Joeri Schasfoort confronts a jarring disconnect: Spain's economy is officially crowned the best in the rich world, yet its citizens overwhelmingly believe it is failing. This piece cuts through the noise of headline-grabbing growth figures to ask a question that macroeconomic models often ignore: why do the numbers look so good while the people feel so bad? Schasfoort's investigation reveals that the answer lies not in a statistical error, but in a fundamental mismatch between how rankings are constructed and how economic well-being is actually experienced.
The Flaw in the Ranking
Schasfoort begins by dissecting the methodology behind The Economist's 2024 ranking, which declared Spain the top performer based on five specific variables. He notes that the publication selected "GDP change in the fourth quarter of 2024," "increase in share prices," "change in consumer prices," "change in unemployment," and "change in government spending compared to what it is getting in taxes." While these metrics are standard, Schasfoort argues they miss the human element. He writes, "GDP measures the total income in the economy but because price increases raise GDP while not making the citizens of a Nation feel happier you need to correct for inflation." This distinction is crucial; it highlights how aggregate growth can mask stagnation at the individual level.
The author's most piercing insight concerns the role of immigration. He points out that Spain's impressive GDP growth is partially "driven by a strong labor market and high levels of immigration which mechanically lifts economic output." While the total economy is expanding, Schasfoort observes that "GDP per person has also risk it has done so by less than overall GDP." This explains the dissonance: a larger population sharing the same pie means the average citizen isn't necessarily better off, even if the total pie is bigger. Critics might argue that immigration is a net positive for long-term dynamism, but Schasfoort correctly identifies that short-term per-capita metrics are what drive daily sentiment.
"It would be a little bit like calling Dutch Football Club fanor the best club of 2024 because it's improved its position quite a lot more than Spain's Real Madrid a club that is clearly much much better."
The Long-Term Shadow of Crisis
Moving beyond the annual snapshot, Schasfoort shifts the lens to a long-term perspective, comparing Spain's recovery to that of the Netherlands. He argues that while Spain is improving year-over-year, it is still recovering from the deep scars of the 2008 financial crisis. He writes, "ever since 2013 there is a clear Trend that Spaniards are getting less negative about their economy," yet the gap remains wide. The author notes that unemployment in Spain "has not yet returned to its 2008 low while in the Netherlands it has," and that the stock market, despite recent gains, is "still quite a bit smaller" than its northern European counterparts.
This analysis reframes the narrative from one of current failure to one of incomplete recovery. Schasfoort suggests that the public's negativity is a rational response to a decade of stagnation rather than a cultural quirk. He dismisses the idea that Spaniards are simply more critical, noting that "before the massive 2008 crash most Spaniards were actually very positive about their economy." The data supports his view that the ranking is technically correct regarding change, but misleading regarding state. As he puts it, "people mostly care about the overall state of the economy rather than just the Improvement last year."
The piece also touches on the limitations of inequality metrics. Schasfoort looked at the Gini coefficient and found that while inequality is a factor, it "did not raise a huge red flag" compared to other nations. This forces the conclusion that the problem is not necessarily how wealth is distributed, but how much wealth exists per person after the crisis. The administration's fiscal policies, while sustainable in the short term, cannot instantly erase the structural damage of the previous decade.
Bottom Line
Schasfoort's strongest contribution is his insistence that economic rankings must account for long-term wealth and per-capita reality, not just year-over-year velocity. The piece's vulnerability lies in its heavy reliance on the Dutch comparison, which may not perfectly translate to the unique structural challenges of the Spanish labor market. However, the core verdict is undeniable: a country cannot be called the "best" if its citizens are still living in the shadow of a decade-old collapse, regardless of how fast they are climbing out of it.