|
|
|
|
|
|
by demian
5149 days ago
|
|
|
Anecdotes are not data. In that ranking, they basically measure reputation, citations of papers in other papers and # of PhDs students. It depends how you measure quality. Finally, I don't think being the best government in Argentine history is a very high bar to reach... Yes, that's correct. In a nutshell, when Argentina was rich there were very rich and very few landowners, who also controlled the goverment, and a lot of poor people that worked for them. It was feudal "capitalism". There wasn't much of a "middle class" or "rising middle class". Of course, a democracy can't work in those conditions. There were fraudulent elections, coups and, of course, the response of the mass of the poor was either following the few intelectuals of the elite that proclaimed comunism as the solution, or to cling to father figures in goverment(Perón). The people were slaves, treated as slaves, and then reacted as slaves. |
|
|
Aggregate stats across a number of areas plus opinion is a reasonable measure, albeit imperfect. Again I have provided many stats and figures and nobody has provided anything contrary other than assertions (and in one case cast some doubt over the Internet penetration). One would suspect that if the education is so good in Argentina people would have better researched arguments (ok that's a low blow, but people are downvoting). Feel free to provide another measure though. I don't think the roles will be reversed, though it might come out even under another measure as they are close in this one.
I think we broadly agree on your other point.