If you're going to indulge in flights of imagination, maybe try to imagine why what this guy, who seems to have every attribute of an expert in the field, says, might be true. Or even, attempt some introspection to see why you'd prefer to dismiss the article, even on a basis that is addressed in the article.
Trying to figure out what 'Here's a comparison that mostly factors scale out: http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/indicators/SP.DYN.IMRT.IN/co.... - again, the primary intention of the medical system in Canada is equality.' means. Primary intention? Really?
It's a nationally delivered service and one of the primary mandates is equality; of availability, of quality, etc. So, yes, really. If you're suggesting that this overlooks 'positive medical outcomes' I think you're missing the point.
Why assume that person is an expert? Can he prove causality, or is he confusing correlation with causation? I see no methodology. Why do students in Singapore, for instance, achieve among the highest test scores in the world with a merit-based system? Shouldn't you expect different results if the author's thesis is correct?
Finland has a merit-based system just like Singapore. And Singapore has, just like Finland, made a concerted effort to provide equal access to education to all its citizens.
The argument is not to drop merit-based tests and chances based on merit. Nobody is arguing that.
The argument is that society as a whole should focus on providing equal access and chance to citizens (in this context children that go to school/university).
So whilst Singaporean education certainly is far more focussed on rote learning and the typical 'Asian Tiger' approach to labor, the system built around those approaches is very 'euro-socialist', if you will: equal access for everyone.
Here's a comparison that mostly factors scale out: http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/indicators/SP.DYN.IMRT.IN/co... - again, the primary intention of the medical system in Canada is equality.