Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If that's such an important criterion, you can not brand Scandinavian states as socialist because there is no collective ownership of businesses there either. That's because Scandinavian nations are welfare states with glorious free markets. That is the source of their wealth. Although they do have high taxes, those tax rates have fallen substantially since 1980 when almost all countries in the world have moved toward economic liberalism - free markets.
The Scandinavian nations are no exception, as Scott Sumner illustrates:
What a well written article. Like the author said, taxes still much higher than ours and they seem to live just fine. I disagree that our government's not corrupt, because it is and that's part of the problem. I think a lot of that is cultural. Scandinavians might not tolerate corrupt governments whereas America just bends over and takes it repeatedly by electing the same two parties over and over again.
Quote:
If the culture promotes hard work and discourages collecting government handouts, it can survive. He cites a study on civic virtue that shows Danes are one of the least likely people to say they'd accept government benefits they are not entitled too.
I think that may be the crux of the argument right there. America promotes the "get rich quick" "lose weight with no exercise" mentality. Couple that with a corrupt government that teams up with Corporate America to rape the middle class and drive wages downward it turns into a self defeating cycle. Good jobs are packed up and shipped overseas leaving behind a bunch of broken lives. All that may be left in some areas is Wal-Mart or McDonald's, which both pay less than unemployment more often than not. Then you have people, admittedly from my side of the political spectrum more often than not, that encourage people to take government benefits.
It's all a vicious cycle that's a reflection of corruption of culture, government, and business.
Those countries do have a larger welfare system in comparison to America's but I think it's more that they have welfare in relation to their size. With about 9 million people to deal with it may be easier for a Sweden to manage the system they have. I don't think America can have an equilvalent system with 300 million people. This is why it will always make more sense for U.S welfare to be aimed at specific groups such as medicaid for certain poor people and medicare for the elderly etc.
The size of the population as such doesn't matter much if things are in the same proportion.
If the US has 60x as many people, it could provide the same things as Sweden if they had a similar system as then GDP etc. would also be 60x as much.
I don't like that "working hard" thingy mentioned. I think it is enough to do something one likes to do and to do it well...
The size of the population as such doesn't matter much if things are in the same proportion.
If the US has 60x as many people, it could provide the same things as Sweden if they had a similar system as then GDP etc. would also be 60x as much.
I don't like that "working hard" thingy mentioned. I think it is enough to do something one likes to do and to do it well...
Your post doesn't reflect any actuality in the real world. GDP is not directly correlated to population.
Wouldn't 60x more people with a government providing 60x more benefits require a government 60x bigger with 60x more overhead and 60x more operating costs?
Your post doesn't reflect any actuality in the real world. GDP is not directly correlated to population.
Wouldn't 60x more people with a government providing 60x more benefits require a government 60x bigger with 60x more overhead and 60x more operating costs?
If the two countries being compared are at the same level, have similar economic and administrative structures, etc., there will be a close relationship between population and GDP or similar indices.
Basically your 60x conclusions are more or less correct, and don't pose a problem when the all things multiplied by 60 are of the same quality as in the small original. 60x higher operating costs are no problem when they are spread over a 60x bigger population/country.
From my own life experinece thus far, I handle my finances and planning for health and retirement much better than the government. I suggest those who wish to live under a Scandinavian system, move there. Leave The Bill of Rights next to the door on your way out.
What the dewy eyed Leftists and and stern Rightist can never comprehend is that the Scandinavian countries are blessed, or cursed depending on your POV, with a rich culture of consensus. A level of consensus that is certainly lacking in the USA and even in Canada and Europe. Japan does not, but nobody ever seems to advocate emulating them.
Good grief, does anyone believe for a minute that even liberal Americans would tolerate Scandinavian levels of taxation? You left -leaning, artsy-fartsy, individualism-loving Lefties are going to let our government run your lives? Clean up the puddle you woke up in already.
We have a social welfare state: Social Security, Public Schools, Welfare, State Universities, Student Loans and Grants, Medicare, Obamacare, Unemployment Insurance, Medicaid, Head Start, etc, etc, etc. What else do you want? Its marginally less than the Scandinavian countries, but far from nonexistent.
Things run great in Sweden or Norway? They also run great in Minnesota, which is full of..... Swedes and Norwegians- hang out here long enough, you trip over an epiphany.
And it would not be a thread about Scandinavia if I did not ask the question which nobody ever answers:
How come you don't counsel Zimbabwe, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Russia, or Cuba to be more like Scandinavia? Anyone?
Keep in mind that to most of the right wingnuts, "socialist" means anything the government does. So public school teachers, firemen, police officers, the EPA, public works depts, etc. are all "socialist" by their definition. Anything that isn't a "for profit" industry is "socialist" and therefore suspect.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. 
