No it is not, They all keep telling stories why they called themselves as “potatoes” how was the life before they find the oil back 30-40 yrs ago, and some of them have no difference than the upstart Arabs who us no idea why to do with money.
It’s all there in the article with sources, Norway was technically a poor country but not compared to others at the time.
Yes, it is a fake design.
It’s correct that Norway was richer than other most other countries before oil was discovered. It had, and still has, massive natural resources and a relatively small population. That’s one explanation for why oil wealth didn’t have the corrupting effect in Norway that it has in other places.
It’s also correct that back then average Norwegians were poor. Economic growth in developed countries over the last fifty years has been dramatic. Compared to living standards today everyone was poor.
Should also be mentioned that Norway had, and still has, a big shipping industry, at one point maybe the greatest in the world. Lot of sailors, lot of shipbuilders and shipowners and everything related to this industry.
The cool fact is that an immigrant from Iraq was essential in Norwegian oil development. We just didn’t have the skills or know how.
Well, it was dirt poor in the 1800s at least. That’s why a lot of people fled to USA.
It got better during the 1900s, staying out of WW1 also helped. But it wasn’t great after WW2 compared to say America for example.
This is a story that comes from Norwegian emigrants to USA.
Norway were not a poor nation, but falling mortality rates resulted in a fast growing population. Mainly agrarian, there were no more available land to farm. So those who left Norway for USA were kind of poor; farmers with no land.
Norway had one of the largest merchant fleets in the world, and thriving mechanical and chemical industries. Fishing, timber exports and massive mining (and whaling actually).
So: not poor as nation, but with quite a problem with poverty anyway.
Yes. It is hard to pinpoint where this narrative comes from. In school I learned that Norway had the second highest per capita emigration to the US, and this was attributed to being one of the poorest countries in Western Europe in the latter half of the 19th century. This claim has later been accepted as being factually incorrect: yes, there was indeed poverty at the time, but so had most other Western European countries, and we weren’t close to being the poorest. In truth, Norway went through rapid industrialization starting around 1850 and onwards. We were a resource rich country before the discovery of oil, and we were big exporters of timber, fish and whale oil. In the first halt of the 20th century we built hydroelectric dams, and became a producer of aluminium and fertilizer. We were at some point one of the largest shipping nations in the world and the Norwegian trade fleet were crucial to the war effort during WW2. In fact, Norwegian economy was already growing rapidly in the post-war era, benefitting considerably from the Marshall aid. So, while discovery oil unquestionably were a big boon to economic growth, no we weren’t that poor in 1969.
More distribution of wealth that was an issue. The big ship fleet owners had castles while most people on Norway lived in tiny huts. Also the odel laws meant that only the eldest would inherent the farm meaning a lot of people started with zero and got nothing for free.
The true source of Norway’s wealth was the three-part labor negotiations between the unions, business organizations and the government – that ensured both the our export economy could stay competitive while the rest of the world went through the great depression while greatly reducing poverty and improving workers conditions. The arrangement got formalized in 1935
Not really. Oil was first discovered on the Norwegian shelf in 1967.
In 1966, Norway had a slightly lower GDP per capita (2300 USD) than Denmark (2400 USD) and much lower than Sweden (3200 USD), but higher than the UK and France. It was a rich country, not that GDP per capita is the best measure of that.
It’s now significantly richer than any of them.
Most of Norway was poor and more agricultural a century ago, but that was true of every country, including the US, UK and Sweden, and the larger agricultural sector then means people remember their grandparents being farmers and assumed this means they were poor. In the meantime, cities, while massive centres of economic activity, were also hotbeds of poverty everywhere.
Even in 1900, when GDP wasn’t something people measured and is harder to compare in retrospect, Norway had high life expectancy and literacy rate than most countries of Western Europe – according to some estimates than any.
Look at the data instead of listening to the narrative
1950 to 1973 is often referred to as the golden ear of Norwegian post war economy. Strict social democratic rule, growing public sector (Nordic Model) and centralized economic planning. Also 400 million US dollars as part of the Marshall program (like most countries). In 58 we joined EFTA, had a rising foreign trade, annual growth of more than 3%, stable inflation and barely any unemployment. All this due to a large public sector and good economic planning.
Of course in 69 we (or rather Philips Petroleum) discovered oil at the Ekofisk field. After that we barely looked back. We did however have a heavy deindustrialization due to the massive growth in the petroleum sector. Some economic hick ups in the 80’s and 90’s due to change from Labour to a Conservative government, but still brought Norway to as #1 on the GDP per capita.
No, it is utter rubbish. In 1965, before oil was even discovered in Norway, GDP per capita was 10th highest in the world. That happens to be exactly the same as in the latest world bank numbers.
15 comments
No it is not, They all keep telling stories why they called themselves as “potatoes” how was the life before they find the oil back 30-40 yrs ago, and some of them have no difference than the upstart Arabs who us no idea why to do with money.
It’s all there in the article with sources, Norway was technically a poor country but not compared to others at the time.
Yes, it is a fake design.
It’s correct that Norway was richer than other most other countries before oil was discovered. It had, and still has, massive natural resources and a relatively small population. That’s one explanation for why oil wealth didn’t have the corrupting effect in Norway that it has in other places.
It’s also correct that back then average Norwegians were poor. Economic growth in developed countries over the last fifty years has been dramatic. Compared to living standards today everyone was poor.
Should also be mentioned that Norway had, and still has, a big shipping industry, at one point maybe the greatest in the world. Lot of sailors, lot of shipbuilders and shipowners and everything related to this industry.
The cool fact is that an immigrant from Iraq was essential in Norwegian oil development. We just didn’t have the skills or know how.
Well, it was dirt poor in the 1800s at least. That’s why a lot of people fled to USA.
It got better during the 1900s, staying out of WW1 also helped. But it wasn’t great after WW2 compared to say America for example.
This is a story that comes from Norwegian emigrants to USA.
Norway were not a poor nation, but falling mortality rates resulted in a fast growing population. Mainly agrarian, there were no more available land to farm. So those who left Norway for USA were kind of poor; farmers with no land.
Norway had one of the largest merchant fleets in the world, and thriving mechanical and chemical industries. Fishing, timber exports and massive mining (and whaling actually).
So: not poor as nation, but with quite a problem with poverty anyway.
Yes. It is hard to pinpoint where this narrative comes from. In school I learned that Norway had the second highest per capita emigration to the US, and this was attributed to being one of the poorest countries in Western Europe in the latter half of the 19th century. This claim has later been accepted as being factually incorrect: yes, there was indeed poverty at the time, but so had most other Western European countries, and we weren’t close to being the poorest. In truth, Norway went through rapid industrialization starting around 1850 and onwards. We were a resource rich country before the discovery of oil, and we were big exporters of timber, fish and whale oil. In the first halt of the 20th century we built hydroelectric dams, and became a producer of aluminium and fertilizer. We were at some point one of the largest shipping nations in the world and the Norwegian trade fleet were crucial to the war effort during WW2. In fact, Norwegian economy was already growing rapidly in the post-war era, benefitting considerably from the Marshall aid. So, while discovery oil unquestionably were a big boon to economic growth, no we weren’t that poor in 1969.
More distribution of wealth that was an issue. The big ship fleet owners had castles while most people on Norway lived in tiny huts. Also the odel laws meant that only the eldest would inherent the farm meaning a lot of people started with zero and got nothing for free.
The true source of Norway’s wealth was the three-part labor negotiations between the unions, business organizations and the government – that ensured both the our export economy could stay competitive while the rest of the world went through the great depression while greatly reducing poverty and improving workers conditions. The arrangement got formalized in 1935
Not really. Oil was first discovered on the Norwegian shelf in 1967.
In 1966, Norway had a slightly lower GDP per capita (2300 USD) than Denmark (2400 USD) and much lower than Sweden (3200 USD), but higher than the UK and France. It was a rich country, not that GDP per capita is the best measure of that.
It’s now significantly richer than any of them.
Most of Norway was poor and more agricultural a century ago, but that was true of every country, including the US, UK and Sweden, and the larger agricultural sector then means people remember their grandparents being farmers and assumed this means they were poor. In the meantime, cities, while massive centres of economic activity, were also hotbeds of poverty everywhere.
Even in 1900, when GDP wasn’t something people measured and is harder to compare in retrospect, Norway had high life expectancy and literacy rate than most countries of Western Europe – according to some estimates than any.
Look at the data instead of listening to the narrative
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vTdvMmfFoxeV7o1q9iCPQXFl3wpfoFZObH7N552SPcqZ5pfAEwNF4NCmXV_3sburigv0kpyZAWph2ZJ/pubchart?oid=1875928041&format=image
1950 to 1973 is often referred to as the golden ear of Norwegian post war economy. Strict social democratic rule, growing public sector (Nordic Model) and centralized economic planning. Also 400 million US dollars as part of the Marshall program (like most countries). In 58 we joined EFTA, had a rising foreign trade, annual growth of more than 3%, stable inflation and barely any unemployment. All this due to a large public sector and good economic planning.
Of course in 69 we (or rather Philips Petroleum) discovered oil at the Ekofisk field. After that we barely looked back. We did however have a heavy deindustrialization due to the massive growth in the petroleum sector. Some economic hick ups in the 80’s and 90’s due to change from Labour to a Conservative government, but still brought Norway to as #1 on the GDP per capita.
No, it is utter rubbish. In 1965, before oil was even discovered in Norway, GDP per capita was 10th highest in the world. That happens to be exactly the same as in the latest world bank numbers.