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.
Since Sweden has long been a model for social welfare I wonder how it's reforms towards the right economiclly will affect other countries? If Sweden can adopt some aspects of private pensions then this may make the idea more appealing to some in America who didn't like Bush's ideas. I think America will have no choice but to move towards more market or private sector approaches involving poverty,healthcare and pension issues in the near future because like Sweden we are experiancing a huge ageing population that will affect our tax collection and ability to fund gov't programs.
It is interesting that people trashed the idea of looking to the private sector and pointed to other countries as examples, yet here is Sweden now having to look to that sector because they can't afford the numbers.
It is interesting that people trashed the idea of looking to the private sector and pointed to other countries as examples, yet here is Sweden now having to look to that sector because they can't afford the numbers.
Yes, if a traditionally-leftist person, organization or country does something traditionally favored by the right, then it is not only palatable, but also perfectly acceptable to the left. Had Bill Clinton been a Republican, I doubt he would have been able to pass Welfare Reform and NAFTA.
Yes, if a traditionally-leftist person, organization or country does something traditionally favored by the right, then it is not only palatable, but also perfectly acceptable to the left. Had Bill Clinton been a Republican, I doubt he would have been able to pass Welfare Reform and NAFTA.
And yes, the reverse is probably true as well.
I agree. Partisan politics is a huge problem and stalls a lot of meaningful ideas.
its easier to privatize with less than 10 million people rather than 300 million
Of course, it's easier to do most things with 10 million that 300 million, including cover them with a government-run system. Sweden has shown that they're having problems with that despite full employment, high taxes and a smaller population. What makes you think we can do it with a population of 300 million?
Sweden does have unemployment but it seems to be debatable as far as how they measure it.
" There has been fierce argument about the true unemployment figure in the run-up to the election, with the opposition accusing the government of massaging the statistics.
The official rate in the first half of 2006 was 5.7%, but another 2.7% who were on job training programmes were not included.
According to a study by the McKinsey Global Institute think-tank this year, the unemployment rate is actually about 15%... "
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.
