Why Ireland Is a Successful Country and Finland Is Not

Demographics#

Between 2000 and 2025, Ireland experienced one of the highest population growth rates in Europe, surging by over 29% to reach 5.5 million. In contrast, Finland’s population grew much more slowly, increasing by about 7% to 5.55 million, driven primarily by net migration rather than natural growth.

Ireland’s population in 2000 was 3.8 million; in 2025: approximately 5.45 million, with total growth from 29% to 32%. Population growth was driven by high natural growth (births minus deaths) and significant net immigration, which has kept the country’s median age relatively low and its youth population among the highest in the EU. Ireland is the youngest country in the European Union, with a median population age of 39.6 years, compared to 44.2 in Finland, and an excess of deaths over births since 2016.

Finland’s demographic growth was primarily fueled by international migration. Its natural population change has been negative (more deaths than births) for most of the last decade. Finland’s population grew by 16,910 persons in 2025, dropping off significantly from 2023–2024 levels.

Economics#

The Finnish economy has been stagnant since 2009, and has been steadily cycling between recessions and GDP declines and modest recovery growth over the past 17 years. A similar path was followed by the late Soviet Union, whose economic stagnation began in 1974, followed exactly 17 years later by the collapse of the state.

In 2010, all key economic indicators of this previously successful country were roughly equal to those of Ireland, which over the past 15 years had more than doubled the GDP of economically ailing Finland.

In 2025, Finland had a GDP of $299 billion, compared to $609 billion for Ireland, ranking 47/197 and 25/197 by economy size, respectively.

Finland’s GDP per capita is $53,150, ranking 23/197, compared to $112,895 in Ireland, ranking 4/197. Adjusted for purchasing power (GDP per capita PPP), Finland ranks 27th at $65,378, while Ireland ranks 4th at $133,437.

Tax policy in Ireland stimulates economic development, while in Finland it stifles any potential for growth and economic success.

Ireland utilizes lower corporate tax rates and lighter tax wedges on labor to attract foreign investment and stimulate economic growth. Ireland has the lowest tax-to-GDP ratio at 22.4%. In Finland, this figure is almost twice as high, at 42.6%.

Ireland manages its finances responsibly, while Finland is rapidly approaching a public debt ratio of 100% of the economy, which is causing great concern in Brussels and reducing the overall viability of the European Union.

Finland has $245 billion in government debt (82.1% of GDP), compared to $236 billion (38.8% of GDP) in Ireland.

I should note here that it is inappropriate for a Finnish journalist, representing a country with a dysfunctional economy, to teach the most successful country in the European Union how to manage its finances and budget.

Falling Country#

Finland’s economy from 2009 to 2025 shifted from deep recessions tied to the 2008 global financial crisis and the 2020 pandemic into a period of sluggish growth. The 2010s were marked by demographic aging and weak productivity, while the mid-2020s saw a fragile recovery. Real GDP growth in 2025 was highly modest, landing at around 0.2%, with the unemployment rate rising past 10%.

Real GDP contracted severely by over 8% in 2009. The 2010s saw slow but uneven growth, followed by a pandemic dip and a 2025 annual growth rate of just 0.2%. The GDP per capita hovered around $57,000 to $58,000 by 2025.

Unemployment rate averaged around 7% to 9% for most of the 2010s. Due to weak labor demand and a technical recession, the unemployment rate increased, averaging between 10% and 10.5% heading into early 2025.

Finland has experienced persistent general government deficits over the last decade. Government debt-to-GDP rose steadily from the 2008 crisis, placing significant pressure on public budgets by 2025, driven in part by increased defense spending.

Finland has the second-fastest-aging advanced economy, putting significant strain on the labor supply and public healthcare/pension expenditures. Sluggish productivity has weighed on long-term potential output.

The Country Is Growing#

Ireland’s economy from 2009 to 2025 transitioned from the severe post-2008 financial crisis into a robust, multinational-driven global hub. The period is defined by an export boom, major labor market shifts, and volatility driven by major technology and pharmaceutical companies.

The initial period of the 2009–2014 crisis started with a severe recession, with GDP falling over 5% in 2009. This was followed by a strict bailout program, resulting in sluggish but stabilizing growth.

In 2015–2022 Ireland became an epicenter for global corporate expansion. In 2015, GDP jumped over 24%, though this largely reflected multinational balance sheets. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Ireland’s GDP actually grew while much of Europe was contracted.

In 2023–2025 Ireland’s GDP grew by 1.2% in 2024 and surged by roughly 12.3% in 2025, largely due to a global spike in the manufacturing of pharmaceutical drugs.

Because GDP and GNI can be heavily distorted by large multinational enterprises, Modified Domestic Demand (MDD) is considered a much more accurate representation of the core domestic Irish economy. MDD remained stable in the 2023–2025 period, growing consistently by 2.1% to 3%.

The conclusion from all of the above is obvious: Finland has no future as a country and a people under the current government and its policies; it faces inevitable economic and demographic decline.

All the accumulated wealth of the economy over the 55 years since the war, up until 2000, has been wasted. The current economic model and political system are compromised. Politicians, mired in corruption, lack fresh ideas for a way out of the crisis, exacerbating it with a hopeless standoff with their enormous eastern neighbor, demanding additional military spending at the expense of the population.

The standoff with Russia, initiated by the Russophobic Finnish “elite,” is scaring off investors who have no desire to invest in a failed country with a declining economy and harbingers of an inevitable war with Russia that will destroy all their investments and capital.

Neutral Ireland serves as the most compelling example of how to effectively utilize its status. A country with a similar population, unlike Finland, deprived of almost all resources, it has achieved stunning economic and social success in just fifteen years, while maintaining its military spending at a modest but adequate level.

Ireland, with its prudent leadership, is on the rise, and its progress could continue in the foreseeable future, barring the global crisis. Finland, with its dysfunctional political system and slow-witted, incompetent politicians, has no bright future in sight.

Finland Pays Billions, This Country Doesn’t—Why?#

Ireland is an underperformer among EU countries in terms of defense spending.

Some time ago, I was in Brussels discussing with an Irish friend of mine about Ireland’s EU presidency, which starts on Wednesday.

When the conversation turned to European security challenges and Ireland’s role, we both started laughing. My friend frankly admitted that Ireland is Europe’s “free rider” when it comes to defense.

The rest of Europe is rapidly arming itself: NATO countries agreed in The Hague last summer to raise defense and security spending to five percent of GDP. At the same time, the EU is building an 800 billion euro defense package and Russia’s war of aggression is continuing for its fifth year. In Germany, there is talk again of armed forces, in Poland of mass weapons purchases and nuclear weapons, and in Finland of strengthening the security of the eastern border.

And then at the head of the table is Ireland, whose defense spending of 1.5 billion euros is only about 0.2–0.5 percent of GDP. At the same time, Finland, with a population of the same size, spends over six billion euros on defense, and Germany spent 87 billion euros last year.

Now, the weakest link in European security, Ireland, is starting to lead the Union’s most important multi-annual budget negotiations, which will also decide on future defense spending.

Acting as a free rider on defense spending has been possible for Ireland because security is a commodity in Europe, the costs of which are not evenly distributed. Ireland has enjoyed the stability of Europe throughout the post-Cold War period without the need to build up a significant military force. Its location on the edge of the Atlantic, under the protection of Great Britain and the US, has offered a luxury that, for example, Finland, the Baltic states or Poland have not been able to enjoy.

Ireland, which is not a member of NATO, is also happy to underline its own neutrality. It is part of Ireland’s national identity, but at the same time it has also been a very affordable security policy solution.

This is something that is not officially said out loud in Ireland, although it can be laughed at among friends. The country’s official story emphasizes UN peacekeeping missions, diplomacy and development cooperation. They are also true, as Ireland has participated in UN operations since 1958, and its development aid budget is high by international standards.

In today’s world, however, one can ask what would happen if every country in Europe did as Ireland does. The answer doesn’t even need to be said out loud.

Ireland’s motto for the presidency, which begins on Wednesday, is an old Gaelic saying: ní neart go cur le chéile—there is strength in unity.

The phrase sounds beautiful, but in today’s Europe, unity can only be strength if the bill for common security is also more fairly balanced.

Source: Kauppalehti (in Finnish)