It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If you think it’s bad here, don’t try Switzerland

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 09:40 PM
link   
www.timesonline.co.uk...


The United Kingdom has been ranked as one of the most stable and prosperous countries in the world, beating the United States, France and even Switzerland in a global assessment of every nation’s achievements and standards.

A one-year investigation and analysis of 235 countries and dependent territories has put the UK joint seventh in the premier league of nations. The top ten comprise also the Vatican, Sweden, Luxembourg, Monaco, Gibraltar, San Marino, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands and the Irish Republic.

The US lies 22nd and Switzerland, normally associated with wealth and untouchable stability, is rated 17th, losing points in the assessment of its social achievements.

The bottom ten, surprisingly, do not include Iraq.


Congratulations to the UK!
Note that the US has dropped to 22nd.
Where do you think the US will be NEXT year?




posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 12:47 AM
link   
Unless the US changes their ways, it'll only drop
. But then again, i'm surprised the UK ranks so high! I think it's rubbish.. I despise it here


It's totally overrated, if they're judging it by the people.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 05:02 AM
link   
Vatican, Luxembourg, Monaco, Gibraltar, San Marino, Liechtenstein are all (extremely) small state countries, not sure ifyou can compare these "countries" with the real nations.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 05:05 AM
link   
sodom

i dont understand the title...
what do you like to say with " don’t try Switzerland " ?

sodom



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by IchiNiSan
Vatican, Luxembourg, Monaco, Gibraltar, San Marino, Liechtenstein are all (extremely) small state countries, not sure ifyou can compare these "countries" with the real nations.


No no no..

Damnit.. do they not TEACH ANYTHING in schools anymore? Good lord.

A country is a geographical boundary.

A Nation is a PEOPLE.

For instance, most indian tribes are Nations not Countries.

A Country can have 2-infinite cultures and identities. America is a Country. The UK is a Country. A Country is just a political boundary, a defined area ruled by a government of any kind.

A Nation has to be a majority of one ethnicity/culture and identity, usually with a unique history and set of beliefs.

Ireland, Luxumburg, The Vatican .. these are Nations.

They are also States.. a State is any defined political boundary.

The United States is technically defined by 50 States under a unified treaty or Union.. They are called states because they are defined and localized governments.

A Country and a Nation can be a State, almost all are.
(Nation State)
A Country is almost never a Nation.

A Country can however be comprised of Nations. The UK is comprised of Nations.

To say smaller Nations cannot compete with big Countries is .. stupid. Uneducated. Ignorant.

People are, by nature programed to be ruled in small numbers, and in Nation type systems. A unified people with a unified vision of government and governing philosophies. These of course have better standards of living with the right ingrediants.. the EU economic pact has helped these smaller nations economically, so they can naturally beat larger countries when utilizing he resources they are given. This is because Countries tend to be generic and distant to the people, as you can see in America there tends to be larger opposition to the government, like Russia, China and Canada, the largest countries in the world, because there are hundreds if not thousands of ethnicities, philosophies, beliefs, histories and so forth.

So its only natural that those who live in small Nations have a better life, or contentment in life compared to large countries.

Also, it is interesting to see how this list changes. I would be interested in knowing how they calculated these outcomes. 2 years ago Ireland was in 2nd place below Luxumberg. Liechtenstein .. how could you not be happy living there, from the pictures I have seen anyways. Its comprised of what, 2 small towns?


I also see most of the nations at the bottom of the list are small island nations .. ironic that it is these destinations that the people from the most well off countries flock to.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 



Vatican is not a nation - it is a state exclusively.

Other than that, I agree, of course.
Another important factor to be considered is the fact that in "small" countries it's much easier - practically unavoidable (certainly not for a long time) - for people to make their "will" heard and imposed.
Which usually (not always) translates into better social services and the general well-being of said people.







[edit on 25-3-2008 by Vanitas]



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 04:27 PM
link   
This is true, good points. I consider the Vatican to be a nation based purely on religious culture and history.. the Vatican is the Vatican and nothing other then Catholic. To be a citizen you must have been born in the Vatican, you cannot immigrate..

Otherwise its just a City State, with an absolute monarch that is elected by an oligarchy.



posted on Mar, 26 2008 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Having lived in three of the countries listed I can say with upmost confidence that the quality of life in Switzerland is far superior then to both the United States and the UK.



posted on Mar, 26 2008 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Well i live in the irish Rep. and i can say that its alot better here than over in the states
It was a shock to me when i went over to NY to see so many people live in what i would consider sub-stantard housing compared to here



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Just to qualify some of the comments on the thread, let me address some of the concerns raised here.
First, the linked article states:

The global check on every country recognised as an individual state or territory by the United Nations was carried out by Jane’s Information Group and is published today.

Note that the author defines what is considered a state or territory by the UN.

For the poster that was wondering about the comment about Switzerland, the original article online:

If you think it’s bad here, don’t try Switzerland
The Times Online ^ | 25 March 08 | Michael Evans


had the above byline. Note that the article was published in the UK, and thus the comment was aimed at UK citizens, so the comment makes sense since the UK is 7th, and Switzerland 17th.



posted on Mar, 28 2008 @ 02:09 PM
link   
How did they rate the countries? I mean... according to the top 50 of the Times, Germany is at rank 15 while Switzerland is at rank 17.
So, what criterias did they use?

The Times states, that the USA were down at 22 partly due to the proliferation of Firearms in private hands, but if that were the case, Switzerland should be somewhere around Iraq, because here, literally every household with a male member that was in the armed forces has his service rifle at home.

Mr Le Mière said that the US had fallen down the scale, although it still scored an average of 93 out of 100, partly because of the proliferation of small arms owned by Americans and the threat to the population posed by the flow of drugs from across the Mexican border.


So really, how / by what criteria are the countries rated?
And if Germany is better off than Switzerland, how come that tens of thousands of Germans are moving to Switzerland?

And just for the record, I don't care what we Swiss are rated, tbh the lower the better, keeps unhealthy interests in our country lower.
But I still wonder...



posted on Mar, 28 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   
One cannot envision the UK with millions of cameras as being anywhere near desirable. One more aptly would call it some B movie country, "The Blob with a Million Eyes," however such an appellation is not far from fiction. Their policy is beyond Orwellian, and increasing in its quest to outdo the author of 1984. Imagine literal garbage can Police, able to arrest you if you have garbage bags in your car, and who can confiscate your vehicle.

This was their "problem-reaction-solution," to enforce a senseless rationing policy on home garbage pickups. Imagine being approached if you have a video camera and talk to three or more people. Yes they reserve video cameras to themselves, either to punish crime or non-crime, and to cover up crimes at will. Instead of being a boon to a free and peaceful society, these cameras and draconian so called "laws," are to humiliate their subject-slaves. Moving to the UK are you? Make sure you have no opinions, and get ready for a continuing onslaught of draconian laws punishing your very existence. It is possible in only a few years that living with Amazon tribes far away from governments, will be healthier and more prosperous in relevant terms, than living any any of the so called "top 50."

[edit on 28-3-2008 by SkipShipman]



posted on Mar, 28 2008 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Uk is a nightmare waiting to occur- and it shall

the economic situation is dismal, a housing bust like that of the U.S they are facing, and they have even more debt per capita than u.s

geez and the weather is dismal too , jk - kind of

also the pound is going to take a steady beat down.

bars and jails will become more crowded

Hawaii sounds good to me.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join