Interesting.

Interesting nugget from Mark Steyn.

For Britain and Ireland, two relatively dynamic
provinces of a moribund continent, there are only two options: share
the pain and expense and societal upheaval, or decide that you’re not
that "European" after all and begin the process of detachment or at
least semi-detachment. When the Continentals bemoan "Anglo-Saxon"
capitalism, they have a point. Of the 20 economies with the biggest GDP
per capita, no fewer than 11 are current or former realms of Her
Britannic Majesty.

Admittedly, some of the
wealthiest turf is the pinprick colonial tax havens – Bermuda,
Guernsey, the Caymans. But, if you eliminate populations under 10
million, the GDP per capita Top Five are, in order, America, Canada,
Australia, Belgium and the United Kingdom. And if you make it
territories with over 20 million, the Top Four is an Anglosphere sweep.
In other words, the ability to generate wealth among large populations
does indeed seem to be an "Anglo-Saxon" thing. That being so, which is
more likely? That Blair will transform a Europe antipathetic to
Anglo-Saxon ways? Or that Europe will drag its Anglo-Saxons down with
it?

It really does show that we need to become more European, doesn’t it?

7 responses

  1. Mark Steyn’s GDPs are bogus economics though. For instance per capita there’s barely $500 between Germany, UK and France. Then he clearly forgets to include Japan.

  2. Interesting being a pseudonym for wrong? According to OECD data, at PPP Norway, Switzerland, Denmark, Austria, and the Netherlands are all ahead of the UK in GDP/capita (some ahead of Ireland/US). Calculate it at current e/rates and you can add Finland, Sweden, Iceland and Japan, and most are ahead of Australia and some ahead of Ireland. Plus, as Monjo says, France and Germany are close enough to the UK to make Steyn’s claims unsafe.
    I know some would fail his arbitrary ’10 million population’ test, but I guess that’s why he set it at 10 million. And anyway, even on his own terms, he’s still wrong. Again.

  3. not make apologies for Euro idiocy butit would be pretty hard to find anywhere on the planet that wasn’t under the not so pleasant boot heel of his or her Britannic majesty at some stage, or that most of these countries economic gains were made as soon as the Brits left and were despite the damage that the Brits caused, not because of their time under occupation. The comparison between The Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland being an obvious one.

  4. Furthermore, GDP is just one indicator of a nation’s health. Why not compare standards of living, crime rates, social mobility, life expectancy, equality, educational achievment?
    Why not? Because the European states do very well in these, often outstripping the superior Anglo-Saxons.

  5. “…and were despite the damage that the Brits caused, not because of their time under occupation…”
    Time under occupation. Cute, eh? He obviously believes that that the polities of USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand were not created by the Empire but historically preceded it, and were then invaded and ‘occupied’ for a while before emerging from under the iron heel. It’s anti-British fantasists like this who spent 1939-45 slumped against Dublin bars telling the world that Hitler wasn’t so bad.
    I guess we’re to blame for his punctuation, too.

  6. dearieme Avatar
    dearieme

    John, that’s an interesting implication on the history of the Eire economy. Care to elaborate?

  7. EIRE’s wealth is very recent and has been helped by good euro subsidies and the ability to capitalise as a low tax country in a highly mobilised, globalised economy.
    The fact EIRE conspired with Nazi Germany for a full UK invasion means we should probably bomb their potato fields just for old-times sake.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Tim Worstall

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading