Apple’s market cap is up $115 billion since the last list was created in October of 2014. That increase is more than 50% of the value of the 14th most valuable company in the world (in October 2014).

China Mobile increased $100 billion and moved into 6th place. Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) increased $78 billion to move into 7th place.

Exxon Mobil lost over $50 billion (oil prices collapsed as OPEC decided to stop attempting to hold back supply in order to maximize the price of oil). Alibaba (the only non-USA company in the last list) and Walmart dropped out of the top 10.

The total value of the top 20 increased from $5.722 trillion to $6.046 trillion, an increase of $324 billion. Several companies have been replaced in the new top 20 list.

The next ten most valuable companies:

Market capitalization shown are of the close of business last Friday, as shown on Yahoo Finance.

The current top 10 includes 8 USA companies and 2 Chinese companies. The 11th to 20th most valuable companies includes 4 Chinese companies, 3 Swiss companies and 3 USA companies. Facebook (after increasing $21 billion), China Construction Bank (increasing $68 billion – it is hard for me to be sure what the value is, I am not sure I am reading the statements correctly but this is my best guess) and Tencent moved into the top 20; which dropped Procter & Gamble, Royal Dutch Shell and Chevron from the top 20.

Related: Historical Stock Returns – Global Stock Market Capitalization from 2000 to 2012 – Stock Market Capitalization by Country from 1990 to 2010 – Solar Energy Capacity by Country (2009-2013)

A few other companies of interest (based on their market capitalization):

Toyota, Japan, current market cap is $213 billion.
Pfizer, USA, $210 billion.
Procter & Gamble, USA, $210 billion.
Bank of China, China, $203 billion**.
Amazon, USA, $198 billion.
Verizon, USA, $192 billion.
Oracle, USA, $191 billion.
Royal Dutch Shell, Netherlands, $184 billion.
Chevron, USA, $191 billion.
Walt Disney, USA, $187 billion.
Samsung, Korea, $183 billion.****
Agricultural Bank of China, China, $178 billion**
Gilead Sciences, USA, $167 billion.
Merck, USA, $167 billion.
BHP, Australia, $114 billion (down $45 billion since October 2014).

Apple is very close to being more valuable than the 2nd and 3rd place companies together: Apple is worth $741 billion, Google and Microsoft together are worth $744 billion. All these figures are approximate as stock buybacks and distributions are only shown quarterly, with Apple’s continued large buybacks the market cap is likely a small bit overstated for them (if I used only the price of GOOG, instead of using GOOG and GOOGL, Apple would be worth more that the other 2).

Google issued a 3rd glass of stock GOOG that doesn’t have voting rights. Depending on if you used GOOGL or GOOG to value the company you get a difference of over $10 billion. There is a special class of stock for Larry Page, Sergy Brin that has 10 times the voting rights of GOOGL. I feel GOOGL is the real stock and GOOG is a derivative without voting rights (but otherwise suppose to be equal to GOOGL). Still I used a value in between the values given using either one of those prices to value the company.

* China Mobile market cap taken from their website and converted to USD.
** calculation by taking cap from MarketWatch and converting to USD – They are quoting the cap in HK$.
*** from Google finance (the market cap varies depending on which symbol you use)
**** from Yahoo finance converting to USD from Korean Won

Chart by Curious Cat Economics Blog using data from the Wind Energy Association. Chart may be used with attribution as specified here.

In 2013 the addition to wind power capacity slowed a great deal in most countries. Globally capacity was increased just 13% (the increases in order since 2006: 26%, 27%, 29%, 32%, 25%, 19% and again 19% in 2012). China alone was responsible for adding 16,000 megawatts of the 25,838 total added globally in 2013.

At the end of 2013 China had 29% of global capacity (after being responsible for adding 62% of all the capacity added in 2013). In 2005 China had 2% of global wind energy capacity.

The 8 countries shown on the chart account for 81% of total wind energy capacity globally. From 2005 to 2013 those 8 countries have accounted for between 79 and 82% of total capacity – which is amazingly consistent.

Wind power now accounts for approximately 4% of total electricity used.

Related: Chart of Global Wind Energy Capacity by Country 2005 to 2012 – In 2010 Global Wind Energy Capacity Exceeded 2.5% of Global Electricity Needs – Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment – Nuclear Power Generation by Country from 1985-2010

Countries where wind power accounts for the largest total shares of electricity: Denmark 34%, Spain 21%, Portugal 19%, Ireland 16%, Germany 9%.

The USA installed just 1 GW (gigawatts) in 2013, compared to 13 GW in 2012. That left the USA solidly in 2nd place (China 91 GW, USA 61 GW, Germany 35 GW, Spain 23 GW). The USA now accounts for 19% of global installed capacity the lowest percentage since 2007.

The situations have many differences, for example, China is a poor country growing rapidly, Japan was a rich country growing little (though in 1990 it showed more growth promise than today). Still this one of the more interesting pieces of data on how much a bubble China real estate has today. Japan suffered more than 2 decades of stagnation and one factor was the problems created by the real estate price bubble.

The global economic consequences of the extremely risky actions taken to bail out the failed too-big-too-fail banks including the massive quantitative easing are beyond anyones ability to really understand. We hope they won’t end badly that is all it amounts to. Noone can know how risky the actions to bail out the bankers is. The fact we not only bailed them out, but showered many billions of profit onto them (even after taking billions in fines for the numerous and continuing violations of law by those bailed out bankers), leaves me very worried.

It seems to me we have put enormous risk on and the main beneficiaries of the policies are the bankers that caused the mess and continue to violate laws without any consequences (other than taking a bit of the profit them make on illegal moves back sometimes).

I hope things work out. But I fear the extremely risky behavior by the central banks and politicians could end more badly than we can even imagine.

Related: Continuing to Nurture the Too-Big-To-Fail Eco-system – The Risks of Too Big to Fail Financial Institutions Have Only Gotten Worse – USA Congress Further Aids The Bankers Giving Those Politicians Piles of Cash and Risks Economic Calamity Again – Investment Options Are Much Less Comforting Than Normal These Days

It is important to keep in mind the data is in current USA dollars, so big swings in exchange rates can have a big impact (and can cause swings to be exacerbated when they move in tandem with stock market movements – if for example the market declines by 15% and the currency declines by 10% against the US dollar those factors combine to move the result down).

The chart shows the top four countries based on stock market capitalization, with data from 200 to 2012. The chart created by Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog may be used with attribution. Data from the World Bank.

As with so much recent economic data China’s performance here is remarkable. China grew from 1.8% of world capitalization in 2000 to 6.9% in 2012. And Hong Kong’s data is reported separately, as it normally is with global data sets. Adding Hong Kong to China’s totals would give 3.7% in 2000 with growth to to 8.9% in 2012 (Hong Kong stayed very stable – 1.9% in 2000, 2% in 2012). China alone (without HK) is very slightly ahead of Japan.

The first chart shows the largest 4 market capitalizations (2012: USA $18.6 trillion, China and Japan at $3.7 trillion and UK at $3 trillion). Obviously the dominance of the USA in this metric is quite impressive the next 7 countries added together don’t quite reach the USA’s stock market capitalization. I also including the data showing the global stock market capitalization divided by 3 (I just divide it by three to have the chart be more usable – it lets us see the overall global fluctuations but doesn’t cram all the other data in the lower third of the chart).

Canada is the 5th country by market capitalization (shown on the next chart) with $2 trillion. From 2000 to 2012 China’s market capitalization increased by $3.1 trillion. The USA increased by $3.6 trillion from a much larger starting point. China increased by 536% while the USA was up 23.5%. The world stock market capitalization increased 65% from 2000 to 2012.

Related: Stock Market Capitalization by Country from 1990 to 2010 – Government Debt as Percent of GDP 1998-2010 – Manufacturing Output by Country 1999-2011: China, USA, Japan, Germany

USA, China, Japan and UK represented 47% of world stock market capitalization in 2000 and 55% in 2012. In the second chart I include countries with stock market capitalizations making them 5th through 12th in the rankings.

The chart shows the 5th through 12th countries based on stock market capitalization, with data from 200 to 2012. The chart created by Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog may be used with attribution. Data from the World Bank.

This second group of countries accounted for 16% of global stock market value in 2000 and 21% in 2012. So they took 500 basis points of the 800 basis points the top 4 lost, meaning all the other countries picked up 300 basis points. India was the biggest gainer, up 753%, (though that has declined quite a bit this year) then South Korea up 590%, China was up 536%, Brazil up 444%, no other market over $1 trillion in value in 2012 was up over 250%.

As the chart shows this second grouping is pretty tightly packed together, with Canada ($2 trillion in 2012) and France ($1.8 trillion) with a bit of separation at the top. Germany had $1.5 trillion and the rest all were over $1.1 trillion.

Apple’s stock market capitalization soared over $600 billion in 2012 (Apple’s stock market capitalization today is $444 billion). Following Apple in stock market capitalization today are: Exxon is $384 billion, Google $295 billion, Berkshire Hathaway $284 billion, Microsoft $270, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China $256 billion, GE $248 billion, Walmart $247 billion, Chevron $241 billion, China Mobile $228 billion, Nestlé $222 billion.

The data is from the world bank and based on the listed domestic companies are the domestically incorporated companies listed on the country’s stock exchanges at the end of the year. I think that means that for example, Toyota stock (TM) is all counted in Japan (even though you can buy ADRs in the USA on the NYSE). And also Apple (AAPL) is all counted in the USA, even though both of those companies make a large portion of their money in other countries and produce much of there product in factories in other countries.

I would not be surprise to see a collection of the lower stock market capitalization countries increase in the next 20 years at rates higher than the largest (so countries like Brazil, South Africa, Thailand, Mexico, Malaysia, Ghana, Indonesia, Philippines…). I would be surprised if some of the smaller countries don’t do poorly but some will likely do fantastically well and over-shadow the poor performers (from a global investors perspective). I believe China will likely do very well (though being volatile).

The USA also has a chance to do very well – largely due to the international performance of many of the companies based there. I do expect to see a growing number of the top 100 market capitalization companies to be non-USA based companies over the next 20 years (mainly because the dominance the USA has there now is so large and many countries are doing smart things to drive successful businesses in their countries compared to 30 years ago). The USA did many good things, but probably more of the reason for the USA’s success if the bad policies elsewhere (as well as the post WW II position the USA was left in and the smart decision by the USA in the 1950s and 1960 to push science and engineering). Today many countries in Asia and Europe are better focused on the value of science and engineering than the leaders in the USA are. The USA is coasting on the huge science and engineering infrastructure built and nourished earlier.

Chart by Curious Cat Economics Blog using data from the Wind Energy Association. Chart may be used with attribution as specified here.

The 8 countries shown on the chart account for 82% of total wind energy capacity globally. From 2005 to 2012 those 8 countries have accounted for between 79 and 82% of total capacity – which is amazingly consistent.

Japan and Brazil are 13th and 15th in wind energy capacity in 2012 (both with just over one third of France’s capacity). Japan has increased capacity only 97% from 2005 to 2012 and just 13% from 2010 to 2012. Globally wind energy capacity increased 41% from 2010 to 2012. The leading 8 countries increased by 43% collectively lead by China increasing by 68% and the USA up by 49%. Germany added only 15% from 2010 through 2012 and Spain just 10%.

Brazil has been adding capacity quickly – up 170% from 2010 through 2012, by far the largest increase for a county with significant wind energy capacity. Mexico, 24th in 2012, is another country I would expect to grow above the global rate in the next 10 years (I also expect Brazil, India and Japan to do so).

In 2005 China accounted for 2% of wind energy capacity globally they accounted for 30% in 2012. The USA went from 15% to 24%, Germany from 31% to 12%, Spain from 17% to 9% and India from 8% to 7%.

Related: Global Wind Energy Capacity Exceeds 2.5% of Global Electricity Needs (2011) – Nuclear Power Generation by Country from 1985-2010 – Chart of Wind Power Generation Capacity Globally 2005 to 2012 (through June)

The massively too big to fail financial institutions that exist on massive leverage and massive government assistance are a new (last 15? years) danger make it more likely the currency losses value rapidly as the government uses its treasury to bail out their financial friends (this isn’t like normal payback of a few million or billion dollars these could easily cost countries like the USA trillions). How to evaluate this risk and create a portfolio to cope with the risks existing today is extremely challenging – I am not sure what the answer is.

Of the big currencies, when I evaluate the USA $ on its own I think it is a piece of junk and wouldn’t wan’t my financial future resting on it. When I look at the other large currencies (Yen, Yuan, Euro) I am not sure but I think the USD (and USA economy) may be the least bad.

In many ways I think some smaller countries are sounder but smaller countries can very quickly change – go from sitting pretty to very ugly financial situations. How they will wether a financial crisis where one of the big currencies losses trust (much much more than we have seen yet) I don’t know. Still I would ideally place a bit of my financial future scattered among various of these countries (Singapore, Australia, Malaysia, Thailand, Brazil [maybe]…).

Basically I don’t know where to find safety. I think large multinational companies that have extremely strong balance sheets and businesses that seem like they could survive financial chaos (a difficult judgement to make) may well make sense (Apple, Google, Amazon, Toyota, Intel{a bit of a stretch}, Berkshire Hathaway… companies with lots of cash, little debt, low fixed costs, good profit margins that should continue [even if sales go down and they make less they should make money – which many others won’t]). Some utilities would also probably work – even though they have large fixed costs normally. Basically companies that can survive very bad economic times – they might not get rich during them but shouldn’t really have any trouble surviving (they have much better balance sheets and prospects than many governments balance sheets it seems to me).

In many ways real estate in prime areas is good for this “type” of risk (currency devaluation and financial chaos) but the end game might be so chaotic it messes that up. Still I think prime real estate assets are a decent bet to whether the crisis better than other things. And if there isn’t any crisis should do well (so that is a nice bonus).

Basically I think the risks are real and potential damage is serious. Where to hide from the storm is a much tricker question to answer. When in that situation diversification is often wise. So diversification with a focus on investments that can survive very bad economic times for years is what I believe is wise.

Related: Investing in Stocks That Have Raised Dividends Consistently – Adding More Banker and Politician Bailouts in Not the Answer –
Failures in Regulating Financial Markets Leads to Predictable Consequences – Charlie Munger’s Thoughts on the Credit Crisis and Risk – The Misuse of Statistics and Mania in Financial Markets

Chart of manufacturing production by China, USA, Japan and Germany from 1999 to 2011. The chart was created by the Curious Cat Economics Blog using UN data. You may use the chart with attribution. All data is shown in current USD (United States Dollar).

The story of global manufacturing production continues to be China’s growth, which is the conventional wisdom. The conventional wisdom however is not correct in the belief that the USA has failed. China shot past the USA, which dropped into 2nd place, but the USA still manufactures a great deal and has continually increased output (though very slowly in the last few years).

The story is pretty much the same as I have been writing for 8 years now. The biggest difference in that story is just that China actually finally moved into 1st place in 2010 and, maybe, the slowing of the USA growth in output (if that continues, I think the USA growth will improve). I said last year, that I expected China to build on the lead it finally took, and they did so. I expect that to continue, but I also wouldn’t be surprised to see China’s momentum slow (especially a few more years out – it may not slow for 3 or 4 more years).

As before, the four leading nations for manufacturing production remain solidly ahead of all the rest. Korea and Italy had manufacturing output of $313 billion in 2011 and Brazil moved up to $308 are in 4-6 place. Those 3 countries together could be in 4th place (ahead of just Germany). Even adding Korea and Italy together the total is short of Germany by $103 in 2011). I would expect Korea and Brazil to grow manufacturing output substantially more than Italy in the next 5 years.

The country supposedly growing their manufacturing the most in the last 10 years is Russia, up 375%. Frankly I don’t believe that data accurately reflects reality. China is next, up 346%. Followed by Indonesia up 345.6%, Brazil up 280%, India up 255%, South Korea up 163% and then Germany up 95%. The figures are all in current USD, inflation alone would result in an increase of about 27% for the period. The slowest gains in manufacturing output are the UK (up just 21%), USA up 32%, Japan up 33% and France up 43%.

Chart of manufacturing production from 1999 to 2011 by the 5th through 14th largest manufacturing countries. The chart was created by the Curious Cat Economics Blog using UN data. You may use the chart with attribution. All data is shown in current USD (United States Dollar).

Of course, when looking at economic data all sorts of questions can be raised. My not believing the Russia data, for example. Also even accepting an inflation of 27% for the economy as a whole, for many manufactured goods that may not be very accurate. And using US $ for everyone creates some issues based on foreign exchange movements (so a country could actually produce 10% more in their own currency but if that currency fell 20% against the $ then they would show a 10% decline in manufacturing output). The data has weaknesses that have to be understood. Even so the data is useful and provides a very good long term picture of what is really going on economically.

I actually believe the USA’s 10 year figure is a discrepancy, but we will see how things shape up in the next 5 to 10 years. The USA had some very bad years from 2006 to 2009.

I expect in the next 10 years Indonesia and Brazil will do quite well and have a great shot at being among the tops in this group of the 14 leading manufacturing countries. China will likely do well, but I think growth will slow and it may well fall back from the lead (though likely remain somewhat near the top). India could do well, but their continued failure to address infrastructure and corruption problems make it very challenging. If they successfully addressed those they could easily be in the lead. I doubt they will though, so I expect them to be held back. Mexico has a chance to do very well, though they also have problems to deal with.

A bunch of the leading countries will struggle to grow significantly. The USA, Japan, Germany, Italy, Russia, France, UK, Spain and Canada are not likely to do fantastically. I would expect the USA to be near the top of this group. That leaves Korea as a country I think can outperform all in the previous sentence but to have trouble keeping up with any of the countries in the previous paragraph that don’t create problems for themselves.

Related: Manufacturing Output as Percent of GDP from 1980 to 2010 by Country – Manufacturing Employment Data: USA, Japan, Germany, UK and more, 1990 to 2009 – Top 15 Manufacturing Countries in 2009 – How Accurate is Manufacturing Data? – Top 12 Manufacturing Countries in 2007

The chart below shows manufacturing production by country as a percent of GDP of the 10 countries that manufacture the most. China has over 30% of the GDP from manufacturing, though the GDP share fell dramatically from 2005 and is solidly in the lead.

Nearly every country is decreasing the percentage of their economic output from manufacturing. Korea is the only exception, in this group. I would expect Korea to start following the general trend. Also China has reduced less than others, I expect China will also move toward the trend shown by the others (from 2005 to 2010 they certainly did).

For the 10 largest manufacturing countries in 2010, the overall manufacturing GDP percentage was 24.9% of GDP in 1980 and dropped to 17.7% in 2010. The point often missed by those looking at their country is most of these countries are growing manufacturing, they are just growing the rest of their economy more rapidly. It isn’t accurate to see this as a decline of manufacturing. It is manufacturing growing more slowly than (information technology, health care, etc.).

This chart shows manufacturing output, as percent of GDP, by country and was created by the Curious Cat Economics Blog based on UN data. You may use the chart with attribution.

The manufacturing share of the USA economy dropped from 21% in 1980 to 18% in 1990, 15% in 2000 and 13% in 2010. Still, as previous posts show, the USA manufacturing output has grown substantially: over 300% since 1980, and 175% since 1990. The proportion of manufacturing output by the USA (for the top 10 manufacturers) has declined from 33% in 1980, 32% in 1990, 35% in 2000 to 26% in 2010. If you exclude China, the USA was 36% of the manufacturing output of these 10 countries in 1980 and 36% in 2010. China’s share grew from 7.5% to 27% during that period.

The United Kingdom has seen manufacturing fall all the way to 10% of GDP, manufacturing little more than they did 15 years ago. Japan is the only other country growing manufacturing so slowly (but Japan has one of the highest proportion of GDP from manufacturing – at 20%). Japan manufactures very well actually, the costs are very high and so they have challenges but they have continued to manufacture quite a bit, even if they are not growing output much.

India’s manufacturing output as a percent of GDP bounces around a bit this is largely because they were such a small manufacturer (and the rapid and somewhat chaotic growth of their economy in general). India’s economy benefited greatly from information technology and call center jobs for economic growth. Very few other emerging economies have had alternatives to manufacturing to grow their economies quickly.

India still is manufacturing far below their potential for several reasons: poor infrastructure, incredibly poorly functioning bureaucracy standing in the way of manufacturing business opportunities and corruption. Without addressing these issues much more successfully it is hard for me to believe they will become a serious manufacturer (even with huge amounts of available labor and a very large domestic market).

India has been trying to grow their manufacturing output, and has done so in the last 10 years. I do think India can move ahead of England and France but, India’s manufacturing output could also easily be overtaken by Indonesia, Mexico, and others, if they don’t deal with their systemic weaknesses much more effectively.

Of the top 10 manufacturing countries, those with the largest manufacturing portions of their economies in 2010 were: China 32% and South Korea 27.5%. Globally, while manufacturing has grown, other areas of economic activity have been growing faster than manufacturing.

Related: The Relative Economic Position of the USA is Likely to Decline – Manufacturing Data, Accuracy Questions – Top 12 Manufacturing Countries in 2007 – Manufacturing Employment Data: 1979 to 2007 – USA Manufacturing Output Continues to Increase (over the long term)

“The United States, like many nations, embraced heavy-handed regulation and extensive over-spending in response to the global recession and debt crises. Consequently, its level of economic freedom has dropped,” said Fred McMahon, Fraser Institute vice-president of international policy research.

The annual Economic Freedom of the World report uses 42 distinct variables to create an index ranking countries around the world based on policies that encourage economic freedom. The cornerstones of economic freedom are personal choice, voluntary exchange, freedom to compete, and security of private property. Economic freedom is measured in five different areas: (1) size of government, (2) legal structure and security of property rights, (3) access to sound money, (4) freedom to trade internationally, and (5) regulation of credit, labor, and business.

Hong Kong offers the highest level of economic freedom worldwide, with a score of 8.90 out of 10, followed by Singapore (8.69), New Zealand (8.36), Switzerland (8.24), Australia and Canada (each 7.97), Bahrain (7.94), Mauritius (7.90), Finland (7.88), Chile (7.84).

The rankings and scores of other large economies include: United States (18th), Japan (20th), Germany (31st), South Korea (37th), France (47th), Italy (83rd), Mexico (91st), Russia (95th), Brazil (105th), China (107th), and India (111th).

When looking at the changes over the past decade, some African and formerly Communist nations have shown the largest increases in economic freedom worldwide: Rwanda (44th this year, compared to 106th in 2000), Ghana (53rd, up from 101st), Romania (42nd, up from 110th), Bulgaria (47th, up from 108th), and Albania (32nd, up from 77th). During that same period the USA has dropped from 2nd to 19th.

The rankings are similar to the World Bank Rankings of easiest countries in which to do business. But they are not identical, the USA is still hanging in the top 5 in that ranking. The BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India and China) do just as poorly in both. The ranking due show the real situation of economies that are far from working well in those countries. China and Brazil, especially, have made some great strides when you look at increasing GDP and growing the economy. But there are substantial structural changes needed. India is suffering greatly from serious failures to improve basic economic fundamentals (infrastructure, universal education, eliminating petty corruption [China has serious problems with this also]…).

Ghana is a country I have great hope for. They have been doing very well recently. It is very easy for a poor country to slip up as they try to move up the economic ladder. And making the right moves over decades (which is what it takes to succeed) is very difficult. I am hopeful Ghana can do so (they have done well for 15 years, they have most likely at least another 20 years of precarious progress to make before they can afford to make huge mistakes. Look at the USA and Europe, there failed political leadership in the last 20 years greatly exceeds the failures elsewhere but the USA and Europe had such wealth that they could absorb those huge failures much more (though as we can see with places like Greece the failures will even eventually have to be dealt with by rich countries – they just can avoid it a lot longer). Africa has suffered from few positive examples of country wide economic gains. Several countries have been doing well recently. I think Ghana is the brightest hope, but the situation is tenuous (as it always is for a poor country). If they can continue making gains for the next 15-20 years they can help provide a positive example of what can be done.

Related: The Relative Economic Position of the USA is Likely to Decline – Government Debt as Percent of GDP 1998-2010 for OECD – Top Countries For Renewable Energy Capacity – Top 10 Countries for Manufacturing Production in 2010: China, USA, Japan, Germany

The rankings include ranking of various aspects of running a business. Some rankings for 2011: starting a business (New Zealand 1st, Singapore 4th, USA 13th, Japan 107th), Dealing with Construction Permits (Hong Kong 1st, New Zealand 2nd, Singapore 3rd, USA 17th, China 179th), protecting investors (New Zealand 1st, Singapore 2nd, Hong Kong 3rd, Malaysia 4th, USA 5th), enforcing contracts (Luxemburg 1, Korea 2, Iceland 3, Hong Kong 5, USA 7, Singapore 12, China 16, India 182), paying taxes (Maldives 1, Hong Kong 3, Singapore 4, USA 72, Japan 120, China 122, India 147).

These rankings are not the final word on exactly where each country truly ranks but they do provide a valuable source of information. With this type of data there is plenty of room for judgment and issues with the data.

Related: Easiest Countries from Which to Operate Businesses 2008 – Stock Market Capitalization by Country from 1990 to 2010 – Looking at GDP Growth Per Capita for Selected Countries from 1970 to 2010 – Top Manufacturing Countries (2000 to 2010) – Country Rank for Scientific Publications – International Health Care System Performance – Best Research University Rankings (2008)