Countries
What is your country best at?
What objective scoring criteria will indicate the best places in the world to live when intelligence has no moat and money is meaningless?
The Platform Benchmark
Countries provide platforms that serve coordination systems that maximize resources and know-how to enable meaningful endeavor.
- Hardware: The geography, resources, and people.
- Software: The laws, culture, and coordination standards.
- User Experience: How easy it is to live, build, and transact.
| Platform | Trust | Speed | Flexibility | Openness | Alignment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tight Five Framework | Principles | Performance | Platform | Perspective | Purpose |
| Defined By | Social cohesion | Execution velocity | Adaptability | Information access | Skin in the game |
| Digital Nation States | |||||
| Ethereum | High (Decentralized) | Low (Gas costs) | Medium (EVM lock-in) | High (Open source) | High (ETH staking) |
| Solana | Medium (Validator set) | High (400ms blocks) | Medium (Monolithic) | High (Open source) | Medium (VC concentration) |
| SUI | Medium (Mysten control) | High (Sub-second) | High (Move language) | Medium (Newer ecosystem) | Low (Early stage) |
| Physical Nation States | |||||
| Australia | Medium (Egalitarian) | Medium (Bureaucracy) | High (Common Law) | Medium (Duopoly media) | Medium (Resources curse) |
| Denmark | High (Consensus) | Low (Bureaucracy) | Low (Civil Law) | Medium (State systems) | High (Social contract) |
| India | Medium (Hierarchy) | Medium (Bureaucracy) | Low (Regulation) | High (UPI success) | Low (30% crypto tax) |
| Kazakhstan | Low (Authoritarian) | Medium (AIFC fast) | High (AIFC enclave) | Low (State control) | High (Energy + Solana) |
| New Zealand | High (Egalitarian) | Medium (No. 8 Wire) | High (Common Law) | High (OIA) | Medium (Small market) |
| Portugal | Medium (Stable) | Low (Bureaucracy) | Medium (EU rules) | Medium (EU standard) | Low (Brain drain) |
| Singapore | Medium (Authoritarian) | High (Efficiency) | Medium (Pragmatic) | Low (Controlled) | High (Reserves) |
| South Korea | Medium (Hierarchy) | High (Ppalli-ppalli) | Low (Regulation) | Low (Chaebol control) | Medium (Corporate) |
| United Kingdom | Medium (Class) | Medium (Brexit) | High (Common Law) | High (Free press) | Medium (FCA evolving) |
| USA | Low (Polarized) | High (Move fast) | High (Common Law) | High (1st Amendment) | Low (Financialized) |
Legend:
- Trust = Do participants cooperate honestly? (Maps to Principles)
- Speed = How fast can decisions execute? (Maps to Performance)
- Flexibility = Can the system adapt to new paradigms? (Maps to Platform)
- Openness = Is information freely accessible? (Maps to Perspective)
- Skin in Game = Are incentives aligned with outcomes? (Maps to Purpose)
Digital vs Physical
Digital nation states optimize for different trade-offs than physical ones:
| Dimension | Physical Nations | Digital Nations |
|---|---|---|
| Exit cost | High (uproot life) | Low (move wallets) |
| Entry barrier | High (visas, language) | Low (internet access) |
| Rule change | Slow (legislation) | Fast (governance votes) |
| Enforcement | Coercion (police, courts) | Code (smart contracts) |
The question isn't "which is better?" but "which platform serves your purpose?
The Build × Scale Matrix
The Platform Scorecard answers: "What's it like to live here?"
It doesn't answer: "Can you build something here that stays here?"
Some countries are greenhouses — perfect for germination, wrong climate for mature growth. Others are deserts — harsh for seedlings, rewarding for those who survive. The gap between incubation and scale is where value leaks.
Low Scale Capacity High Scale Capacity
┌───────────────────┬───────────────────┐
Strong │ GREENHOUSE │ POWERHOUSE │
Incubation │ Denmark, NZ │ USA, Singapore │
│ (talent exports) │ (talent imports) │
├───────────────────┼───────────────────┤
Weak │ DESERT │ MAGNET │
Incubation │ Kazakhstan │ Dubai, Estonia │
│ (imports both) │ (imports seeds) │
└───────────────────┴───────────────────┘
| Quadrant | Pattern | The Gap |
|---|---|---|
| Greenhouse | Incubates well, can't scale. Companies relocate for market proximity, talent density, funding access. | Why do winners leave? |
| Powerhouse | Incubates AND scales. Network effects compound. Winner-take-most dynamics. | What's the moat? |
| Desert | Neither incubates nor scales. Requires external injection of both talent and capital. | What would change? |
| Magnet | Can't incubate locally but attracts mature companies. Regulatory arbitrage, tax optimization. | Is this sustainable? |
The Denmark Example (via Michael Sieverts):
"6 million people. Fintechs shaping money infrastructure."
Denmark excels at infrastructure-focused innovation — compliance, regtech, payments plumbing. "Danes love rules and structure" creates competitive advantage in regulated sectors.
But: Chainalysis → New York. Tradeshift → San Francisco. Why?
- Market proximity (customers are US enterprises)
- Talent density (specialists cluster)
- Funding access (scale capital lives elsewhere)
- Ecosystem effects (network value compounds)
The questions this matrix reveals:
- What keeps companies once they need to scale?
- Is "incubate then export" a viable national strategy?
- Can regulatory moats survive when companies can relocate?
- What would turn a Greenhouse into a Powerhouse?
The Build × Scale Scorecard
| Factor | Greenhouse | Powerhouse | Desert | Magnet |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Talent Origin | Local | Both | Imported | Imported |
| Talent Retention | Low | High | N/A | Medium |
| Funding Stage | Seed/Series A | All stages | External | Growth+ |
| Market Access | Limited | Global | Limited | Regional |
| Regulatory Moat | Strong | Variable | Weak | Arbitrage |
| Network Effects | Weak | Strong | None | Artificial |
| Value Capture | Low | High | Low | Medium |
Where the gap is: Most country assessments focus on conditions for starting. The invisible dimension is conditions for staying.
The Goodwill Foundation
How solid is the home for building goodwill among citizens?
The Foundations framework identifies what all beings need to flourish. Countries are platforms that either enable or block these flows:
Blocks Goodwill Flow Enables Goodwill Flow
┌───────────────────────┬───────────────────────┐
Strong │ FORTRESS │ GARDEN │
Natives │ Denmark, Japan │ NZ, Portugal │
│ (insiders flourish) │ (all can flourish) │
├───────────────────────┼───────────────────────┤
Weak │ WASTELAND │ CASINO │
Natives │ Failed states │ Dubai, Singapore │
│ (nobody flourishes) │ (money flourishes) │
└───────────────────────┴───────────────────────┘
The SCARF Test at Country Level
The brain treats social needs like survival needs. Countries that threaten these drives create "unhappy expats in happy countries":
| Drive | Question for Newcomers | Denmark Score | NZ Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Status | Can you earn respect? | Low (Janteloven) | Medium (No. 8 Wire) |
| Certainty | Can you read the rules? | Low (implicit codes) | High (direct culture) |
| Autonomy | Can you choose your path? | Medium (systems) | High (flexibility) |
| Relatedness | Can you belong? | Low (closed networks) | Medium (friendly, shallow) |
| Fairness | Are the rules equal? | Medium (for residents) | High (egalitarian) |
See SCARF drives for the framework.
The Goodwill Flow Checklist
| Foundation | What It Enables | Blocked By | Enabled By |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trust | Cooperation without friction | Opacity, corruption | Transparency, verification |
| Shelter | Stable base for action | Housing crisis, ownership barriers | Access, tokenization |
| Energy | Power to act | Scarcity, dependency | Abundance, local grids |
| Health | Body that works | Access barriers, cost | Universal coverage |
| Learning | Capability to grow | Credential gatekeeping | Open education, verifiable credentials |
| Connection | Others who matter | Closed networks, language | Integration programs, third spaces |
The Denmark Paradox Explained
Denmark scores high on Trust (for natives) but low on Connection (for outsiders). The goodwill flows freely within the system but has high barriers to entry.
This is the Fortress pattern:
- Natives: High Status, High Certainty, High Relatedness
- Newcomers: Threatened Status, Low Certainty, Blocked Relatedness
The "happiest country, unhappiest expats" paradox isn't a contradiction — it's the Fortress working exactly as designed.
Questions the Goodwill Foundation reveals:
- Does the platform enable agency for everyone, or just insiders?
- Can trust be built, or must it be inherited?
- Where does social capital accumulate? Can newcomers access it?
- Which SCARF drives are threatened for different populations?
See Goodwill, Foundations, and The Heroes Journey for the underlying frameworks.
Trad Lens vs Future Lens
Where will be the best place to live when intelligence has no moat and money is meaningless?
The current framework measures against an antiquated model. What happens when intelligence is ubiquitous (zero cognitive moats) and money means nothing (cultural motivators replace economic incentives)?
The question inverts:
- Trad Lens: Where can I make money and build things?
- Future Lens: Where can I live well with good people?
Trad Lens (2024) Future Lens (2031+)
┌─────────────────────┬─────────────────────────┐
Optimizes │ Economic opportunity│ Quality of existence │
For │ Value extraction │ Value of experience │
│ Talent attraction │ Community belonging │
│ Business building │ Inner space exploration │
└─────────────────────┴─────────────────────────┘
What Matters When Moats Collapse
| Trad Lens Metric | Future Lens Equivalent | Why It Inverts |
|---|---|---|
| GDP / Income | Time with good people | Money can't buy what matters |
| Business opportunity | Community density | Can't build your way to belonging |
| Talent pool | Values alignment | Intelligence is free; character isn't |
| Regulatory clarity | Freedom to explore | Rules matter less than agency |
| Scale capacity | Beauty / Nature access | Growth is meaningless; experience isn't |
| Tax optimization | Health infrastructure | Longevity > wealth |
The Reordering
| Country | Trad Lens Rank | Future Lens Rank | Reason for Shift |
|---|---|---|---|
| USA | 1st (Powerhouse) | Low | Optimized for extraction. Polarized. Low trust. Bad health. |
| Singapore | High (Efficiency) | Medium | Authoritarian. Controlled. Nature-poor. |
| Denmark | Medium (Greenhouse) | High | Once inside, goodwill concentrated. Strong social fabric. |
| NZ | Medium (Small market) | 1st | High trust. Beautiful nature. Egalitarian. Good company. |
| Portugal | Low (Brain drain) | High | Climate. Beauty. Slow pace. Community focus. |
The Fortress Revaluation
In the Trad Lens, Denmark's Fortress pattern is a weakness — blocks talent, exports winners, hard to enter.
In the Future Lens, the Fortress might be the point:
- Concentrated goodwill (not diluted by extraction)
- Strong social fabric (built over generations)
- High trust (within the walls)
- Quality of life (not optimized for productivity)
The question: Is the wall a bug or a feature? Depends on whether you're measuring economic throughput or existential quality.
Future Lens Scorecard
| Factor | Question | What to Measure |
|---|---|---|
| Good Company | Who will you spend time with? | Community density, values alignment, social access |
| Beauty | What will you see and experience? | Nature access, aesthetics, inspiration |
| Health | How long and well will you live? | Healthcare, longevity research, food quality |
| Climate | Is the environment hospitable? | Weather, climate resilience, air quality |
| Agency | Can you explore inner space? | Freedom, spiritual infrastructure, meaning access |
| Belonging | Can you become part of something? | Integration path, community rituals, shared identity |
The Ultimate Measure
From the claude-mental-model:
"If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together." "No road is long in good company."
Good company is both the method AND the measure.
When intelligence is free and money is meaningless, the only question is: Who do you want to spend your time with, and where do they live?
Games Shape Goodwill
But where does good company come from? Culture. And what shapes culture? Games.
Games → Beliefs → Consensus → Identity → Culture → Goodwill
The chain is clear:
- Games define what counts as "winning" → shapes what we value
- Games set valid moves → shapes what we consider possible
- Games create shared experiences → shapes what "we all know"
- Games reward behaviors → shapes what we consider good
The leverage: Printing press → AI (printing press × 1 billion) → Games (interactive choose-your-own-adventure). Whoever designs the games shapes the beliefs at billion-fold scale.
The spirit matters. Games can be designed for extraction (attention capture, addiction loops, zero-sum competition) or for coordination (collaboration, skill development, positive-sum play). The spirit in which games are designed and played is the greatest teacher and influence of individuals and collectives.
Future Lens implication: When intelligence has no moat and money is meaningless, the countries that matter will be those that:
- Design games that shape better culture
- Export coordination models that build goodwill
- Demonstrate how to play positive-sum games at scale
This isn't about hosting game studios. It's about exporting how to coordinate for greater good.
The NZ Opportunity:
New Zealand already exports coordination culture through rugby — a game that demands alignment of diverse players, fast collective decisions, and shared sacrifice for common goals. Rugby culture has spread globally through the diaspora.
The question: Can NZ export the spirit of coordination games — not just sports, but the principles — as the template for how AI-human collaboration should work?
| What NZ Has | What It Could Export |
|---|---|
| Rugby coordination model | Coordination game design principles |
| Egalitarian culture | Positive-sum game mechanics |
| Cooperative heritage (Fonterra) | Tokenized coordination models |
| High trust society | Trust-building game loops |
| Small scale (5M) | Prototype ground for global games |
See Games, New Zealand, and Culture for the underlying frameworks.
The Leapfrog Thesis
Centralized investment creates the Innovator's Dilemma. Denmark has invested heavily in centralized digital infrastructure (e-Boks, MitID) — "world-class" legacy tech that works so well there's no incentive to switch to decentralized, open standards.
Countries with Common Law (NZ) or less "perfect" legacy systems have the incentive to leapfrog directly to open-source protocols.
"Blockchain is the advancement of open source. As time has proven, open source wins."
Context
- Country Scorecard — The full evaluation checklist
- Matrix Thinking — Make invisible trade-offs visible
- Perspective — See from angles others miss
- Goodwill — Trust as compounding asset
- Foundations — What all beings need to flourish
- Games — What shapes culture
- Predictions — The evolution timeline
- The Game — What matters beyond economics