What Makes a Country Great?

Both sides of the debate have called for a re-examination of our cultural values. A recent comprehensive, multi-disciplined study done by Newsweek magazine provoked me to wonder what our own economic recovery might look like if we reconsidered what we value as a nation. Newsweek rated the world’s top 100 countries, and declared Finland #1. The country we often sentimentally call the greatest is actually ranked 11^th. Not bad, but not the greatest.

The criteria for this study include education, health, quality of life, economic dynamism, and political environment. The top ten includes Finland, Switzerland, Sweden, Australia, Luxembourg, Norway, Canada, Holland, Japan and Denmark. All but one of the countries in Newsweek’s top 20 embrace traditions of westernized democracy, active capitalism, and a respect for personal freedoms. In this way, the western tradition of humanism appears vindicated. This is why China ranks so low on Newsweek’s list, despite being an economic giant. Success is defined by justice under rule of law as much as it is by GNP.

The United States scores highest in the category of economic dynamism, which conjures the notion of economic transition. America has set precedents for such change in the past. Consider our economy during in World War II, or the change from the late 80’s slump to the dotcom revolution in the 90’s, and you have a sense of what our economy has been capable of in the past. But what kind of recovery will ours be someday, and whom will it benefit most?

While Finland and the United States both have populations that exist well above most countries’ standard of living, there is in Finland a smaller disparity between rich and poor. The United States is far ahead of Finland in terms of mass consumption. We are a consumer-based society, where consumerism feeds economic success. Yet each nation in the top ten is rated as having higher levels of success than ours in comprehensive education and in overall health. Newsweek suggests that both numbers one and nine- Finland and Japan - have something to tell about both these topics.

First, education. Newsweek offers Finland’s example. Finnish schools keep longer school hours with shorter breaks than those in the U.S.; they train teachers more rigorously, and there is a cultural expectation that all students will have extra one-on-one tutoring in some capacity. Theirs is a culture where the day-to-day life of the ordinary person is geared heavily toward the education of young people. Our public systems are too slow to respond to such ideas, but Newsweek suggests that Knowledge Is Power Program (KIPP) charter schools are having success with this level of comprehensive intervention.

Japan is one model that Newsweek presents for both health and health care. Japan’s system is not socialized medicine, but the government offers an option to those who cannot afford insurance. Health insurance itself is not an option, though; everyone is required to buy it. What I found fascinating is that most Japanese are actually on private plans.

What might be difficult for Americans to imagine is that Japan’s health care system is capitalism with highly regulated prices. Because of this, patients visit their doctors far more often than we do. Japan’s health care costs are less than half per person what we spend here. Lower costs, combined with the healthier lifestyle of the Japanese themselves, create a life expectancy that the country can actually afford. Still Newsweek’s T.R. Reid suggests that this system may not be sustainable long-term because personal care is favored far more than medical research. No country is perfect.

But consider that what makes these two countries so livable are values that are somewhat alien to Americans. In the midst of our calls for re-examination of cultural values, I wonder if we might reconsider:

Can free market competition in education eclipse the public system and at the same time offer equal services to children? Can competition breed success if it is regulated? What if Americans made their daily work lives geared entirely toward their children’s education, and what if kids’ time was occupied more than ever by schoolwork? In his recent reaction to the Newsweek study, Thomas Friedman asks what if American students in general lived in a culture where apathy toward school was considered unacceptable?

What if teachers were trained nearly as vigorously as doctors? And what if doctors competed for patients and not for the status of their position? Imagine a nation whose life expectancy was high not because seniors were kept alive by an expensive, innovative system but because the diet and habits of its people were so healthy that seniors lived longer and more happily. How many of these issues would force us to rethink our entire identity as a consumer economy?

I am generalizing, and these are questions arising from only one study’s view of greatness. But I wonder how much of our recovery would be eased by addressing cultural conditions that keep us from being the greatest in anything other than the potential for change. Admittedly, the inherent social and cultural challenges of a diverse society are not as present in the top 10 as they are in the United States, but our history tells us that this is not a true impediment to economic recovery.

But notice one other feature that is missing from the top 10. Each of these nations is not saddled with an expensive military that occupies the largest burden on its government’s budget. It’s difficult to imagine the United States redefined as a less militarized nation, but other countries in the top 20 have demilitarized with great success. Imagine the possibilities…

But are any of these possible? Such cultural shifts cannot be successfully legislated. They must come from within.

Comments

[Nick Carraway]

Great article. You do well at taking a complex issues from many perspectives. I think you are right to point out that America's challenges are much larger than those of Finland or Japan. America's status as a global superpower has certainly caused our country more stress over the last century or so and now maybe we need to refocus on our standard of living. We do have a huge military, huge deficit spending, and porous borders that all subtract from what we could potentially accomplish for our citizens. But at the same time, I'd like to see a study or article that examines what the world's standard of living would've been like without America's influence. Would the world be better or worse off if we hadn't risen to global prominence? Perhaps a country's contribution to the rest of the world should be a factor considered when we ask how well they've done for themselves.

[James Dugan]

I an enjoyed your post as it offered a broad perspective on how to improve one's society. The constant search to find what is better is an important search and part of our inherent consumerism in the States.

Education perhaps is undergoing a serious debate after years of attempting just to improve the next generation. Now in some ways I think we are trying to get our students to reach our own or a previous standard of education. I believe it is the same in healthcare.

Is something slipping or can we live with being #11? Were we ever #1 in anyone's mind other than our own?

I really enjoy the idea that education -- the broad based knowledge and cultural beliefs that are meant to insure and promote the ideals of a nation - should be shared by the whole of society. Promoting a versatile and cultural literate youth, as well as an educated and involved electorate to continue democracy and environmental and economic progress, is one I think we must emulate.

Volunteering in schools
Work internships
Saturday Trade schools
Reading as a community
Cultural Events involving a mentor program

When we connect the world of adults, not just parents, with education's goal in more than lip service, but actually craete safeguards and connections in the community, I think we can move towards the society that Finland has created. We can start small but it is possible.

A society where all are responsible for the youth, not just social services paid for by the state or a religious organization.

Thanks again for the lunch.