Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Does your google not work? I won't waste my time on ignorant people who choose not to learn about the world around them. There are two Norweign funds.... But I am sure you knew that.
If you're going to issue personal attacks because someone's views differ from yours you should make the effort to provide statistical data to back it up. Calling someone ignorant who is refuting your facts with their own is as ignorant as you claim those people to be.
I'll help you out....
Norway has two funds that make up the Gov't Pension Fund. (This is really the only whole truth you've stated thus far)
The Government Pension Fund Global (formerly The Government Petroleum Fund)
The Government Pension Fund Norway (formerly, The National Insurance Scheme Fund)
The wealth from petroleum income is deposited in this fund that is comprised of the two funds above.
"The fund saw losses of 4.9 percent in the three months to September, or 273 billion Norwegian crowns ($32.17 billion), according to its results posted on Wednesday morning. This marked the $825 billion fund's third weakest result – measured in its domestic currency - since its launch in 1990. It was also its worse result since October 2011 when it returned -8.8 percent, which it also blamed on tumbling stock markets."
"The Norwegian government has defended its decision to withdraw money from the country's $819 billion dollar sovereign wealth fund.
In January the fund transferred $781 million dollars to the government -- the first such transfer since the fund was set up in 1996, according to the country's Ministry of Finance.
Prime Minister Erna Solberg raised the possibility of a withdrawal during her budget speech last October as falling oil prices have slowed the economy.
The additional cash is needed for Norway's economy as income receipts from oil have plummeted.
Public spending in the country is the third largest in the OECD, accounting for almost 60 percent of GDP.
And Statistics Norway figures show unemployment in the country stood at 4.5 percent in December, trending higher than the long-term average. "
Typically the government is allowed draw down up to 4% of the fund per year to put into the economy because the assumption is made that oil/gas profits should make about that much in the year to recover it. But with prices lower, it isn't recovering all of it.
No one has said the US Govt has made smart budgetary decisions in the past decade, but moving to a system that is slowly beginning to fail (as Denmark and Sweden have already learned) is not correcting the problem, it's just changing it.
I think that site should refer to itself as a church rather than a university, since its views seem to be based more on faith than on facts.
Like the religious belief that GODvernment and the fictional collective has a fictional right to impose its will upon the individual with violence, aggression, and coercion?
There is no more dangerous and destructive religion than that of the zealots who defend the Holy State. Collectivism/Statism is the source of more murders and human deprivation than any force in human history.
Like the religious belief that GODvernment and the fictional collective has a fictional right to impose its will upon the individual with violence, aggression, and coercion?
There is no more dangerous and destructive religion than that of the zealots who defend the Holy State. Collectivism/Statism is the source of more murders and human deprivation than any force in human history.
This is true. In the last century alone, Stalin, Hitler and Mao killed more than 100 million people. That's equal to all the people in California, Texas, New York and Florida combined.
If you're going to issue personal attacks because someone's views differ from yours you should make the effort to provide statistical data to back it up. Calling someone ignorant who is refuting your facts with their own is as ignorant as you claim those people to be.
Refuting what facts exactly? All you are doing is explaining what is happening in Norway.
Quote:
I'll help you out....
Norway has two funds that make up the Gov't Pension Fund. (This is really the only whole truth you've stated thus far)
The Government Pension Fund Global (formerly The Government Petroleum Fund)
The Government Pension Fund Norway (formerly, The National Insurance Scheme Fund)
The wealth from petroleum income is deposited in this fund that is comprised of the two funds above.
Yep. I can google the sum total of man's knowledge too....
Quote:
"The fund saw losses of 4.9 percent in the three months to September, or 273 billion Norwegian crowns ($32.17 billion), according to its results posted on Wednesday morning. This marked the $825 billion fund's third weakest result – measured in its domestic currency - since its launch in 1990. It was also its worse result since October 2011 when it returned -8.8 percent, which it also blamed on tumbling stock markets."
"With the fund as big as it is today, this (market fluctuation) can have a considerable impact in the short term. The fund has a long-term horizon, however, and is in a good position to ride out short-term market volatility," he added.
Quote:
"The Norwegian government has defended its decision to withdraw money from the country's $819 billion dollar sovereign wealth fund.
In January the fund transferred $781 million dollars to the government -- the first such transfer since the fund was set up in 1996, according to the country's Ministry of Finance.
Prime Minister Erna Solberg raised the possibility of a withdrawal during her budget speech last October as falling oil prices have slowed the economy.
The additional cash is needed for Norway's economy as income receipts from oil have plummeted.
Public spending in the country is the third largest in the OECD, accounting for almost 60 percent of GDP.
And Statistics Norway figures show unemployment in the country stood at 4.5 percent in December, trending higher than the long-term average. "
Typically the government is allowed draw down up to 4% of the fund per year to put into the economy because the assumption is made that oil/gas profits should make about that much in the year to recover it. But with prices lower, it isn't recovering all of it.
...and? When your sovereign wealth funds are tied to the market and oil revenues..... What do you think happens during an oil crash and market uncertainty?
Quote:
No one has said the US Govt has made smart budgetary decisions in the past decade, but moving to a system that is slowly beginning to fail (as Denmark and Sweden have already learned) is not correcting the problem, it's just changing it.
What's failing?
The main issues facing the budget's of developed countries and rapidly emerging countries are 1) We severely underestimated how much old age costs 2) We didn't even properly fund our entitlements that incompetently handled. And be "we" I mostly mean boomers since this is the world they built.
Last edited by dv1033; 07-22-2016 at 11:56 PM..
Reason: gra
Nobody (virtually) understands capitalism because capitalism exists nowhere except in black (unregulated) markets. And there are virtually no places on earth where some form of thug government or another doesn't "regulate" the market with aggression, violence, and coercion.
"Socialists", actually no group of collectivists/statists, understand how people can interact freely and voluntarily amongst themselves. Everything that they believe in is based only upon widespread government aggression, violence, and coercion to impose their personal whims upon their fellow man. Their entire "philosophy" is based upon them being able to enslave others through government violence and coercion. They have no concept of human freedom or morality.
so you think the elimination of goverment is inherently moral
give me a break
there is nothing moral about capitalism , its a far more efficient system than outright socialism but there is nothing righteous about it
if markets went completely unchecked and goverment was cut to the bone , you would end up with a bunch of oligarchs with their own private armies - police force protecting their status through violence ( like in the movie robocop ) , the point of goverment is that you can vote it out , you cant vote out some unaccountable mega corporation
so you think the elimination of goverment is inherently moral
give me a break
there is nothing moral about capitalism , its a far more efficient system than outright socialism but there is nothing righteous about it
if markets went completely unchecked and goverment was cut to the bone , you would end up with a bunch of oligarchs with their own private armies - police force protecting their status through violence ( like in the movie robocop ) , the point of goverment is that you can vote it out , you cant vote out some unaccountable mega corporation
But all of these individualists think they'd be the ones immune from any tyranny due solely because at the present time they think they're actually self sustaining.
Socialism cannot advance without capitalism and capitalism needs some socialism as well...the key is to find the balance that works best. Part of me has been envious of the lighter work balance of western European countries like France, Germany, Sweden but you also see countries like Greece, Spain, Portugal that have struggled with socialism...I think USA has a good balance for people that are very productive. I would say Canada has about the best balance.
Since our demographics are closer to Venezuela than Norway, I think we would be more like Venezuela than the Scandinavian countries as we become more socialist.
Socialism cannot advance without capitalism and capitalism needs some socialism as well...the key is to find the balance that works best. Part of me has been envious of the lighter work balance of western European countries like France, Germany, Sweden but you also see countries like Greece, Spain, Portugal that have struggled with socialism...I think USA has a good balance for people that are very productive. I would say Canada has about the best balance.
Since our demographics are closer to Venezuela than Norway, I think we would be more like Venezuela than the Scandinavian countries as we become more socialist.
is venezuela any more of a basket case than countless other developing countries ? , is it anymore socialist either ?
venezuela needed a guy like chavez fifteen years ago , until the price of oil collapsed , he had improved the plight of a sizeable chunk of the population , socialism of that kind is often not a bad thing when the vast majority of people are very poor , enlarging the state allows sweeping change , it happened in ireland back in the earlier thirties , vast public infrastructural programmes were undertaken which would not be considered today
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
