The case for Social Democracy.

As to the Nordic culture; between the Civil War and WWI there was a massive migration of Scandinavians to America. Minnesota being the state where something like half the people have Scandinavian ancestry. Anyhow, this exodus left Sweden and Norway with a shortage of people. The reforms, which eventually led to what is now in Sweden, began as a way to keep people from moving away. It forced the leaders to sit down and ask themselves, what kind of country do people want to live in.

 

Here are another two brilliant video debunking Ben Shapiro's lies and strawman's on Norway and Social democracy.

 

The conservatives don't seem to know what is being talked about. Perhaps more details should be provided. For instance, the way things work, in the Swedish model is that the government acts like the general contractor, but all the work is done by private business.

For instance, for health care, the actual care is done by private doctors and hospitals, the government pays so much for services. Most providers will find their profit through efficiencies and volume. Those desiring a more upscale setting can pay an extra fee or buy supplemental insurance.

Same with schools. The state sets the standards, private companies contract to run the schools. The wealthy can always pay more at more exclusive schools.

Same with roads. The state determines the work to be done, private companies contract to do the actual work. Those same companies also do work for private interests, like on parking lots and driveways.

All of the so-called social, is just that, what we all need, roads schools, health care, utilities..... Even though taxes are high, the money is put back into society and the people get more efficient service.

One of the things that is unique in the Nordic countries is that they don't have a 1% class, like the US does. Even so, even with its small size, Sweden is one of the most industrialized countries. Even though they are something like 90th in population, they have around the 20th largest economy. Clearly they are punching above their weight.

It may be that what makes Sweden work, is its culture of innovation. It has been the most literate, of European countries, going back hundreds of years, the Nobel prize comes from Sweden. A rather large number of Swedes and Norwegians have won Nobel prizes. Ball bearings, Bluetooth and zippers, all came from Sweden. This all begins with a good solid education.

 

Just to point out something, the workings of Scandinavian ideas can be seen in the US. In the Pacific Northwest, there is a rather large Nordic population, second only to Minnesota-Wisconsin. Portland flies a Nordic flag. Oregon uses the Swedish model of the state acting as the general contractor but private companies do the actual work. Because of this, Oregon has perhaps the most progressive health care system, of any state.

There is a drive to create the ability, for anyone to buy into the Oregon Health Plan. But there has also been a structural change, in the way health care is delivered. It is s coordinated care system, where providers, of different specialties, coordinate their efforts. It provides for a system that is much more attuned to the needs of the patient, as provider pay, in part, is dependent on outcomes. The state sponsored coordinating system allows the patient to go seamlessly from provider to provider. The infusion of ACA money has made all hospital systems better, for everybody.

Seattle now has the highest minimum wage. It is also the economic hotspot of the country. One of the hallmarks of the Pacific Northwest, is the protection of the environment, which far exceeds any other region of the country. Part of it because if outdoor communal social gatherings. It is a characteristic of Nordic people, that even though they live in northern climates, where it gets cold and dark in the winter, they have a very outdoorsy culture, as in communal social gatherings. People in Minnesota and Wisconsin also engage in such gatherings.

 

Perhaps your ideology blinds you to what is actually being discussed. We, all of us, are what is called a society. Things that are of concern, to the society, as a whole, are termed social. What is being discussed is not government control of production, rather public control of social issues.

 

Works out well for the zoo animals

 

Not at all. Your idea of "public control" is done by government. Once the government gets power it never gives it up easily. If you are fantasizing about a benevolent monstrosity of a government then you are dreaming.

 

So what happens when the private ownership of a means of production does not want to turn over their business just because a vote was taken?

 

Let us know how it goes when your state implements it.

Good luck!

 

So people gradually giving up their rights and power to a government is good? If the government does not get power hungry then the people will just keep voting themselves free stuff. Either way it does not end well.

 

I don't support social democracy, I just don't think it's even remotely comparable to socialism. Socialism is the end of all liberty, social democracy is Australia or Switzerland. Could be better, but it's not exactly terrible.

 

Sweden reformed their economy by balancing their budget. Their debt went from 80% of GDP in the early 1990's to 41% today. Sounds like Conservatives, not Socialists, took over to this astute observer..

 

Here’s a snippet from someone on the ground actually dealing with reality in Sweden. Not throwing around ivory tower ideas.
https://www.thelocal.se/20171107/op...ists-in-sweden-but-it-has-been-made-invisible

I already mentioned large numbers of people freezing to death all over Europe.

 

Compare Sweden the country to New York City. We can compare it to states Michigan and New Jersey.

 

You are mixing vegetables with meat only because both are food. Still not the same thing.

 

Government is inherently flawed. There is no "awesome" government. Government stands for human control.

Take the zoo animal shown above. Zoo animals have guaranteed meals. They have guaranteed shelter. They have guaranteed health care.

Do you want to live as they live?

The free man lives also a flawed existence. He lacks those guarantees. But he has his freedom.

Is your freedom valuable to you? If you want what operations like Socialism award you, you wish to live in the zoo, regulated up the wazoo.

 

SS has been beneficial for some. For many it lowers their quality of life in retirement compared to what they could have had investing in the private sector. It will be insolvent by the time I retire (if I ever do). That’s why I pay almost zero into the Ponzi scheme.

Now, here’s some more recent reality with SS disability. When I was 17 my dad was severely injured in a logging accident. No insurance of any kind. Someone finally talked him in to going on SS. He did for a few months until he taped a block on his full leg cast so his leg was long enough to go back to work driving a truck.

The process to get off of SS disability was longer than the period he received benefits. Nobody in local and regional offices even knew how to make it happen because they had never done it before.

I have had a couple employees and numerous applicants in the last 5 years on disability. It’s a combination of gaming the system and the structure of payments and allowable income that force or incentivize this behavior. None of these people had any physical maladies that prevented them from doing physical labor.

I’ve also had employees who game the SNAP and WIC programs. The result is working men who want to stay in low paying dead end jobs, women who have illegitimate children, and kids who grow up without two parents. This cycle now goes on generationally in perpetuity.

The idea that our programs don’t incentivize laziness and under achievement is absurd. Why do you think there are job openings for illegals?

Programs for those too old or actually unable to work I can stomach. But what we have now is garbage. Before adding benefits like health care we must fix the issues we have now with entitlements.

A large demographic in the US doesn’t want what you are selling no matter the label you attach. Many of us want to fail or succeed on our own merits. We are happy to, and gain quality of life by sharing our wealth with those less fortunate. We have no desire to share with those who demonstrate repeatedly their apathy and sloth.

Finally, I understand you are all trying to unshackle yourselves from the negative connotations of socialism, communism and now democratic socialism. I don’t blame you. What I would like to see is instead of playing third person Robin Hood you would just man up and do the taking personally. Hiding behind new labels and using power of government to do the enforcing is cowardly.

Or, figure out a way to set up your utopian programs on a voluntary basis and leave those who believe in personal responsibility, hard work, and charity alone.

 

You left out some things...like the human feces all over the place. That’s not a Nordic value.

 

Thank you!

Most of the poor people, people without Medicare, and drug addicts became that way due to disability. In USA most people who need help get very very little.

 

Back in the days of my childhood, my parents had no insurance. But when they took any of their 5 children to the doctor, it got paid. Mom was a stickler for paying bills. She could be handed 5 dollars and ask her later and it was now 6 dollars. She could handle money.

Back then prior to insurance and especially the Feds, it was not very expensive to see the doctor.

 

I don't know if I believe this "happiness" studies non-sense. There are a multitude of way to quantify "happy", and a large margin of error and/or doctoring of the criteria in order to obtain the results desired.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-co...fe-in-norway-as-happy-as-its-cracked-up-to-be

And yes, cost of living is EXTREMELY high. They have high wages, which are confiscated to the tune of more than 50%.

Just to give you an idea of some common costs in Norway:

A standard McMeal at McDonalds for 1 - $12.35
A Gallon of Milk - $7.67
A Toyota Corolla 1.6i - $34,859.99 (holy ****!)
1 Bedroom Apt in City Center - $1,189.98 (and these are tiny apartments see next calc)
3 Bedroom Apt Outside Center - $1,588.07 (and these are tiny apartments see next calc)
Price per square foot of apartment in Center - $608.44/ft

Norway Average MONTHLY Salary after tax - $3,321.87


Let's compare that to the United States:

A standard McMeal at McDonalds for 1 - $7.00 (43% cheaper)
A Gallon of Milk - $3.14 (59% cheaper)
A Toyota Corolla 1.6i - $20,410.54 (41% cheaper)
1 Bedroom Apt in City Center - $1,238.31 (1% more expensive)
3 Bedroom Apt Outside Center - $1,581.93 (.5% cheaper)

Now, looking at rents, you would think that its pretty comparable... except its not. They are paying 3 times as much based on size.

Price per square foot of Apartment in Center - $232.19 (62% cheaper)

USA Average MONTHLY Salary after tax - $3,027.42

So after tax, they are getting paid $300 dollars more per month, but their costs are 40% higher.

No thanks.

 

We have cities with more people than their countries. Should one compare Norway to a country or a city?

 

That isn't necessarily true. Our taxes in this country are no just allocated to roads and fire departments. A significant portion of our taxes (too high in my opinion) is allocated to individuals to ensure the under privileged and elderly have medical coverage, that retirees aren't dying in the street, and a multitude of other social safety nets to pick people up that are down.

I agree our opinions are totally different. You desire a nanny state government that ensures people are taken care of from cradle to grave. Yet, we have been shown time and time again that government is the biggest purveyor of harm in our world's history. Government's are rife with corruption, historically harmful, and all in all, not who I would trust to see that I am taken care of from birth to death.

On the other hand, I see individualism as the best format to provide for the collective. The social experiment that is the United States has proven that by incentivizing individual success, we as a country holistically see great benefit. Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure. We should strive to minimize government as much as possible to provide the bear minimum required by the collective and the rest of the responsibility should fall on the individual. It was how this country was founded, and to-date the biggest contributor to our success.

Sure it is, because politicians are trying to win elections. The quote "when people find out they can vote themselves money from the treasury, that will herald the end of the republic" rings loud and clear.

Government on the other hand is NOT about improving people's lives. That is the responsibility of the individual. Government's job is to ensure that the playing field is equal, that people have the protections to operate within civilized society and a fair marketplace, and that people determine their own destiny.

Not the job of government in my opinion, and even if the claim that education should be, the format is wrong. I like Swedens model, where education is funded through taxation but schools are all private. Students take their earmarked allocated funding to whichever private school best serves them and their parents perception of quality education". The collective still pays for it, but the result is underperforming schools close and competition exists to earn those government allocated education dollars per student.

This idea that government exists to "improve" people's lives is starkly contrast to my opinion, and those of our founding fathers and our constitution.

Absolutely they do.

We are seeing massive economic growth, due to the reduction of the corporate tax rates. Progressive liberals can say that isn't the case all they want, but I agree the proof is in the pudding.

 

So we can use that same rational to determine that government systems and organization is not a fair comparison between the US and Norway either.

Right?

 

Good grief. I was born in 1938 and know the 1950s. They act as if the high taxes then was a great benefit to our lives. That is pure rubbish. Those high taxes were not spent to improve our lives, they were taking money from the rich to assist others who were also rich. Those taxes did not reach down to the poor.