So What is Wrong With the Nordic Model of Economics?

[Rusk]

Small, stable, in a safe neighborhood and can off-load defense, mostly homogeneous, oil-exporting countries can afford a lot of non-optimal spending.

no.

 

[AgeofEmpires2**]

Weren't the Nordic countries actually doing better without their social-welfare programs?

Why aren't all the other countries that enjoyed rampant social policy spending emerge on those lists? Why are some countries that had heavy entitlement programs about to collapse the entire Euro currency?

Tell you what, I'll take a nice rich neighborhood and turn it socialist. Then I'll take a poor neighborhood and turn it socialist. When one stays rich and the other stays poor I'll point at the rich ones that their policies are a one-size-fits-all for economic and political success. Everyone likes to make fun of libertarians by telling them to take Libertarianism to Somalia... well to that I say take your socialism there too and see where that leaves you.

To hell with it, if you really want more social welfare policy feel free to give more of your paycheck to the IRS... the SAME entity that collects money already to hand over to the SAME government that spends your money so wisely on all the things it promises. One thing about America is that almost every taxpayer isn't satisfied with how their 'share' is being spent.... yet people are calling for MORE money as if it will somehow be used for better purposes rather than divided up into where it's already going. If anyone is going to waste my money I'd rather it be me spending it on useless junk food and overpriced alcohol.

 

[James Keith]

So yes, they have high taxes.
But they also make some of the best wages in the world and have the best quality of life, along with some of the smallest levels of inequality.

So I will ask this as bluntly as I can, would you really not considering paying 45-50% income tax if it meant the absolute minimalization of inequality and social problems? (of course there are still problems in these countries but they are statistically less)

The US has much higher corporate tax rates than scandinavia. They rate much higher in terms of economic freedom for businesses.

 

[Supereem]

Because they hate Freedom

 

[CableandThanos]

Funk That

I'm not giving up 50% of my check for you, yo momma, or anyone else.

Give up 50% so that the lazy asses can be closer in income to my income level?

I've got a way they can get closer to my level,,,wait for it..... get a job or a second job, Like I have.

 

[nhbfan8080]

I always hear conservatives saying stuff like "time after time socialism is shown to be unstable and lead to failure" but a number of Nordic countries have been following such a plan for a long time and are not only doing well, they are doing a lot better than more traditional capitalist countries.
......
And if not, why? Greed? Idealism?
Explain.

Because they serve as a counter example to the American ideal of free market capitalism.

 

[CableandThanos]

no.

YES

NORWAY

The petroleum industry accounts for around a quarter of the country's gross domestic product.

On a per-capita basis, it is the world's largest producer of oil and natural gas outside the Middle East

ONLY 14%of the population is immigrants (which a good percentage of those being from poland and Sweden)



Funny note- There are more people who claim Norwegian American status in the YS than there are actual Norwegian people in Norway.

In the 2006 US census, almost 4.7 million persons identified as Norwegian Americans.,[131] which was larger than the population of ethnic Norwegians in Norway itself.

 

[speakhandsforme]

Funk That

I'm not giving up 50% of my check for you, yo momma, or anyone else.

Give up 50% so that the lazy asses can be closer in income to my income level?

I've got a way they can get closer to my level,,,wait for it..... get a job or a second job, Like I have.

I love people that ignore what would be better for all of society and, as such, better for them (and is based on pretty concrete statistics) because of some grade school, two-dimensional principles about entitlement.

I make decent money. Once I graduate law school, I plan to stay over 70k for the rest of my life. However, I was afforded the opportunity to achieve by way of these super-evil laziness-enabling public programs. So, I realize their merit in driving up the well-being and economic floor of an entire country. So, I'm for it. But, then again, I'm not you. I analyze things and think before I take a stance on something.

When I was 19, I spent one evening writing a sophomore level 10-page paper on the Nordic Model and Scandinavian public policy as a whole. It only took one night to establish the basis for understanding why they're ahead of us in terms of economic understanding. I suggest you spend one night looking into it.

 

[Lead]

There are quite a few aspects of socialism we use as a country (ex Social Secuirty, food stamps, medicare, etc). These Nordic countries aren't exactly easy to compare with our own country for a variety of reasons. Two of them would be that our country is a military superpower in the world and has to have their budget accordingly. The second is these countries do little when it comes to R&D for innovations of different sectors like healthcare. They simply have bigger countries put the money into funding and piggy back onto the results once they come out.

 

[SuperGNP]

There is no simple answer to this question. Inequality is low and quality of life is high, but the weather sux.

I won't speak for the other nordic countries but here in Finland the tax rate is not as high as people may thing it is. There are 7 other nations in Europe that have higher taxes, including Germany.

The US is one of the richest nations in the world and if the political leaders decided that improving the lives of ordinary Americans was a priority they would have done so a long time ago. Spending trillions on the military and war on drugs shows where they place their priority.

Finland is top 5 in the world in business transparency, education, happiness, best place in the world raise a child, gender equality, etc. But since I moved here a few years ago I have noticed a shift. Although Finland still has a AAA ranking from the credit agencies, unemployment is increasing and there are signs of social instability. The situation is the same in Sweden.

 

[CableandThanos]

I love people that ignore what would be better for all of society and, as such, better for them (and is based on pretty concrete statistics) because of some grade school, two-dimensional principles about entitlement.

I make decent money. Once I graduate law school, I plan to stay over 70k for the rest of my life. However, I was afforded the opportunity to achieve by way of these super-evil laziness-enabling public programs. So, I realize their merit in driving up the well-being and economic floor of an entire country. So, I'm for it. But, then again, I'm not you. I analyze things and think before I take a stance on something.

When I was 19, I spent one evening writing a sophomore level 10-page paper on the Nordic Model and Scandinavian public policy as a whole. It only took one night to establish the basis for understanding why they're ahead of us in terms of economic understanding. I suggest you spend one night looking into it.

LOL, I just wrote a post containing facts about the scandinavian model before you posted. I have read and know all about it.

Here is a HINT for not sounding like an asshole in the future--- Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they have not read the same shit as you.

How am I (and people like me) better off from giving up 50% of my check so that someone else can make $25,000 instead of $20,000?

Ok Mr. 70K, you willing to give up 50% of that? What's stopping you Now? Donate to public school, adopt a kid, write a check to the IRS, don't take deductions on your income taxes.

But of course you won't, be cause you have no real desire to put your money where your mouth is. You'll only do it if everyone else is forced to do it.

Until then you'll just take your moral high horse to the internet and spout off about how much more enlightened you are . LOL

 

[CableandThanos]

There is no simple answer to this question. Inequality is low and quality of life is high, but the weather sux.

I won't speak for the other nordic countries but here in Finland the tax rate is not as high as people may thing it is. There are 7 other nations in Europe that have higher taxes, including Germany.

The US is one of the richest nations in the world and if the political leaders decided that improving the lives of ordinary Americans was a priority they would have done so a long time ago. Spending trillions on the military and war on drugs shows where they place their priority.

Finland is top 5 in the world in business transparency, education, happiness, best place in the world raise a child, gender equality, etc. But since I moved here a few years ago I have noticed a shift. Although Finland still has a AAA ranking from the credit agencies, unemployment is increasing and there are signs of social instability. The situation is the same in Sweden.

What do you believe is the cause of the above? World economy, mass immigration, ??

 

[SuperGNP]

What do you believe is the cause of the above? World economy, mass immigration, ??

Finns appear, at least on the surface, to be very tolerant. But increasingly, immigration from muslim countries (Finland takes in many Somali and Sudanese refugees) has place a burden on society. The enormously generous social welfare system has been stretched to the limits and for a country that has historically been 90% lutheran, many people are voicing their discontent.

The global/European economic crisis is another aspect and the news media is daily showing stories of factories closing and moving to Eastern Europe, China and India. youth unemployment is above 15%. Total unemployment is around 10% but the govt manipulates the numbers because immigrants who join the language/job training program are considered to be employed, even though they are still students.

At the same time, due to influence from other nations, particularly UK and the US, many Finnish politicians are embracing neoliberal policies as a solution to the economic problems, but at the same time grass-roots groups are against it. Since these groups are quite powerful in society, I believe there will be a backlash against neoliberalism and monetary economics in the future.

 

[speakhandsforme]

LOL, I just wrote a post containing facts about the scandinavian model before you posted. I have read and know all about it.

Here is a HINT for not sounding like an asshole in the future--- Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they have not read the same shit as you.

How am I (and people like me) better off from giving up 50% of my check so that someone else can make $25,000 instead of $20,000?

Ok Mr. 70K, you willing to give up 50% of that? What's stopping you Now? Donate to public school, adopt a kid, write a check to the IRS, don't take deductions on your income taxes.

But of course you won't, be cause you have no real desire to put your money where your mouth is. You'll only do it if everyone else is forced to do it.

Until then you'll just take your moral high horse to the internet and spout off about how much more enlightened you are . LOL

That's where you and your understanding fall short. You think the extent of the model begins and ends with you losing $5,000 and it going to some lazy piece of shit. In actuality, the policy itself has much broader latent effects: higher disposable income, better public services, high worker/citizen satisfaction, better levels of citizen solidarity, lower rates of violent crime, and list goes on.

I only act as if I'm more enlightened than you because your understanding of the subject matter, as usual, is very basic.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

Only Norway has oil.

Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Iceland, etc. do not.

Finland is highly integrated into the global economy, exports a lot, and benefits from their proximity to Germany and Russia. Same with Denmark. They are in very fortunate situations.

Iceland isn't doing well, Sweden is a feminist Utopia,

 

[SuperGNP]

Finland is highly integrated into the global economy, exports a lot, and benefits from their proximity to Germany and Russia. Same with Denmark. They are in very fortunate situations.

Iceland isn't doing well, Sweden is a feminist Utopia,

Finnish geographical proximity to Russia/USSR has been a blessing and a curse. By staying somewhat neutral, not joining NATO, etc. the Finnish economy went from agrarian to manufacturing to high tech in the last 70 years, mostly to supply the Soviet Union of goods they did not have access to in the rest of Europe, it created a dependency on Russia. Finland, not unlike the rest of Europe, is heavily dependent on Russian energy, but also on tourism. As the Russian economy declines, so does the money Russian tourists bring every year. In the last 2 months there has been a 17% reduction from Russian tourists compared to the same 2 months last year.

 

[CableandThanos]

That's where you and your understanding fall short. You think the extent of the model begins and ends with you losing $5,000 and it going to some lazy piece of shit. In actuality, the policy itself has much broader latent effects: higher disposable income, better public services, high worker/citizen satisfaction, better levels of citizen solidarity, lower rates of violent crime, and list goes on.

I only act as if I'm more enlightened than you because your understanding of the subject matter, as usual, is very basic.

Apparently your understanding of the internet and message boards is very basic. We all can't explain every situation with every bit of knowledge we have on every subject. I made a simple statement that I didn't want to give up 50% of my pay and you took that to mean that I understood nothing of other tiny countries and how they run their governments and economies.

You jumped to stupid conclusions and when called on it, you didn't even have the decency to admit it or acknowledge your mistake.



No that is not where my understanding falls short--again dude, stop actling like you know what I do an don't understand.

I didn't say lazy pieces of shit, I said going to a person who makes $20,000. I didn't say welfare rat. Again if you are going to try and criticize me or my statements, at least get what I say correct.

I just think it is foolish and you must be foolish since you don't agree with me----see what I did there...

That we are comparing a country of 5 million homogeneous, oil wealthy, historically similar, NON R&D spending, military and world insignificant people to a country of 315 million people the size Europe, with massive amounts of poor immigrants, a percentage of the population that is still recovering from slavery and JIM Crow, a world Military power, a country that is asked to give billions in aid, food, first aid, military help, etc.

 

[speakhandsforme]

Apparently your understanding of the internet and message boards is very basic. We all can't explain every situation with every bit of knowledge we have on every subject. I made a simple statement that I didn't want to give up 50% of my pay and you took that to mean that I understood nothing of other tiny countries and how they run their governments and economies.

You jumped to stupid conclusions and when called on it, you didn't even have the decency to admit it or acknowledge your mistake.



No that is not where my understanding falls short--again dude, stop actling like you know what I do an don't understand.

I didn't say lazy pieces of shit, I said going to a person who makes $20,000. I didn't say welfare rat. Again if you are going to try and criticize me or my statements, at least get what I say correct.

I just think it is foolish and you must be foolish since you don't agree with me----see what I did there...

That we are comparing a country of 5 million homogeneous, oil wealthy, historically similar, NON R&D spending, military and world insignificant people to a country of 315 million people the size Europe, with massive amounts of poor immigrants, a percentage of the population that is still recovering from slavery and JIM Crow, a world Military power, a country that is asked to give billions in aid, food, first aid, military help, etc.

I am calling you out for taking a stance on something that you do not understand. You can get pissy about it all you want, but that's just the fact of it. You said you didn't want to give up a portion of your paycheck, citing that it would only serve to increase the income of someone who could, by your estimations, make said money by working as hard as you have.

You neglect to factor in the larger effects such policies would instate. So, yes, you lack understanding and, as is common with such reactionary thinkers, based your opinion on the effect that was the most immediately apparent to you.

 

[Rusk]

YES

NORWAY

The petroleum industry accounts for around a quarter of the country's gross domestic product.

On a per-capita basis, it is the world's largest producer of oil and natural gas outside the Middle East

ONLY 14%of the population is immigrants (which a good percentage of those being from poland and Sweden)



Funny note- There are more people who claim Norwegian American status in the YS than there are actual Norwegian people in Norway.

In the 2006 US census, almost 4.7 million persons identified as Norwegian Americans.,[131] which was larger than the population of ethnic Norwegians in Norway itself.

Oil is 1/4 of economy in Norway, not in other Scandinavian countries, and there are a large % of second generation immigrants. Travel to Osla and tell me how homogeneous it is. There are also a large % of "In and out" immigrants that you usually not see in statistics.

You are right about American Norwegians, its even more funny that a large portion of Southern Norwegians identify themselves as Americans, and even listen to country music, dress like rednecks, and fuck their relatives. :icon_lol:

 

[oldshadow]

No, giving up 50% of my gross for taxes that I believe I personally would get very little benefit from.

Just because some would like what they got for their money does not mean most of the middle class would and this would affect the middle class more in a negative way than anyone else.