| Topic: |
Sociology > Depression |
| User: |
"CyberDroog" |
| Date: |
22 Mar 2007 11:01:02 AM |
| Object: |
The Iceland Miracle |
The Iceland Miracle
by James W. Harris
From: The Liberator Online (www.theadvocates.org)
Hey, look at Iceland!
Stuck in the economic doldrums just a few years ago, Iceland today is
enjoying an explosion of prosperity.
In fact, Iceland is now one of the world's richest nations, according to
the World Bank. And it's arguably the wealthiest European country.
The economy is growing rapidly. The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) has grown
about 50% since 1995. And the benefits are being felt throughout Icelandic
society. Unemployment has almost disappeared -- dropping below 2 percent.
As a writer for the UK Spectator bluntly put it: "Today, Icelanders are
absolutely rolling in it."
So what happened? Lots of lucky lottery ticket winners? Nope. Beginning
around 1990, Icelandic leaders -- inspired by visits from libertarian free-
market thinkers like Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman and James Buchanan --
instituted bold, fundamental free-market reforms.
Taxes were slashed, for both individuals and businesses. Personal income
tax rates were cut from 33 percent in 1995 to 22.75 percent. The corporate
tax rate was cut from 55 percent to 18 percent -- and a further cut to 10
percent is under consideration. A cumbersome income tax was replaced with a
flat tax. Wealth and estate taxes were slashed. Major segments of the
economy were deregulated. Numerous government services were privatized.
Monetary policy was stabilized; inflation, which hit 100% in 1983, is down
to 2-3% today. Government debt was hacked away. Private property rights
were created for fisheries, a major Icelandic industry. And so forth.
Due to such market-oriented reforms, between 1990 and today Iceland rose
from 26th to 9th in the Economic Freedom of the World rankings (a respected
annual ranking of countries by the amount of economic freedom they permit).
The result: Iceland is enjoying the same remarkable progress that other
countries around the world which have adopted similar policies have also
seen.
Lesson, anyone?
(Sources:
Cato Institute: http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb_0207-43.pdf
NCPA:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?page=article&Article_ID=14288
Wall Street Journal:
http://www.mps-iceland.org/img/WSJ-HHG.pdf
Thanks to Larry Alexander)
.
|
|
| User: "used2be" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 03:37:51 PM |
|
|
"CyberDroog" <CyberDroog@ClockworkOrange.com> wrote in message
news:h0a503p7pcl0epdn04dkl2erpuunftnkk0@news.easynews.com...
The Iceland Miracle
by James W. Harris
From: The Liberator Online (www.theadvocates.org)
Hey, look at Iceland!
Stuck in the economic doldrums just a few years ago, Iceland today is
enjoying an explosion of prosperity.
In fact, Iceland is now one of the world's richest nations, according to
the World Bank. And it's arguably the wealthiest European country.
The economy is growing rapidly. The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) has grown
about 50% since 1995. And the benefits are being felt throughout Icelandic
society. Unemployment has almost disappeared -- dropping below 2 percent.
As a writer for the UK Spectator bluntly put it: "Today, Icelanders are
absolutely rolling in it."
So what happened? Lots of lucky lottery ticket winners? Nope. Beginning
around 1990, Icelandic leaders -- inspired by visits from libertarian
free-
market thinkers like Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman and James
Buchanan --
instituted bold, fundamental free-market reforms.
Taxes were slashed, for both individuals and businesses. Personal income
tax rates were cut from 33 percent in 1995 to 22.75 percent. The corporate
tax rate was cut from 55 percent to 18 percent -- and a further cut to 10
percent is under consideration. A cumbersome income tax was replaced with
a
flat tax. Wealth and estate taxes were slashed. Major segments of the
economy were deregulated. Numerous government services were privatized.
Monetary policy was stabilized; inflation, which hit 100% in 1983, is down
to 2-3% today. Government debt was hacked away. Private property rights
were created for fisheries, a major Icelandic industry. And so forth.
Due to such market-oriented reforms, between 1990 and today Iceland rose
from 26th to 9th in the Economic Freedom of the World rankings (a
respected
annual ranking of countries by the amount of economic freedom they
permit).
The result: Iceland is enjoying the same remarkable progress that other
countries around the world which have adopted similar policies have also
seen.
Lesson, anyone?
free market. it works everytime it's tried.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 12:05:11 PM |
|
|
On 3/22/2007 10:01 AM, CyberDroog was all like:
The Iceland Miracle
by James W. Harris
From: The Liberator Online (www.theadvocates.org)
Hey, look at Iceland!
Stuck in the economic doldrums just a few years ago, Iceland today is
enjoying an explosion of prosperity.
In fact, Iceland is now one of the world's richest nations, according to
the World Bank. And it's arguably the wealthiest European country.
The economy is growing rapidly. The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) has grown
about 50% since 1995. And the benefits are being felt throughout Icelandic
society. Unemployment has almost disappeared -- dropping below 2 percent.
As a writer for the UK Spectator bluntly put it: "Today, Icelanders are
absolutely rolling in it."
So what happened? Lots of lucky lottery ticket winners? Nope. Beginning
around 1990, Icelandic leaders -- inspired by visits from libertarian free-
market thinkers like Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman and James Buchanan --
instituted bold, fundamental free-market reforms.
Taxes were slashed, for both individuals and businesses. Personal income
tax rates were cut from 33 percent in 1995 to 22.75 percent. The corporate
tax rate was cut from 55 percent to 18 percent -- and a further cut to 10
percent is under consideration. A cumbersome income tax was replaced with a
flat tax. Wealth and estate taxes were slashed. Major segments of the
economy were deregulated. Numerous government services were privatized.
Monetary policy was stabilized; inflation, which hit 100% in 1983, is down
to 2-3% today. Government debt was hacked away. Private property rights
were created for fisheries, a major Icelandic industry. And so forth.
Due to such market-oriented reforms, between 1990 and today Iceland rose
from 26th to 9th in the Economic Freedom of the World rankings (a respected
annual ranking of countries by the amount of economic freedom they permit).
The result: Iceland is enjoying the same remarkable progress that other
countries around the world which have adopted similar policies have also
seen.
Lesson, anyone?
(Sources:
Cato Institute: http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb_0207-43.pdf
NCPA:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?page=article&Article_ID=14288
Wall Street Journal:
http://www.mps-iceland.org/img/WSJ-HHG.pdf
Thanks to Larry Alexander)
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Janithor" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 02:33:39 PM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
On 3/22/2007 10:01 AM, CyberDroog was all like:
The Iceland Miracle
by James W. Harris
From: The Liberator Online (www.theadvocates.org)
Hey, look at Iceland!
Stuck in the economic doldrums just a few years ago, Iceland today is
enjoying an explosion of prosperity.
In fact, Iceland is now one of the world's richest nations, according
to the World Bank. And it's arguably the wealthiest European country.
The economy is growing rapidly. The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) has
grown about 50% since 1995. And the benefits are being felt throughout
Icelandic society. Unemployment has almost disappeared -- dropping
below 2 percent.
As a writer for the UK Spectator bluntly put it: "Today, Icelanders
are absolutely rolling in it."
So what happened? Lots of lucky lottery ticket winners? Nope.
Beginning around 1990, Icelandic leaders -- inspired by visits from
libertarian free-
market thinkers like Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman and James
Buchanan --
instituted bold, fundamental free-market reforms.
Taxes were slashed, for both individuals and businesses. Personal
income tax rates were cut from 33 percent in 1995 to 22.75 percent.
The corporate tax rate was cut from 55 percent to 18 percent -- and a
further cut to 10 percent is under consideration. A cumbersome income
tax was replaced with a
flat tax. Wealth and estate taxes were slashed. Major segments of the
economy were deregulated. Numerous government services were
privatized. Monetary policy was stabilized; inflation, which hit 100%
in 1983, is down to 2-3% today. Government debt was hacked away.
Private property rights were created for fisheries, a major Icelandic
industry. And so forth.
Due to such market-oriented reforms, between 1990 and today Iceland
rose from 26th to 9th in the Economic Freedom of the World rankings (a
respected
annual ranking of countries by the amount of economic freedom they
permit).
The result: Iceland is enjoying the same remarkable progress that
other countries around the world which have adopted similar policies
have also seen.
Lesson, anyone?
(Sources:
Cato Institute: http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb_0207-43.pdf
NCPA:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?page=article&Article_ID=14288
Wall Street Journal: http://www.mps-iceland.org/img/WSJ-HHG.pdf
Thanks to Larry Alexander)
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
That wouldn't explain the change though, because presumably their energy
costs have always been low.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Dehn" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 04:26:20 PM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
That wouldn't explain the change though, because presumably
their energy costs have always been low.
Iceland restructured its energy usage during the 1990s,
to get rid of the dreaded oil dependency by 2020.
Then, the costs for the geothermal energy did not go up
as quickly as the oil price. That *is* a competitive advantage
for Iceland in recent years. *Your* energy price has about tripled the last few years,
whereas Iceland's energy price remained pretty constant.
Next, the 50% growth number is a bit misleading. 50% growth
over 12 years, thats 3.43% per year. Thats not much
for an underdeveloped country that is transitioning from
fishing and sheep to industry and services.
Most of Iceland's economic growth is in tourism, which
has almost doubled from 1995 to 2000 alone, and now is
Iceland's second largest part of the economy (#1 still is fishing).
Neither fishing nor tourism should be much impacted by Iceland's
income taxes, so there goes Droog's nice theory.
Thomas
.
|
|
|
| User: "used2be" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 04:34:53 PM |
|
|
"Thomas Dehn" <thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote in message
news:56gaf8F29em81U4@mid.individual.net...
x-no-archive: yes
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
That wouldn't explain the change though, because presumably
their energy costs have always been low.
Iceland restructured its energy usage during the 1990s,
to get rid of the dreaded oil dependency by 2020.
Then, the costs for the geothermal energy did not go up
as quickly as the oil price. That *is* a competitive advantage
for Iceland in recent years. *Your* energy price has about tripled the
last few years,
whereas Iceland's energy price remained pretty constant.
Next, the 50% growth number is a bit misleading. 50% growth
over 12 years, thats 3.43% per year. Thats not much
for an underdeveloped country that is transitioning from
fishing and sheep to industry and services.
Most of Iceland's economic growth is in tourism, which
has almost doubled from 1995 to 2000 alone, and now is
Iceland's second largest part of the economy (#1 still is fishing).
Neither fishing nor tourism should be much impacted by Iceland's
income taxes, so there goes Droog's nice theory.
not convincing at all....sorry.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "CyberDroog" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 03:25:41 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 22:26:20 +0100, "Thomas Dehn" <thomas-usenet@arcor.de>
wrote:
Most of Iceland's economic growth is in tourism, which
has almost doubled from 1995 to 2000 alone, and now is
Iceland's second largest part of the economy (#1 still is fishing).
Neither fishing nor tourism should be much impacted by Iceland's
income taxes, so there goes Droog's nice theory.
It wasn't my theory.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "sigvaldi" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 05:40:50 PM |
|
|
Thomas Dehn wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
That wouldn't explain the change though, because presumably
their energy costs have always been low.
Iceland restructured its energy usage during the 1990s,
to get rid of the dreaded oil dependency by 2020.
Then, the costs for the geothermal energy did not go up
as quickly as the oil price. That *is* a competitive advantage
for Iceland in recent years. *Your* energy price has about tripled the last few years,
whereas Iceland's energy price remained pretty constant.
Iceland gets most of the electricity from hydro electric sources, hot
water for heating homes and businesses comes from geothermal but only
ca 20% of the electricity.
Next, the 50% growth number is a bit misleading. 50% growth
over 12 years, thats 3.43% per year. Thats not much
for an underdeveloped country that is transitioning from
fishing and sheep to industry and services.
Iceland has been developing for a lot longer than that, it was not an
underdeveloped country, most of the transition took place over a much
longer period, the article is quite misleading on most points.
Most of Iceland's economic growth is in tourism, which
has almost doubled from 1995 to 2000 alone, and now is
Iceland's second largest part of the economy (#1 still is fishing).
Neither fishing nor tourism should be much impacted by Iceland's
income taxes, so there goes Droog's nice theory.
The taxes could be lowered when the economy allowed, the cuts in taxes
were the result of an economic upswing, not the cause.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Dehn" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 11:07:05 PM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
"sigvaldi" <sigvald@binet.is> wrote:
Thomas Dehn wrote:
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
That wouldn't explain the change though, because presumably
their energy costs have always been low.
Iceland restructured its energy usage during the 1990s,
to get rid of the dreaded oil dependency by 2020.
Then, the costs for the geothermal energy did not go up
as quickly as the oil price. That *is* a competitive advantage
for Iceland in recent years. *Your* energy price has about tripled the last few years,
whereas Iceland's energy price remained pretty constant.
Iceland gets most of the electricity from hydro electric sources, hot
water for heating homes and businesses comes from geothermal but only
ca 20% of the electricity.
The other 80% of Iceland's electricity are not burning
fossiles either, but hydropower. Thus, again, not really
affected by the rising oil and natural gas price.
(Iceland began using hydropower to create electricity
way back in 1921. The year 2020 program
I referenced above is Iceland's goal to use hydropower to
create hydrogen to power Iceland's fishing fleet, and the cars and
busses.)
Next, the 50% growth number is a bit misleading. 50% growth
over 12 years, thats 3.43% per year. Thats not much
for an underdeveloped country that is transitioning from
fishing and sheep to industry and services.
Iceland has been developing for a lot longer than that, it was not an
underdeveloped country, most of the transition took place over a much
longer period, the article is quite misleading on most points.
Depends on what you consider underdeveloped.
Iceland's per capita GDP is above EU average (Iceland
is not an EU member), but Iceland still does not
export much except fish and fish products.
A country that is not exporting much, and does not have
much tourism either (Iceland pre 1990s) has a good
potential for growth, just by increasing tourism and foreign trade.
Here, the ultimate resolution of all those fishing wars between
the UK and Iceland, way back in 1991, where one result was
that the EU dropped import taxes on Iceland's fish and fish products,
probably contributed to Iceland's growth in the 2nd half of the 1990s.
That actually is a tax reduction, just not the one Droog considered. ;-)
Thomas
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 09:25:03 AM |
|
|
On 3/22/2007 10:07 PM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
x-no-archive: yes
"sigvaldi" <sigvald@binet.is> wrote:
Thomas Dehn wrote:
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
That wouldn't explain the change though, because presumably
their energy costs have always been low.
Iceland restructured its energy usage during the 1990s,
to get rid of the dreaded oil dependency by 2020.
Then, the costs for the geothermal energy did not go up
as quickly as the oil price. That *is* a competitive advantage
for Iceland in recent years. *Your* energy price has about tripled the last few years,
whereas Iceland's energy price remained pretty constant.
Iceland gets most of the electricity from hydro electric sources, hot
water for heating homes and businesses comes from geothermal but only
ca 20% of the electricity.
The other 80% of Iceland's electricity are not burning
fossiles either, but hydropower. Thus, again, not really
affected by the rising oil and natural gas price.
(Iceland began using hydropower to create electricity
way back in 1921. The year 2020 program
I referenced above is Iceland's goal to use hydropower to
create hydrogen to power Iceland's fishing fleet, and the cars and
busses.)
Next, the 50% growth number is a bit misleading. 50% growth
over 12 years, thats 3.43% per year. Thats not much
for an underdeveloped country that is transitioning from
fishing and sheep to industry and services.
Iceland has been developing for a lot longer than that, it was not an
underdeveloped country, most of the transition took place over a much
longer period, the article is quite misleading on most points.
Depends on what you consider underdeveloped.
Iceland's per capita GDP is above EU average (Iceland
is not an EU member), but Iceland still does not
export much except fish and fish products.
A country that is not exporting much, and does not have
much tourism either (Iceland pre 1990s) has a good
potential for growth, just by increasing tourism and foreign trade.
Here, the ultimate resolution of all those fishing wars between
the UK and Iceland, way back in 1991, where one result was
that the EU dropped import taxes on Iceland's fish and fish products,
probably contributed to Iceland's growth in the 2nd half of the 1990s.
That actually is a tax reduction, just not the one Droog considered. ;-)
Thomas
They're also splitting by about half a centimeter per year! That's FREE
real estate!!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "sigvaldi" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 10:00:15 AM |
|
|
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
On 3/22/2007 10:07 PM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
x-no-archive: yes
"sigvaldi" <sigvald@binet.is> wrote:
Thomas Dehn wrote:
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
That wouldn't explain the change though, because presumably
their energy costs have always been low.
Iceland restructured its energy usage during the 1990s,
to get rid of the dreaded oil dependency by 2020.
Then, the costs for the geothermal energy did not go up
as quickly as the oil price. That *is* a competitive advantage
for Iceland in recent years. *Your* energy price has about tripled the last few years,
whereas Iceland's energy price remained pretty constant.
Iceland gets most of the electricity from hydro electric sources, hot
water for heating homes and businesses comes from geothermal but only
ca 20% of the electricity.
The other 80% of Iceland's electricity are not burning
fossiles either, but hydropower. Thus, again, not really
affected by the rising oil and natural gas price.
(Iceland began using hydropower to create electricity
way back in 1921. The year 2020 program
I referenced above is Iceland's goal to use hydropower to
create hydrogen to power Iceland's fishing fleet, and the cars and
busses.)
Next, the 50% growth number is a bit misleading. 50% growth
over 12 years, thats 3.43% per year. Thats not much
for an underdeveloped country that is transitioning from
fishing and sheep to industry and services.
Iceland has been developing for a lot longer than that, it was not an
underdeveloped country, most of the transition took place over a much
longer period, the article is quite misleading on most points.
Depends on what you consider underdeveloped.
Iceland's per capita GDP is above EU average (Iceland
is not an EU member), but Iceland still does not
export much except fish and fish products.
A country that is not exporting much, and does not have
much tourism either (Iceland pre 1990s) has a good
potential for growth, just by increasing tourism and foreign trade.
Here, the ultimate resolution of all those fishing wars between
the UK and Iceland, way back in 1991, where one result was
that the EU dropped import taxes on Iceland's fish and fish products,
probably contributed to Iceland's growth in the 2nd half of the 1990s.
That actually is a tax reduction, just not the one Droog considered. ;-)
Thomas
They're also splitting by about half a centimeter per year! That's FREE
real estate!!!
Well, probably. Erosion is possibly reducing that gain somewhat.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 11:01:37 AM |
|
|
On 3/23/2007 9:00 AM, sigvaldi was all like:
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
On 3/22/2007 10:07 PM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
x-no-archive: yes
"sigvaldi" <sigvald@binet.is> wrote:
Thomas Dehn wrote:
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
That wouldn't explain the change though, because presumably
their energy costs have always been low.
Iceland restructured its energy usage during the 1990s,
to get rid of the dreaded oil dependency by 2020.
Then, the costs for the geothermal energy did not go up
as quickly as the oil price. That *is* a competitive advantage
for Iceland in recent years. *Your* energy price has about tripled the last few years,
whereas Iceland's energy price remained pretty constant.
Iceland gets most of the electricity from hydro electric sources, hot
water for heating homes and businesses comes from geothermal but only
ca 20% of the electricity.
The other 80% of Iceland's electricity are not burning
fossiles either, but hydropower. Thus, again, not really
affected by the rising oil and natural gas price.
(Iceland began using hydropower to create electricity
way back in 1921. The year 2020 program
I referenced above is Iceland's goal to use hydropower to
create hydrogen to power Iceland's fishing fleet, and the cars and
busses.)
Next, the 50% growth number is a bit misleading. 50% growth
over 12 years, thats 3.43% per year. Thats not much
for an underdeveloped country that is transitioning from
fishing and sheep to industry and services.
Iceland has been developing for a lot longer than that, it was not an
underdeveloped country, most of the transition took place over a much
longer period, the article is quite misleading on most points.
Depends on what you consider underdeveloped.
Iceland's per capita GDP is above EU average (Iceland
is not an EU member), but Iceland still does not
export much except fish and fish products.
A country that is not exporting much, and does not have
much tourism either (Iceland pre 1990s) has a good
potential for growth, just by increasing tourism and foreign trade.
Here, the ultimate resolution of all those fishing wars between
the UK and Iceland, way back in 1991, where one result was
that the EU dropped import taxes on Iceland's fish and fish products,
probably contributed to Iceland's growth in the 2nd half of the 1990s.
That actually is a tax reduction, just not the one Droog considered. ;-)
Thomas
They're also splitting by about half a centimeter per year! That's FREE
real estate!!!
Well, probably. Erosion is possibly reducing that gain somewhat.
Now the real estate market is gonna collapse, you can't point out that
kind of thing.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "sigvaldi" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 03:18:30 AM |
|
|
Thomas Dehn wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
"sigvaldi" <sigvald@binet.is> wrote:
Thomas Dehn wrote:
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
That wouldn't explain the change though, because presumably
their energy costs have always been low.
Iceland restructured its energy usage during the 1990s,
to get rid of the dreaded oil dependency by 2020.
Then, the costs for the geothermal energy did not go up
as quickly as the oil price. That *is* a competitive advantage
for Iceland in recent years. *Your* energy price has about tripled the last few years,
whereas Iceland's energy price remained pretty constant.
Iceland gets most of the electricity from hydro electric sources, hot
water for heating homes and businesses comes from geothermal but only
ca 20% of the electricity.
The other 80% of Iceland's electricity are not burning
fossiles either, but hydropower. Thus, again, not really
affected by the rising oil and natural gas price.
(Iceland began using hydropower to create electricity
way back in 1921. The year 2020 program
I referenced above is Iceland's goal to use hydropower to
create hydrogen to power Iceland's fishing fleet, and the cars and
busses.)
Next, the 50% growth number is a bit misleading. 50% growth
over 12 years, thats 3.43% per year. Thats not much
for an underdeveloped country that is transitioning from
fishing and sheep to industry and services.
Iceland has been developing for a lot longer than that, it was not an
underdeveloped country, most of the transition took place over a much
longer period, the article is quite misleading on most points.
Depends on what you consider underdeveloped.
Iceland's per capita GDP is above EU average (Iceland
is not an EU member), but Iceland still does not
export much except fish and fish products.
Fish and fish products account for ca 40% of the exports.
A country that is not exporting much, and does not have
much tourism either (Iceland pre 1990s) has a good
potential for growth, just by increasing tourism and foreign trade.
Here, the ultimate resolution of all those fishing wars between
the UK and Iceland, way back in 1991, where one result was
that the EU dropped import taxes on Iceland's fish and fish products,
probably contributed to Iceland's growth in the 2nd half of the 1990s.
That actually is a tax reduction, just not the one Droog considered. ;-)
True, that and other "outside factors" account for much of the rise of
the Icelandic economy, the tax cuts in Iceland were a response to, not
the cause of, the economic boom.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 09:27:19 AM |
|
|
On 3/23/2007 2:18 AM, sigvaldi was all like:
True, that and other "outside factors" account for much of the rise of
the Icelandic economy, the tax cuts in Iceland were a response to, not
the cause of, the economic boom.
I call it the "Björk Effect".
Now everybody make love like a robot.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Dehn" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 04:08:15 PM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
"sigvaldi" <sigvald@binet.is> wrote:
Thomas Dehn wrote:
Depends on what you consider underdeveloped.
Iceland's per capita GDP is above EU average (Iceland
is not an EU member), but Iceland still does not
export much except fish and fish products.
Fish and fish products account for ca 40% of the exports.
The last reliable numbers I can find for Iceland's exports
are from 2003. In 2003, marine exports constituted
62.3% of Iceland's exports. Aluminium was 18.8% in 2003,
and I believe the aluminium price has increased a little bit
since 2003.
Thomas
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 04:53:44 PM |
|
|
On 3/23/2007 3:08 PM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
x-no-archive: yes
"sigvaldi" <sigvald@binet.is> wrote:
Thomas Dehn wrote:
Depends on what you consider underdeveloped.
Iceland's per capita GDP is above EU average (Iceland
is not an EU member), but Iceland still does not
export much except fish and fish products.
Fish and fish products account for ca 40% of the exports.
The last reliable numbers I can find for Iceland's exports
are from 2003. In 2003, marine exports constituted
62.3% of Iceland's exports. Aluminium was 18.8% in 2003,
and I believe the aluminium price has increased a little bit
since 2003.
Thomas
Aluminum's a hell of a good business to be in if you've got cheap
electricity.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Dehn" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
24 Mar 2007 02:27:54 AM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
"Franz Bestuchev" <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/23/2007 3:08 PM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
The last reliable numbers I can find for Iceland's exports
are from 2003. In 2003, marine exports constituted
62.3% of Iceland's exports. Aluminium was 18.8% in 2003,
and I believe the aluminium price has increased a little bit
since 2003.
Aluminum's a hell of a good business to be in if you've got cheap
electricity.
Iceland has been building a new very large hydroelectric power plant
(increasing Iceland's electricity production by 60%)
which will exclusively serve a new huge aluminium smelter.
Production is supposed to begin this year.
Thomas
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
24 Mar 2007 08:05:39 AM |
|
|
On 3/24/2007 1:27 AM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
x-no-archive: yes
"Franz Bestuchev" <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/23/2007 3:08 PM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
The last reliable numbers I can find for Iceland's exports
are from 2003. In 2003, marine exports constituted
62.3% of Iceland's exports. Aluminium was 18.8% in 2003,
and I believe the aluminium price has increased a little bit
since 2003.
Aluminum's a hell of a good business to be in if you've got cheap
electricity.
Iceland has been building a new very large hydroelectric power plant
(increasing Iceland's electricity production by 60%)
which will exclusively serve a new huge aluminium smelter.
Production is supposed to begin this year.
Thomas
I'm just guessing but that's probably from the application of their real
deep drilling tech they've been working on. It's a lot more fun to pull
the SUPER hot water up from 600-800 meters than it is to get it closer
to the surface.
Amazing stuff, aluminum, (favorite metal #3), hellaciously abundant in
the earth's crust but hard enough to pull apart that when it was newly
discovered it was selling for much, much more than gold.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Dehn" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
24 Mar 2007 09:33:19 AM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
"Franz Bestuchev" <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/24/2007 1:27 AM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
"Franz Bestuchev" <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/23/2007 3:08 PM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
The last reliable numbers I can find for Iceland's exports
are from 2003. In 2003, marine exports constituted
62.3% of Iceland's exports. Aluminium was 18.8% in 2003,
and I believe the aluminium price has increased a little bit
since 2003.
Aluminum's a hell of a good business to be in if you've got cheap
electricity.
Iceland has been building a new very large hydroelectric power plant
(increasing Iceland's electricity production by 60%)
which will exclusively serve a new huge aluminium smelter.
Production is supposed to begin this year.
I'm just guessing but that's probably from the application of their real
deep drilling tech they've been working on. It's a lot more fun to pull
the SUPER hot water up from 600-800 meters than it is to get it closer
to the surface.
Hydroelectric power plant, what you describe would
be geothermal energy. If you google for "Hydroelectric power plant",
"Iceland" and "Aluminium", you will get quite a few descriptive hits.
Thomas
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
24 Mar 2007 10:21:06 AM |
|
|
On 3/24/2007 8:33 AM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
x-no-archive: yes
"Franz Bestuchev" <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/24/2007 1:27 AM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
"Franz Bestuchev" <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/23/2007 3:08 PM, Thomas Dehn was all like:
The last reliable numbers I can find for Iceland's exports
are from 2003. In 2003, marine exports constituted
62.3% of Iceland's exports. Aluminium was 18.8% in 2003,
and I believe the aluminium price has increased a little bit
since 2003.
Aluminum's a hell of a good business to be in if you've got cheap
electricity.
Iceland has been building a new very large hydroelectric power plant
(increasing Iceland's electricity production by 60%)
which will exclusively serve a new huge aluminium smelter.
Production is supposed to begin this year.
I'm just guessing but that's probably from the application of their real
deep drilling tech they've been working on. It's a lot more fun to pull
the SUPER hot water up from 600-800 meters than it is to get it closer
to the surface.
Hydroelectric power plant, what you describe would
be geothermal energy. If you google for "Hydroelectric power plant",
"Iceland" and "Aluminium", you will get quite a few descriptive hits.
Thomas
Well I don't really care how they applied it. I just know that one of
the technologies they're developing as of late is going for the hot, hot
to run things. But a damn damn does the job too. I believe Alcoa has
some facilites around Niagara for the same reasons, also doesn't hurt
that Canada's got the bauxite for 'em.
Can I get a holla for nonferrous metals!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Janithor" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 06:01:07 PM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
sigvaldi wrote:
Thomas Dehn wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
That wouldn't explain the change though, because presumably
their energy costs have always been low.
Iceland restructured its energy usage during the 1990s,
to get rid of the dreaded oil dependency by 2020.
Then, the costs for the geothermal energy did not go up
as quickly as the oil price. That *is* a competitive advantage
for Iceland in recent years. *Your* energy price has about tripled the last few years,
whereas Iceland's energy price remained pretty constant.
Iceland gets most of the electricity from hydro electric sources, hot
water for heating homes and businesses comes from geothermal but only
ca 20% of the electricity.
Next, the 50% growth number is a bit misleading. 50% growth
over 12 years, thats 3.43% per year. Thats not much
for an underdeveloped country that is transitioning from
fishing and sheep to industry and services.
Iceland has been developing for a lot longer than that, it was not an
underdeveloped country, most of the transition took place over a much
longer period, the article is quite misleading on most points.
Most of Iceland's economic growth is in tourism, which
has almost doubled from 1995 to 2000 alone, and now is
Iceland's second largest part of the economy (#1 still is fishing).
Neither fishing nor tourism should be much impacted by Iceland's
income taxes, so there goes Droog's nice theory.
The taxes could be lowered when the economy allowed, the cuts in taxes
were the result of an economic upswing, not the cause.
How do you handle not having any trees? I'd go nuts. No offense.
.
|
|
|
| User: "sigvaldi" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 06:27:50 PM |
|
|
Janithor wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
sigvaldi wrote:
Thomas Dehn wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Franz Bestuchev wrote:
Their energy costs are also really, really low. The whole place is
heated and powered by geothermal energy. 90% of homes.
That wouldn't explain the change though, because presumably
their energy costs have always been low.
Iceland restructured its energy usage during the 1990s,
to get rid of the dreaded oil dependency by 2020.
Then, the costs for the geothermal energy did not go up
as quickly as the oil price. That *is* a competitive advantage
for Iceland in recent years. *Your* energy price has about tripled the last few years,
whereas Iceland's energy price remained pretty constant.
Iceland gets most of the electricity from hydro electric sources, hot
water for heating homes and businesses comes from geothermal but only
ca 20% of the electricity.
Next, the 50% growth number is a bit misleading. 50% growth
over 12 years, thats 3.43% per year. Thats not much
for an underdeveloped country that is transitioning from
fishing and sheep to industry and services.
Iceland has been developing for a lot longer than that, it was not an
underdeveloped country, most of the transition took place over a much
longer period, the article is quite misleading on most points.
Most of Iceland's economic growth is in tourism, which
has almost doubled from 1995 to 2000 alone, and now is
Iceland's second largest part of the economy (#1 still is fishing).
Neither fishing nor tourism should be much impacted by Iceland's
income taxes, so there goes Droog's nice theory.
The taxes could be lowered when the economy allowed, the cuts in taxes
were the result of an economic upswing, not the cause.
How do you handle not having any trees? I'd go nuts. No offense.
Iceland actually does have a number of trees so there is no reason to
go nuts over that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Janithor" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 06:37:45 PM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
sigvaldi wrote:
Iceland actually does have a number of trees so there is no reason to
go nuts over that.
Oh, I was under the impression that there were no trees in Iceland.
I'll have to visit your fair country some day and help contribute to
your GDP.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gayle" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 08:41:54 AM |
|
|
Janithor wrote:
Oh, I was under the impression that there were no trees in Iceland. I'll
have to visit your fair country some day and help contribute to your GDP.
I'll always have a gigantic warm spot in
my heart for the people of Iceland. My
son was visiting there and ended up
stranded on the last day of his trip --
on 9/11/01. He came back to the hotel
after what he thought was his last day
wandering around in town. The folks at
the hotel tearfully and gently told him
what had happened/was happening in NYC.
They stayed with him while he watched
the coverage on BBC. In addition to
comfort, they provided housing, food,
and trans-Atlantic phone calls home at
no charge, until he was able to sort out
his travel back home.
It helped me shore up my belief, during
those dark days, that there are more
people on this planet with compassion in
their hearts than hate.
Gayle
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "sigvaldi" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 06:48:15 PM |
|
|
Janithor wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
sigvaldi wrote:
Iceland actually does have a number of trees so there is no reason to
go nuts over that.
Oh, I was under the impression that there were no trees in Iceland.
I'll have to visit your fair country some day and help contribute to
your GDP.
Large parts of Iceland are montainous and there are vast lava fields
and in these areas there are no trees and so it can look quite
treeless to the tourist but there are number of areas that may be off
the tourist routes that are forested.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Janithor" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
22 Mar 2007 06:54:47 PM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
sigvaldi wrote:
Janithor wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
sigvaldi wrote:
Iceland actually does have a number of trees so there is no reason to
go nuts over that.
Oh, I was under the impression that there were no trees in Iceland.
I'll have to visit your fair country some day and help contribute to
your GDP.
Large parts of Iceland are montainous and there are vast lava fields
and in these areas there are no trees and so it can look quite
treeless to the tourist but there are number of areas that may be off
the tourist routes that are forested.
Are you just some random lurker dude from Iceland who popped in out of
the ether because someone posted about Iceland? I don't recall seeing
you post before. What's your story?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Charles" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 04:19:28 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:37:45 GMT, Janithor <Janithor@comcast.net>
wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
sigvaldi wrote:
Iceland actually does have a number of trees so there is no reason to
go nuts over that.
Oh, I was under the impression that there were no trees in Iceland.
I'll have to visit your fair country some day and help contribute to
your GDP.
Visit with Google Earth
64 d 07 m 44.82 s N
21 d 55 m 10,21 s W
Check out the views provided. Looks like a nice place.
Charles
__
.
|
|
|
| User: "Janithor" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 06:32:09 PM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
Charles wrote:
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:37:45 GMT, Janithor <Janithor@comcast.net>
wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
sigvaldi wrote:
Iceland actually does have a number of trees so there is no reason to
go nuts over that.
Oh, I was under the impression that there were no trees in Iceland.
I'll have to visit your fair country some day and help contribute to
your GDP.
Visit with Google Earth
64 d 07 m 44.82 s N
21 d 55 m 10,21 s W
Check out the views provided. Looks like a nice place.
Charles
Yeah, but they don't have Paula DeAnda
.
|
|
|
| User: "Charles" |
|
| Title: Re: The Iceland Miracle |
23 Mar 2007 06:36:39 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 23:32:09 GMT, Janithor <Janithor@comcast.net>
wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
Charles wrote:
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:37:45 GMT, Janithor <Janithor@comcast.net>
wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
sigvaldi wrote:
Iceland actually does have a number of trees so there is no reason to
go nuts over that.
Oh, I was under the impression that there were no trees in Iceland.
I'll have to visit your fair country some day and help contribute to
your GDP.
Visit with Google Earth
64 d 07 m 44.82 s N
21 d 55 m 10,21 s W
Check out the views provided. Looks like a nice place.
Charles
Yeah, but they don't have Paula DeAnda
No, but they have Björk.
Charles
__
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
