> Henriksen wrote in an op-ed earlier this year, might have been: The Country That Should Have Been Even Richer

What's wrong with not rabidly chasing bigger wealth? Why has this become totally unacceptable in this world?

This reeks of late stage capitalist views.

> We are choosing a model that is uninspiring for capital investment

Sounds fantastic in my book.

I also like that sort of example:

> His examples include $2.6 billion to develop a carbon-capture project whose commercial viability remains unclear

What if the goal was carbon capture and not commercial viability? What worth will be your commerce if we choke ourselves out on carbon dioxyde? That's also the concept of subsidiary and state funded stuff, it's not because it's not commercially viable that it's not useful.

I'm also unconvinced by quotes like "the country is suffering from the dutch disease" while Norway seems to have done what's indicated in such a case, through its sovereign fund. Another mitigation for that is to avoid letting in too many foreign investments in, to combat the currency appreciation that comes as a symptom of dutch disease... which this article presents as a bad situation.

Sure, the country might face a challenge as the oil wells dry up, and I'm not saying everything is fine (although I think a lot of countries would prefer to have that sort of issue).

I also think cost-efficiency should be a goal, and a responsibility of the state for state-funded projects and endeavours. I'm absolutely not absolving things like overblown costs and delays in big government led projects, this shouldn't be an excuse either (although the definition of "overblown" for delays may vary from person to person).

But his article looks more like people upset that Norway's money isn't going to them, rather than worrying about the fate of Norway itself.