:
This is a very questionable 'ranking' . No links at all to their source data only a description of where they supposedly got it.
I out of curiosity I checked the World Order portion of it. So That section is comprised of Charity Giving, Refugees Hosted, Refugees Generated, Birth Rate and Un Treaties Signed.
There is a slider to show how good or bad each country is in that particular area.
I looked at Refugees generated. now the usa had a positive mark but not by a lot. which would seem to indicate the USA generates refugees. I have no idea who that would be. of course the good site referenced the UNHCR for its data however searching UNHCR produced no documents that showed this.
So I wandered over to Science and Technology. part of that was Patents.. well they had quite a few countries rated high. I found it interesting Sweden and Finland and even Luxemborg was higher than the usa.. I thought how could Luxemborg contribute more to the world through patents than the usa I mean they hardly have any people... oh... its by population. doesn't make sense but ok.
International Peace and Security... Peacekeeping troops. usa not rated high.. again its by population....
I went back to world order.. Charity giving hrm usa not rate all that high.. oh this one is by population too not how much was given.
Prosperity and equality. ranked low because of UNESCO dues being in arrears. Apparently the US quit paying its UNESCO dues in 2011 when Palestinians were given membership.

This is a nutty site. perhaps intentioned well but not really an indicator of what it claims.
Click to expand...

Here you have the link for detailed information on the sources data as a Google Sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...uDvg4Sv7RKtVluGxwlWEUsV4x4/edit#gid=357839706 you can also find the link on the Source Data page.

Also of course you have to go by per capita in comparisons like this one. Else you can for example claim that the people of New York is much more charitable than people living in Idaho. Because New York have a lot more people living in that state and the total amount going to charity from that state is much higher.

Also I think it good that you have ranking for the categories like for example science & technology, culture and planet and climate. That at the same time you can see the indicators under each category. This mean that you can make a lot of different comparisons and also for yourself determine how relevant you consider the different indicators and also decide if some indicators are missing.
 
 
Last edited:
Funny stuff.
Any survey that determines how good a country is based on how much money and how many people it gives to different UN organizations, and based on whether or not it's involved in a conflict regardless of whether it's on the defensive side or not, and based on how many international students are studying in it, and based on how big is its arms export industry, is an irrelevant survey.
 
Last edited:
PeteEU said:
That is like saying, good to see the US is all the way up at 21st place despite the mass raping and killings going on every day..
Click to expand...

mass raping?
 
countryboy said:
You're equating NK, Iran, Cuba, and Saudi Arabia with American conservatism, and you're accusing me of not wanting to have a discussion? Um, ooooo-kay.
Click to expand...

Why 'American' conservatism? We're on an international scale in this thread. Those nations I cited are among the most conservative societies in the world.
 
Grand Mal said:
Why 'American' conservatism? We're on an international scale in this thread. Those nations I cited are among the most conservative societies in the world.
Click to expand...

Don't be ridiculous. NK and Cuba are the result of leftist philosophies. Iran and Saudi Arabia are theocracies. And yes, American conservatism is the only comservative philosophy worthy of consideration. So called "conservatives" in most other parts of the world are virtually indistinguishable from the leftist idiots in this country. Besides, you obviously intended your comparison to be a dig at American conservatives.
 
Bergslagstroll said:
The Good Country index show how countries contributes to the greater good of humanity, based on 35 separate indicators. This year with Sweden at the top.



Sweden officially the 'goodest' country in the world, study says | World Politics | News | The Independent

The Good Country index's homepage: Overall Rankings - The Good Country
Click to expand...

How " Good " could a Country that puts a destructive and toxic multicultural agenda over the safety of its Women be ?

1 in 4 Swedish Women Will Be Raped as Sexual Assaults Increase 500% | Frontpage Mag
 
PeteEU said:
Damn.. Denmark beaten by those drunken crazies (meant in a loving way) over on the other side of the Øresund!!!! Just wait till the next game in football between the countries!!!! :) You got no more Zlatan soon.. and we got Bendtner.. err .. Eriksen!..
Click to expand...

They were at #1 when you were in Spain. :mrgreen: Hehe, just kidding.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
mass raping?
Click to expand...

Yes, there is a sexual assault ever 2 minutes in the US.. that is mass assault no? And since on these boards sexual assault is rape according to a lot of people, then one must conclude that there is a mass rape problem in the US.
 
countryboy said:
Don't be ridiculous. NK and Cuba are the result of leftist philosophies. Iran and Saudi Arabia are theocracies. And yes, American conservatism is the only comservative philosophy worthy of consideration. So called "conservatives" in most other parts of the world are virtually indistinguishable from the leftist idiots in this country. Besides, you obviously intended your comparison to be a dig at American conservatives.
Click to expand...

Listen, when people say they hope Cuba opens up and allows more freedom for Cubans, they're hoping the country gets more liberal, right? Same with NK, same with Iran, which is the poster child for conservative regimes.When you say you wish those people could get more rights and freedoms, you say you hope the society becomes more liberal.
Your personal definitions of words don't even bear consideration- for one thing, you certainly don't represent America'.
And I don't see how America even enters the conversation. We're talking about European countries, 'liberal hell-holes', remember?
 
Bergslagstroll said:
Here you have the link for detailed information on the sources data as a Google Sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...uDvg4Sv7RKtVluGxwlWEUsV4x4/edit#gid=357839706 you can also find the link on the Source Data page.

Also of course you have to go by per capita in comparisons like this one. Else you can for example claim that the people of New York is much more charitable than people living in Idaho. Because New York have a lot more people living in that state and the total amount going to charity from that state is much higher.

Also I think it good that you have ranking for the categories like for example science & technology, culture and planet and climate. That at the same time you can see the indicators under each category. This mean that you can make a lot of different comparisons and also for yourself determine how relevant you consider the different indicators and also decide if some indicators are missing.
Click to expand...

The point is this goodest is ranking what good countries do for the world at large. In your example of New York vs Idaho yes New York would obviously give more in charity ( because there are a lot more people ) but unquestionably if they give more to charity then they do more overall good. And in the same respect the USA is yes larger than most countries but unquestionably donates the most money therefore doing the most good charitably.
 
Apocalypse said:
Funny stuff.
Any survey that determines how good a country is based on how much money and how many people it gives to different UN organizations, and based on whether or not it's involved in a conflict regardless of whether it's on the defensive side or not, and based on how many international students are studying in it, and based on how big is its arms export industry, is an irrelevant survey.
Click to expand...

Fair point about conflict but it is also something that is hard to determent, for example the opinion on the Iraq war vary a lot between Americans. Also even people that is for the Iraq war must admit that the Iraq war showed how hard it was even for the world’s only superpower to create democracy and stability through invasion. That you also need other ways to create peace and democracy there one way is to contribute to UN organizations. Also western countries don’t only sell arms to democracies but also countries like Saudi Arabia. That use the weapons not only to oppress their own people but also to suppress public uprisings in other countries. Sweden have a policy of not selling arms to dictators but somehow still sold weapon to Saudi Arabia. Also then we stopped selling weapons to Saudi Arabia it was not only Saudi Arabia that got upset but also 30 Swedish business executives wrote an angry letter to the Swedish government. So I think it fair that Sweden rank low on that index category.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi-led_intervention_in_Bahrain

SocialD said:
The point is this goodest is ranking what good countries do for the world at large. In your example of New York vs Idaho yes New York would obviously give more in charity ( because there are a lot more people ) but unquestionably if they give more to charity then they do more overall good. And in the same respect the USA is yes larger than most countries but unquestionably donates the most money therefore doing the most good charitably.
Click to expand...

English isn’t my first language so I’m not the best person to argue about the semantics of the world “goodest”, I can just find it more relevant to use per capita then you compare different countries like this index does.
 
Fenton said:
How " Good " could a Country that puts a destructive and toxic multicultural agenda over the safety of its Women be ?

1 in 4 Swedish Women Will Be Raped as Sexual Assaults Increase 500% | Frontpage Mag
Click to expand...

More anti-immigration propaganda. First Sweden fully participate in EU:s outer boarder defense that typically leads to only couple of 100 000 refugees are able to reach EU and mostly over the dangerous Mediterranean Sea and of those only 100 000 is typically allowed to stay.

The reason why Sweden have given asylum to a large part of those 100 000 is because there are no internal borders between EU states and no system for distribute the refugee between the member states. So many refugees have travel through EU to the states with most humane asylum process like for example Sweden there it easier to rejoin with your family.

This worked pretty good until 2015 then you had a drastic increase in numbers of refugees there one big reason was that Turkey no longer wanted to act as a border police for EU. Still EU with 500 million people should have been able to handle the million asylum seeker that came to Europe during 2015. Especially since EU typically allow in so very few. But the problem was that refugees could freely travel through EU to the country they choose. Leading to that Sweden with 9 million people got 160 000 of those one million asylum seekers.

Of course that lead to short term problem but a lot is now done for integration and jobs for those asylum seeker, there probably half will be allowed to stay. Also because so many refuges last year, Sweden have now implemented less human asylum process, for example it is now harder for refugees to rejoin with their family and Sweden also reinstated board controls against Denmark. So the numbers of asylum seeker so far this year is less than 20 000 to Sweden. Also the numbers of refugees to EU is also lower because EU have made a deal with Turkey.

Then it comes to rape how it is reporting and what constitute rape differ a lot between different countries.
"In Sweden there has been this ambition explicitly to record every case of sexual violence separately, to make it visible in the statistics," she says.
"So, for instance, when a woman comes to the police and she says my husband or my fiance raped me almost every day during the last year, the police have to record each of these events, which might be more than 300 events. In many other countries it would just be one record - one victim, one type of crime, one record." reported crimes.
Click to expand...

Sweden's rape rate under the spotlight - BBC News

Also this is a very meticulous two parts blog post that debunks the myth of drastic increase in rape because of immigrants in Sweden.

https://georgeboring.wordpress.com/2015/12/19/swedens-rape-culture-checking-sargons-sources/

https://georgeboring.wordpress.com/2015/12/19/swedens-rape-culture-checking-sargons-sources/
 
Bergslagstroll said:
The Good Country index show how countries contributes to the greater good of humanity, based on 35 separate indicators. This year with Sweden at the top.



Sweden officially the 'goodest' country in the world, study says | World Politics | News | The Independent

The Good Country index's homepage: Overall Rankings - The Good Country
Click to expand...

Not trying to swipe at Sweden, they're a cool people and probably are very "good."
But that index is complete garbage, it even contradicts itself.

An example.

"Try thinking of “good” as a measure of how much a country contributes to the common good. So in this context “good” means the opposite of “selfish”, not the opposite of “bad”. The Good Country Index isn’t trying to make any moral judgments: it just measures, as objectively as possible, what each country contributes to the common good, and what it takes away, relative to its size."

Translates to, "we're not making a moral judgement, but we're making a moral judgment."
 
Bergslagstroll said:
Fair point about conflict but it is also something that is hard to determent
Click to expand...

I'm fully in agreement with you on that which is why it shouldn't be a factor for determinign a "good state" to begin with.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Not trying to swipe at Sweden, they're a cool people and probably are very "good."
But that index is complete garbage, it even contradicts itself.

An example.

"Try thinking of “good” as a measure of how much a country contributes to the common good. So in this context “good” means the opposite of “selfish”, not the opposite of “bad”. The Good Country Index isn’t trying to make any moral judgments: it just measures, as objectively as possible, what each country contributes to the common good, and what it takes away, relative to its size."

Translates to, "we're not making a moral judgement, but we're making a moral judgment."
Click to expand...

Thanks and of course this index doesn't prove that Sweden is the best country or even the “goodest” country. That like all index is it just one way of measure countries and all indexes have their pros and cons. Still I don’t think it’s complete garbage. Instead it’s an interesting compilation and ranking how countries can contribute to a better world by doing some things and avoiding other things.

That the makers want to say with that quote was that they don’t want to make a judgment if a country should be selfish or not. Instead they just want to show different ways a country can contribute to a better world and also by ranking show how much different countries contribute to the greater good of humanity. But of course there will always be subjetive part in deciding that action is selfish and wich are "good" so therefor it can be good to have debate about their selection of indicators.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom