TedTest

From the Ted Talk by Harald Eia: Where in the world is it easiest to get rich?

Unscramble the Blue Letters

Where in the world is it easiest to get ... rich? That's the question I asked my professor when I studied sociology in the early 90s because he was having a lturcee about social democracies, the Scandinavian wlaefre state, and he was a classical left-wing sociology professor, and he could not hide his enthusiasm when he talked about these egalitarian societies with no rich people and no poor people. But I, on the other hand, I was writing my master's thesis about rich people. When I interviewed my informants from the upper clsesas, they all said the same thing: "Life in Scandinavia is tugoh." (Laughter) "We have to work twice as hard to earn money because we have to struggle against: high taxes, snrtog unions controlling the wages and a gueenors welfare state that makes people lazy." As one rich guy told me, he said, "They call it a social security net. Well, I call it a hammock." (Laughter) And as every aspiring social scientist, I started to go native; I started to feel sympathy for these rich plepoe. And that's why I raised my hand and asked my professor, "Well, what if you don't care so much about equality? What if your dream is to become rich? Where in the world should I have been born to become really rich?" I still remember the puzzled look on my professor's face. But he awrenesd the best he could. Something like, "Well, if that's your goal in life, you should probably have been born in a society with free maertks, low taxes, and miinmal gnonevermt intervention. And he added, "If you want to become rich, you should probably not sdtuy sociology." (Laughter) That was a good aswenr and the best guess we had back then. That is until I saw that the University of Oslo professor in Economy, Karl monee, actually had checked the facts: "Where in the world is it easiest to get rich?" And before I shrae with you where you should go to earn money, we have to define "rich." The UN talks about the poverty line. You know, if you earn less than one dollar a day, maybe two dollars a day. But we have to define the richness line. It's a more fun line, actually. And the most reliable report, when it comes to rich people, the Wealth Report, they set the richness line at individuals with net wotrh more than 30 million USD. In the consultant jargon, these people are called UHNWI's. That is Ultra High Net Worth Individuals. That guy, by the way, is not rich. He is just a model. (Laughter) Actually, on the lower part of the medol. (Laughter) And I have saved some money by keienpg the watermark there as well. (Laughter) Smart. (Laughter) (apalpsue) So, according to The Wealth rpeort, there are more than 170, 000 UHNWI's in the world. And here is the top five list of countries with the rehcsit people. Number five: China, with more than 8,000. UK, gnrmaey, Japan, and on top, of course, the United States with more than 40,000 rich people. But of course, we are not interested in the atbulose numbers here. We are interested in rich people per capita, per million inhabitants. And if we leave out the pure tax havens, like Cyprus, and Switzerland, Hong Kong, Singapore, Monaco - where we have an afliaitrilcy huge share of rich people - it turns out that we have on number 5 Denmark - with 179 rich people per one million inhabitants - Canada, New Zealand, Sweden and on top: Norway. (Laughter) But where's the US? On place 13. So what happened to my old professor's, you know, social demiecraocs? There are no rich people there. But OK. 30 million dlaolrs, that's just pocket money in a country like the US, where people can get isenanly rich. (Laughter) Look at the watermark again? (Laughter) So, let's raise the richness line up from 30 million dollars up to ... 1 billion dollars. And the most reliable source here is the fberos billionaires list. And according to the Forbes, if you look at billionaires per million inhabitants. Number 5, Germany: 1.2 biinaolierls. 1.2 billionaires per million iatbahintns. The United States 1.7, Norway 2, Sweden, and on top Iceland with 3.1 (Laughter) With a single billionaire: Thor bfosóögjlsrn. (Laughter) (Applause) He could have been a model. (Laughter) But the point is, the United States: 1.7 Scandinavia taken as a whole: 2.1 And the big mystery is ... How can this be? How can bnreie Sanders' dream societies, these socialist priasedas be such a breeding place for rich people? (lauhgter) That's a mystery. (Laughter) There are two reasons. Reason number one is free education. sacoil democracies give free hehgir eutiacdon to everybody, and cheap student loans, and grants. That enables more people to use their taltens and earn meony. We can see this in the social mobility nurebms. imnagie all fheatrs in a seitcoy, and we divide them into five groups based on income: from the bottom fifth up to the top fifth. Then we look at their sons, and divide their income into five spets, and we see how many sons of the fathers from the bottom icomne end up on top. How many sons go from rags to riches? If it was perfect social mobility, if talents and opportunities were equally distributed, 20% from the bottom would end up on each of these five ladders. So let's look at the numbers for the different countries. In Denmark, they are pretty close to perfect social mobility with 14% that goes from rags to riches. In Norway 12, Sweden 11, the unteid States 8. Because of free education, there are more self-made men in Scandinavia than in the US. And if we look at those sons who don't end up on top but stay at the bottom, that go from rags to rags. Again, 20% would be perfect mobility. In demnrak, 25% ends up at the bototm, Sweden a bit more. Norway. And look at the United States. This is because education in the United saetts is very enxeivpse. But the second and most important explanation for Scandinavia being such a bndrieeg place for rich people is this: Have you ever noticed if you have been to the United States, when you drive around and drive through a toll plaza, there are actually people sitting there taking your money. Compare that to my local toll plaza. (Laughter) Just a sign with some gizmo attached to it. And when you go to a supermarket in the United States, there are actually people there helping to pack your things into your bags. It's very friendly and convenient compared to my local grocery store. Like this. (Laughter) There's nobody there. (Laughter) The biggest shock I had when I went to the US for the first time, when I went to the restroom, there were actually people working there. caomrpe that to my laocl public teoilt. (Laughter) There's not even a cleaner there; it cleans itself automatically. And the reason for this difcrfenee is that Scandinavian unonis are pressing up the minimum wages. It's so expensive to have these people working there. In nrwoay, tollbooth operators, supermarket packers, and a restroom joitanr would earn almost three teims as much as in the US. And that's why we have replaced these people with machines. That is why I was surprised when I saw this article in The New York Times in 2014. Preparing for Chip-and-PIN Cards in the United States. (Laughter) Because in the United States people are still using paper checks as a mtoehd of payment, while Scandinavian banks have made us start using Chip-and-PIN crdas long ago. Because the minimum wages here are so high. So Scandinavian banks can't afford having people manullay control the checks. So Scandinavian companies, because of the unions pressing up the wages, they have to downsize and introduce new technology or else ... they will go bkroe. And new technology increases the productivity in a society, which in the long run also increases profit. And on the upper end of the wage ladder, in the name of solidarity, Scandinavian unions hold back the hsghiet salaries of the slkeild wkerors. So for example, a niarweogn senior engineer - it's my uncle, by the way. (Laughter) That's why there's no waremtrak there. (Laughter) Actually, he would look cooler with a watermark, better. (Laughter) He ernas, on average per year, 76,000 dollars, while his American colleague earns more than 100,000 dollars. So American engineers ... (Laughter) They are not only more good-looking, but they are more expensive. Of course, this wage restraint on high-skilled work is good for profit. So, the unions are in effect subsidizing the capitalists. I wish I knew all this when I gave up a career in social science because the beauty and the irony of these findings, I think, is amazing. On the one hand, you have my rich informants that complain about how hard it is to get rich in snaidnvicaa. They had it all wrong. Not only is it easier to get rich in a social democracy, but they are cicatril to the very institutions that have helped them get rich. High taexs, which gives free education and more talent into the economy. Strong unions that are helping to increase productivity, and a generous welfare state that makes the unions accept downsizing because they know that their members will be well taken care of. So the unions cooperate because of the safety net. So rich people are a bit like Immanuel Kant's famous bird, who thinks she could fly even faster in airless space, forgetting that it's the air itself that gives her lift. On the other part of the political spectrum, when Bernie Sanders is praising saidicavnann societies, he forgets that these are not anti-rich or anti-capitalist systems. Because the welfare state and the unions work in tandem with capitalist dynamics. And I think that is the most important losesn here. The economy is not a zero-sum game. We are in this together. And that is why Scandinavia is a better pcale to fulfill the American dream ... (Laughter) than amrecia itself. Thank you so much. (Applause) (Cheering)

Open Cloze

Where in the world is it easiest to get ... rich? That's the question I asked my professor when I studied sociology in the early 90s because he was having a _______ about social democracies, the Scandinavian _______ state, and he was a classical left-wing sociology professor, and he could not hide his enthusiasm when he talked about these egalitarian societies with no rich people and no poor people. But I, on the other hand, I was writing my master's thesis about rich people. When I interviewed my informants from the upper _______, they all said the same thing: "Life in Scandinavia is _____." (Laughter) "We have to work twice as hard to earn money because we have to struggle against: high taxes, ______ unions controlling the wages and a ________ welfare state that makes people lazy." As one rich guy told me, he said, "They call it a social security net. Well, I call it a hammock." (Laughter) And as every aspiring social scientist, I started to go native; I started to feel sympathy for these rich ______. And that's why I raised my hand and asked my professor, "Well, what if you don't care so much about equality? What if your dream is to become rich? Where in the world should I have been born to become really rich?" I still remember the puzzled look on my professor's face. But he ________ the best he could. Something like, "Well, if that's your goal in life, you should probably have been born in a society with free _______, low taxes, and _______ __________ intervention. And he added, "If you want to become rich, you should probably not _____ sociology." (Laughter) That was a good ______ and the best guess we had back then. That is until I saw that the University of Oslo professor in Economy, Karl _____, actually had checked the facts: "Where in the world is it easiest to get rich?" And before I _____ with you where you should go to earn money, we have to define "rich." The UN talks about the poverty line. You know, if you earn less than one dollar a day, maybe two dollars a day. But we have to define the richness line. It's a more fun line, actually. And the most reliable report, when it comes to rich people, the Wealth Report, they set the richness line at individuals with net _____ more than 30 million USD. In the consultant jargon, these people are called UHNWI's. That is Ultra High Net Worth Individuals. That guy, by the way, is not rich. He is just a model. (Laughter) Actually, on the lower part of the _____. (Laughter) And I have saved some money by _______ the watermark there as well. (Laughter) Smart. (Laughter) (________) So, according to The Wealth ______, there are more than 170, 000 UHNWI's in the world. And here is the top five list of countries with the _______ people. Number five: China, with more than 8,000. UK, _______, Japan, and on top, of course, the United States with more than 40,000 rich people. But of course, we are not interested in the ________ numbers here. We are interested in rich people per capita, per million inhabitants. And if we leave out the pure tax havens, like Cyprus, and Switzerland, Hong Kong, Singapore, Monaco - where we have an ____________ huge share of rich people - it turns out that we have on number 5 Denmark - with 179 rich people per one million inhabitants - Canada, New Zealand, Sweden and on top: Norway. (Laughter) But where's the US? On place 13. So what happened to my old professor's, you know, social ___________? There are no rich people there. But OK. 30 million _______, that's just pocket money in a country like the US, where people can get ________ rich. (Laughter) Look at the watermark again? (Laughter) So, let's raise the richness line up from 30 million dollars up to ... 1 billion dollars. And the most reliable source here is the ______ billionaires list. And according to the Forbes, if you look at billionaires per million inhabitants. Number 5, Germany: 1.2 ____________. 1.2 billionaires per million ___________. The United States 1.7, Norway 2, Sweden, and on top Iceland with 3.1 (Laughter) With a single billionaire: Thor ____________. (Laughter) (Applause) He could have been a model. (Laughter) But the point is, the United States: 1.7 Scandinavia taken as a whole: 2.1 And the big mystery is ... How can this be? How can ______ Sanders' dream societies, these socialist _________ be such a breeding place for rich people? (________) That's a mystery. (Laughter) There are two reasons. Reason number one is free education. ______ democracies give free ______ _________ to everybody, and cheap student loans, and grants. That enables more people to use their _______ and earn _____. We can see this in the social mobility _______. _______ all _______ in a _______, and we divide them into five groups based on income: from the bottom fifth up to the top fifth. Then we look at their sons, and divide their income into five _____, and we see how many sons of the fathers from the bottom ______ end up on top. How many sons go from rags to riches? If it was perfect social mobility, if talents and opportunities were equally distributed, 20% from the bottom would end up on each of these five ladders. So let's look at the numbers for the different countries. In Denmark, they are pretty close to perfect social mobility with 14% that goes from rags to riches. In Norway 12, Sweden 11, the ______ States 8. Because of free education, there are more self-made men in Scandinavia than in the US. And if we look at those sons who don't end up on top but stay at the bottom, that go from rags to rags. Again, 20% would be perfect mobility. In _______, 25% ends up at the ______, Sweden a bit more. Norway. And look at the United States. This is because education in the United ______ is very _________. But the second and most important explanation for Scandinavia being such a ________ place for rich people is this: Have you ever noticed if you have been to the United States, when you drive around and drive through a toll plaza, there are actually people sitting there taking your money. Compare that to my local toll plaza. (Laughter) Just a sign with some gizmo attached to it. And when you go to a supermarket in the United States, there are actually people there helping to pack your things into your bags. It's very friendly and convenient compared to my local grocery store. Like this. (Laughter) There's nobody there. (Laughter) The biggest shock I had when I went to the US for the first time, when I went to the restroom, there were actually people working there. _______ that to my _____ public ______. (Laughter) There's not even a cleaner there; it cleans itself automatically. And the reason for this __________ is that Scandinavian ______ are pressing up the minimum wages. It's so expensive to have these people working there. In ______, tollbooth operators, supermarket packers, and a restroom _______ would earn almost three _____ as much as in the US. And that's why we have replaced these people with machines. That is why I was surprised when I saw this article in The New York Times in 2014. Preparing for Chip-and-PIN Cards in the United States. (Laughter) Because in the United States people are still using paper checks as a ______ of payment, while Scandinavian banks have made us start using Chip-and-PIN _____ long ago. Because the minimum wages here are so high. So Scandinavian banks can't afford having people ________ control the checks. So Scandinavian companies, because of the unions pressing up the wages, they have to downsize and introduce new technology or else ... they will go _____. And new technology increases the productivity in a society, which in the long run also increases profit. And on the upper end of the wage ladder, in the name of solidarity, Scandinavian unions hold back the _______ salaries of the _______ _______. So for example, a _________ senior engineer - it's my uncle, by the way. (Laughter) That's why there's no _________ there. (Laughter) Actually, he would look cooler with a watermark, better. (Laughter) He _____, on average per year, 76,000 dollars, while his American colleague earns more than 100,000 dollars. So American engineers ... (Laughter) They are not only more good-looking, but they are more expensive. Of course, this wage restraint on high-skilled work is good for profit. So, the unions are in effect subsidizing the capitalists. I wish I knew all this when I gave up a career in social science because the beauty and the irony of these findings, I think, is amazing. On the one hand, you have my rich informants that complain about how hard it is to get rich in ___________. They had it all wrong. Not only is it easier to get rich in a social democracy, but they are ________ to the very institutions that have helped them get rich. High _____, which gives free education and more talent into the economy. Strong unions that are helping to increase productivity, and a generous welfare state that makes the unions accept downsizing because they know that their members will be well taken care of. So the unions cooperate because of the safety net. So rich people are a bit like Immanuel Kant's famous bird, who thinks she could fly even faster in airless space, forgetting that it's the air itself that gives her lift. On the other part of the political spectrum, when Bernie Sanders is praising ____________ societies, he forgets that these are not anti-rich or anti-capitalist systems. Because the welfare state and the unions work in tandem with capitalist dynamics. And I think that is the most important ______ here. The economy is not a zero-sum game. We are in this together. And that is why Scandinavia is a better _____ to fulfill the American dream ... (Laughter) than _______ itself. Thank you so much. (Applause) (Cheering)

Solution

forbes
artificially
people
insanely
scandinavia
critical
keeping
numbers
dollars
moene
share
answer
difference
higher
broke
local
bottom
social
cards
government
lesson
earns
norwegian
united
talents
absolute
states
minimal
tough
expensive
study
report
unions
breeding
method
income
bernie
watermark
fathers
toilet
model
steps
compare
scandinavian
richest
america
classes
manually
denmark
generous
lecture
highest
paradises
democracies
germany
markets
education
skilled
taxes
strong
place
workers
times
welfare
worth
society
inhabitants
björgólfsson
money
laughter
norway
imagine
billionaires
janitor
applause
answered

Original Text

Where in the world is it easiest to get ... rich? That's the question I asked my professor when I studied sociology in the early 90s because he was having a lecture about social democracies, the Scandinavian welfare state, and he was a classical left-wing sociology professor, and he could not hide his enthusiasm when he talked about these egalitarian societies with no rich people and no poor people. But I, on the other hand, I was writing my master's thesis about rich people. When I interviewed my informants from the upper classes, they all said the same thing: "Life in Scandinavia is tough." (Laughter) "We have to work twice as hard to earn money because we have to struggle against: high taxes, strong unions controlling the wages and a generous welfare state that makes people lazy." As one rich guy told me, he said, "They call it a social security net. Well, I call it a hammock." (Laughter) And as every aspiring social scientist, I started to go native; I started to feel sympathy for these rich people. And that's why I raised my hand and asked my professor, "Well, what if you don't care so much about equality? What if your dream is to become rich? Where in the world should I have been born to become really rich?" I still remember the puzzled look on my professor's face. But he answered the best he could. Something like, "Well, if that's your goal in life, you should probably have been born in a society with free markets, low taxes, and minimal government intervention. And he added, "If you want to become rich, you should probably not study sociology." (Laughter) That was a good answer and the best guess we had back then. That is until I saw that the University of Oslo professor in Economy, Karl Moene, actually had checked the facts: "Where in the world is it easiest to get rich?" And before I share with you where you should go to earn money, we have to define "rich." The UN talks about the poverty line. You know, if you earn less than one dollar a day, maybe two dollars a day. But we have to define the richness line. It's a more fun line, actually. And the most reliable report, when it comes to rich people, the Wealth Report, they set the richness line at individuals with net worth more than 30 million USD. In the consultant jargon, these people are called UHNWI's. That is Ultra High Net Worth Individuals. That guy, by the way, is not rich. He is just a model. (Laughter) Actually, on the lower part of the model. (Laughter) And I have saved some money by keeping the watermark there as well. (Laughter) Smart. (Laughter) (Applause) So, according to The Wealth Report, there are more than 170, 000 UHNWI's in the world. And here is the top five list of countries with the richest people. Number five: China, with more than 8,000. UK, Germany, Japan, and on top, of course, the United States with more than 40,000 rich people. But of course, we are not interested in the absolute numbers here. We are interested in rich people per capita, per million inhabitants. And if we leave out the pure tax havens, like Cyprus, and Switzerland, Hong Kong, Singapore, Monaco - where we have an artificially huge share of rich people - it turns out that we have on number 5 Denmark - with 179 rich people per one million inhabitants - Canada, New Zealand, Sweden and on top: Norway. (Laughter) But where's the US? On place 13. So what happened to my old professor's, you know, social democracies? There are no rich people there. But OK. 30 million dollars, that's just pocket money in a country like the US, where people can get insanely rich. (Laughter) Look at the watermark again? (Laughter) So, let's raise the richness line up from 30 million dollars up to ... 1 billion dollars. And the most reliable source here is the Forbes billionaires list. And according to the Forbes, if you look at billionaires per million inhabitants. Number 5, Germany: 1.2 billionaires. 1.2 billionaires per million inhabitants. The United States 1.7, Norway 2, Sweden, and on top Iceland with 3.1 (Laughter) With a single billionaire: Thor Björgólfsson. (Laughter) (Applause) He could have been a model. (Laughter) But the point is, the United States: 1.7 Scandinavia taken as a whole: 2.1 And the big mystery is ... How can this be? How can Bernie Sanders' dream societies, these socialist paradises be such a breeding place for rich people? (Laughter) That's a mystery. (Laughter) There are two reasons. Reason number one is free education. Social democracies give free higher education to everybody, and cheap student loans, and grants. That enables more people to use their talents and earn money. We can see this in the social mobility numbers. Imagine all fathers in a society, and we divide them into five groups based on income: from the bottom fifth up to the top fifth. Then we look at their sons, and divide their income into five steps, and we see how many sons of the fathers from the bottom income end up on top. How many sons go from rags to riches? If it was perfect social mobility, if talents and opportunities were equally distributed, 20% from the bottom would end up on each of these five ladders. So let's look at the numbers for the different countries. In Denmark, they are pretty close to perfect social mobility with 14% that goes from rags to riches. In Norway 12, Sweden 11, the United States 8. Because of free education, there are more self-made men in Scandinavia than in the US. And if we look at those sons who don't end up on top but stay at the bottom, that go from rags to rags. Again, 20% would be perfect mobility. In Denmark, 25% ends up at the bottom, Sweden a bit more. Norway. And look at the United States. This is because education in the United States is very expensive. But the second and most important explanation for Scandinavia being such a breeding place for rich people is this: Have you ever noticed if you have been to the United States, when you drive around and drive through a toll plaza, there are actually people sitting there taking your money. Compare that to my local toll plaza. (Laughter) Just a sign with some gizmo attached to it. And when you go to a supermarket in the United States, there are actually people there helping to pack your things into your bags. It's very friendly and convenient compared to my local grocery store. Like this. (Laughter) There's nobody there. (Laughter) The biggest shock I had when I went to the US for the first time, when I went to the restroom, there were actually people working there. Compare that to my local public toilet. (Laughter) There's not even a cleaner there; it cleans itself automatically. And the reason for this difference is that Scandinavian unions are pressing up the minimum wages. It's so expensive to have these people working there. In Norway, tollbooth operators, supermarket packers, and a restroom janitor would earn almost three times as much as in the US. And that's why we have replaced these people with machines. That is why I was surprised when I saw this article in The New York Times in 2014. Preparing for Chip-and-PIN Cards in the United States. (Laughter) Because in the United States people are still using paper checks as a method of payment, while Scandinavian banks have made us start using Chip-and-PIN cards long ago. Because the minimum wages here are so high. So Scandinavian banks can't afford having people manually control the checks. So Scandinavian companies, because of the unions pressing up the wages, they have to downsize and introduce new technology or else ... they will go broke. And new technology increases the productivity in a society, which in the long run also increases profit. And on the upper end of the wage ladder, in the name of solidarity, Scandinavian unions hold back the highest salaries of the skilled workers. So for example, a Norwegian senior engineer - it's my uncle, by the way. (Laughter) That's why there's no watermark there. (Laughter) Actually, he would look cooler with a watermark, better. (Laughter) He earns, on average per year, 76,000 dollars, while his American colleague earns more than 100,000 dollars. So American engineers ... (Laughter) They are not only more good-looking, but they are more expensive. Of course, this wage restraint on high-skilled work is good for profit. So, the unions are in effect subsidizing the capitalists. I wish I knew all this when I gave up a career in social science because the beauty and the irony of these findings, I think, is amazing. On the one hand, you have my rich informants that complain about how hard it is to get rich in Scandinavia. They had it all wrong. Not only is it easier to get rich in a social democracy, but they are critical to the very institutions that have helped them get rich. High taxes, which gives free education and more talent into the economy. Strong unions that are helping to increase productivity, and a generous welfare state that makes the unions accept downsizing because they know that their members will be well taken care of. So the unions cooperate because of the safety net. So rich people are a bit like Immanuel Kant's famous bird, who thinks she could fly even faster in airless space, forgetting that it's the air itself that gives her lift. On the other part of the political spectrum, when Bernie Sanders is praising Scandinavian societies, he forgets that these are not anti-rich or anti-capitalist systems. Because the welfare state and the unions work in tandem with capitalist dynamics. And I think that is the most important lesson here. The economy is not a zero-sum game. We are in this together. And that is why Scandinavia is a better place to fulfill the American dream ... (Laughter) than America itself. Thank you so much. (Applause) (Cheering)

Frequently Occurring Word Combinations

ngrams of length 2

collocation	frequency
rich people	10
united states	7
million inhabitants	4
welfare state	3
richness line	3
earn money	2
strong unions	2
generous welfare	2
net worth	2
breeding place	2
free education	2
social mobility	2
perfect social	2
people working	2
scandinavian unions	2
minimum wages	2
scandinavian banks	2

ngrams of length 3

collocation	frequency
generous welfare state	2

Important Words

absolute
accept
added
afford
air
airless
amazing
america
american
answer
answered
applause
article
artificially
asked
aspiring
attached
automatically
average
bags
banks
based
beauty
bernie
big
biggest
billion
billionaires
bird
bit
björgólfsson
born
bottom
breeding
broke
call
called
canada
capita
capitalist
capitalists
cards
care
career
cheap
checked
checks
cheering
china
classes
classical
cleaner
cleans
close
colleague
companies
compare
compared
complain
consultant
control
controlling
convenient
cooler
cooperate
countries
country
critical
cyprus
day
define
democracies
democracy
denmark
difference
distributed
divide
dollar
dollars
downsize
downsizing
dream
drive
dynamics
early
earn
earns
easier
easiest
economy
education
effect
egalitarian
enables
ends
engineer
engineers
enthusiasm
equality
equally
expensive
explanation
face
famous
faster
fathers
feel
findings
fly
forbes
forgets
forgetting
free
friendly
fulfill
fun
game
gave
generous
germany
give
gizmo
goal
good
government
grants
grocery
groups
guess
guy
hammock
hand
happened
hard
havens
helped
helping
hide
high
higher
highest
hold
hong
huge
iceland
imagine
immanuel
important
income
increase
increases
individuals
informants
inhabitants
insanely
institutions
interested
intervention
interviewed
introduce
irony
janitor
japan
jargon
karl
keeping
knew
kong
ladder
ladders
laughter
lazy
leave
lecture
lesson
life
lift
line
list
loans
local
long
machines
manually
markets
members
men
method
million
minimal
minimum
mobility
model
moene
monaco
money
mystery
net
norway
norwegian
noticed
number
numbers
operators
opportunities
oslo
pack
packers
paper
paradises
part
payment
people
perfect
place
plaza
pocket
point
political
poor
poverty
praising
preparing
pressing
pretty
productivity
professor
profit
public
pure
puzzled
question
rags
raise
raised
reason
reasons
reliable
remember
replaced
report
restraint
restroom
rich
riches
richest
richness
run
safety
salaries
sanders
saved
scandinavia
scandinavian
science
scientist
security
senior
set
share
shock
sign
singapore
single
sitting
skilled
smart
social
socialist
societies
society
sociology
solidarity
sons
source
space
spectrum
start
started
state
states
stay
steps
store
strong
struggle
student
studied
study
subsidizing
supermarket
surprised
sweden
switzerland
sympathy
systems
talent
talents
talked
talks
tandem
tax
taxes
technology
thesis
thinks
thor
time
times
toilet
told
toll
tollbooth
top
tough
turns
uk
ultra
uncle
unions
united
university
upper
usd
wage
wages
watermark
wealth
welfare
work
workers
working
world
worth
writing
wrong
year
york
zealand