What's wrong with the Nordic Model? (ideology, compared, financial, 2014)
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.
Only the government has enough money to invest in basic research, one that doesn't immediately produce marketable technologies. Without government grants the science and higher education dies.
Republican policy of fighting spending money on science and higher education is simply a form of economical sabotage.
No, it's a form of attempting to use resources intelligently.
Using 1 billion dollars smartly is better than blowing 2 billion dollars wastefully.
Money is not unlimited. It comes from somewhere. A dollar you spend on one thing is a dollar that isn't spent on another thing.
We already spend more money on education than any other industrialized nation, and we get middling results. Instead of "investing" more money into an education system that is 2nd rate, we should analyze the education practices of the #1 nation and learn from them.
That way we could have a better education system and lower the deficit. Your way leads to a bigger deficit and a continued 2nd rate education system.
No, it's a form of attempting to use resources intelligently.
Using 1 billion dollars smartly is better than blowing 2 billion dollars wastefully.
Money is not unlimited. It comes from somewhere. A dollar you spend on one thing is a dollar that isn't spent on another thing.
We already spend more money on education than any other industrialized nation, and we get middling results. Instead of "investing" more money into an education system that is 2nd rate, we should analyze the education practices of the #1 nation and learn from them.
That way we could have a better education system and lower the deficit. Your way leads to a bigger deficit and a continued 2nd rate education system.
Dude, we're no longer on the gold standard. Step into the 21st century for god's sake.
Some of the best research universities are public universities.
Look, research is research. Whether it happens at a university, the National science laboratory in New Mexico, or from IBM or Intel or Microsoft or whomever. It just happens. For that matter, the private universities who do research, are also getting public money to do their research. The National Science Foundation hands out tens of billions a year for research.
The real question here is, what would the world be missing out on if there was no government spending on education and research? If it would actually be missing out if not for the spending we have now. What if we spent more than we do now? Maybe we already are missing out on a lot and just don't realize it? How much should we spend?
This is a logical fallacy that a lot of people seem to be susceptible to. This notion that "Because something I like exists, and since the government is in some way responsible for it, then without the government this thing that I like wouldn't exist."
That fallacy isn't simply repeated by governments. I've heard unions rambling about how there wouldn't be a Chrysler building if it wasn't for the union steelworkers who built it. In fact, they make this claim for every single thing ever built/made by union companies, or even the existence of any company that is union controlled. Its dumb, and it isn't actually true.
Last edited by Redshadowz; 09-12-2014 at 08:00 AM..
Sweden produces 11,000 barrels of oil a day. Norway produces more than 1 million a day. Why does Sweden have a welfare state that is as lavish as Norway's? Not to mention the fact that Sweden has millions more people than Norway. Please explain, I would love to know
One more time: Culture of Consensus.
The Nordic countries have a unique culture set that is characterized by a high level of sharing, and a committment to government-driven, although still theortetical egalitarianism. All financed by a high level of taxation that everybody there agrees with.
And it works- for them. Here in the USA we do not agree on a damn thing. Do you think Swedish or Norwegian MPs behave like our Congress?
The Nordic system derives from a Culture. You can admire it and perhaps import a few ideas. But you can no more shove the Nordic system down our throats then you could shove Nigeria's culture of corruption down the Nordic throats.
Look, research is research. Whether it happens at a university, the National science laboratory in New Mexico, or from IBM or Intel or Microsoft or whomever. It just happens. For that matter, the private universities who do research, are also getting public money to do their research. The National Science Foundation hands out tens of billions a year for research.
The real question here is, what would the world be missing out on if there was no government spending on education and research?? If it would actually be missing out if not for the spending we have now. What if we spent more than we do now? Maybe we already are missing out on a lot and just don't realize it? How much should we spend?
This is a logical fallacy that a lot of people seem to be susceptible to. This notion that "Because something I like exists, and since the government is in some way responsible for it,, then without the government this thing that I like wouldn't exist."
That fallacy isn't simply repeated by governments. I've heard unions rambling about how there wouldn't be a Chrysler building if it wasn't for the union steelworkers who built it. In fact, they make this claim for every single thing ever built/made by union companies, or even the existence of any company that is union controlled. Its dumb, and it isn't actually true.
The question is what's wrong with government funded research? Not everything dealing with the government is bad. You anarcho friendly libertarians would sanction anything bad under the sun just so it's not at the hands of government.
Sweden produces 11,000 barrels of oil a day. Norway produces more than 1 million a day. Why does Sweden have a welfare state that is as lavish as Norway's? Not to mention the fact that Sweden has millions more people than Norway. Please explain, I would love to know
This is an export map of Sweden. You'll notice the single largest export for Sweden is Oil.
This is an export map of the United States.
This is an export treemap of Norway.
The colors each represent a different type of export. The key colors to look for, would be the dark browns, orange, and red. These best represent "natural resources" or manufactures directly from natural resources.
These four categories make up about 35%-40% of all Swedish exports, about 16% of all US exports, and about 70% of all Norwegian exports.
More importantly, Sweden's #1 export partner is Norway. But Sweden is Norway's fifth largest export partner. Basically, Norway buys a lot of stuff from Sweden, but sells very little back to Sweden. This wouldn't even include tourism and other types of travel between Norway and Sweden.
In effect, Norway is a significant driver of the Swedish economy. Since Norway's economy is almost entirely based around natural resource extraction, then you could say a large part of Sweden's economy comes from Norway's oil. If you took Norway's oil out of the region, the Scandinavian countries altogether would take a big economic hit. And if it wasn't for Sweden's timber and iron, it would take a huge economic hit.
That doesn't mean Sweden would be "poor", but it wouldn't be held up as a model anyone would want to emulate.
The question is what's wrong with government funded research? Not everything dealing with the government is bad. You anarcho friendly libertarians would sanction anything bad under the sun just so it's not at the hands of government.
I am not opposed in principle to government funded research. The problem with government is that it tends to grow out of proportion and isn't as easily "checked" when there are noticeably bad/questionable parts.
For instance, I know a lot of people with college degrees who are employed in professions that in no way require a college degree. When they show me their degree they will remark "That was the most expensive and useless piece of paper I ever purchased."
What you have in the case of education, is government "manufacturing" a demand for college-educated people which otherwise wouldn't exist. And in the case of education, that demand seems to be unnecessary and wasteful.
If we go back to research, it wouldn't be unrealistic to say that the majority of all research is also unnecessary and wasteful.
My friend is very science-oriented and is constantly posting science news on facebook about stuff that might be interesting, but which has no practical application whatsoever. He always remarks that my problem is that I expect all science to be useful, but he declares that science can simply be interesting.
My position is always, "If you find this kind of science useful that is your choice, but why are you using my money to fund something that has no positive impact on the human condition? If you find it interesting then you should hand over your money for this kind of research, keep your hand out of my pocket."
To understand a little about my position, watch this video of Bill Nye comparing NASA to SpaceX.
My friend used to say that, "Whatever is worth inventing, will be invented". If that is true, then why must government be involved?
To me, it seems the primary purpose of government in regards to research is less about doing what is good for all of humanity. Rather, it seems to be about making sure America invents it first. We don't want some other country getting the patent or notoriety. Basically, it is less about improving the human condition and more about "National competition". Which is why so much government research money goes to armaments of war.
I am not opposed in principle to government funded research. The problem with government is that it tends to grow out of proportion and isn't as easily "checked" when there are noticeably bad/questionable parts.
For instance, I know a lot of people with college degrees who are employed in professions that in no way require a college degree. When they show me their degree they will remark "That was the most expensive and useless piece of paper I ever purchased."
What you have in the case of education, is government "manufacturing" a demand for college-educated people which otherwise wouldn't exist. And in the case of education, that demand seems to be unnecessary and wasteful.
If we go back to research, it wouldn't be unrealistic to say that the majority of all research is also unnecessary and wasteful.
My friend is very science-oriented and is constantly posting science news on facebook about stuff that might be interesting, but which has no practical application whatsoever. He always remarks that my problem is that I expect all science to be useful, but he declares that science can simply be interesting.
My position is always, "If you find this kind of science useful that is your choice, but why are you using my money to fund something that has no positive impact on the human condition? If you find it interesting then you should hand over your money for this kind of research, keep your hand out of my pocket."
To understand a little about my position, watch this video of Bill Nye comparing NASA to SpaceX.
My friend used to say that, "Whatever is worth inventing, will be invented". If that is true, then why must government be involved?
To me, it seems the primary purpose of government in regards to research is less about doing what is good for all of humanity. Rather, it seems to be about making sure America invents it first. We don't want some other country getting the patent or notoriety. Basically, it is less about improving the human condition and more about "National competition". Which is why so much government research money goes to armaments of war.
USPS has to be one of the most efficient organizations known to man, so your theory doesn't hold much water.
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.
