The Nordic countries are often pitched to North Americans as the place where socialism works perfectly. But are countries like Denmark, Sweden, and Norway really socialist?
The Nordic countries are often pitched to North Americans as the place where socialism works perfectly. But are countries like Denmark, Sweden, and Norway really socialist?
Well, a Big Mac meal in Stavanger cost me like $22 Canadian dollars when I was there, so they got the high taxes. A pizza, when we finally found one in Christiansand was like $60 with a single beer.
Kjerag is worth the the hike though, but the Eagle’s Nest is expensive.
My biggest regret about Norway, is not bringing back a Stavanger Oilers jersey. The food was always great though, even when it was “it is like beef, sort of” (I think they served us reindeer).
And the hotel staff was hilarious. It was like 19 or 20 degrees one day, and they acted like they were dying in the Mohave.
“During an interview on “60 Minutes,” Anderson Cooper put this question to Ocasio-Cortez: “When people hear the word socialism, they think Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela. Is that what you have in mind?”
Her response: “Of course not. What we have in mind — and what of my — and my policies most closely resemble what we see in the U.K., in Norway, in Finland, in Sweden.”
If that were true, then Ocasio-Cortez would have to abandon almost her entire economic agenda and embrace free-market economic policies. Because that’s what those countries have been doing. Here’s a rundown: ”
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/ocasio-cortez-socialism-norway-sweden-venezuela/
stan, yup, those no-dick countries are hybrids, not pure socialism. In the late 1980T’s sveden realized that they were going down the toilet, and loosened business restrictions so capitalism would work. Finland is also hybrid, I know, I’v been there quite a few times recently. Kotex and her ilk don’t know what socialism is. And rich asshole like seam penn are just virtue signalers who’s verbal support never costs them personally
When I was in elementary school (back when, apparently, dinosaurs roamed the earth), we referred to such economies as “mixed”. In other words, they weren’t strictly socialist or strictly free-enterprise.
People who tout Denmark never talk about the most important factor in all this: the homogeneity of its demographics. Eighty-six percent of its people are ethnic Danes. Social welfare there is built on the cultural cohesion of its population who overwhelmingly share Danish values and perspectives on work and society. It is very much the same in Norway, though somewhat less so now in Sweden (where troubles are really beginning to manifest themselves as a result).
That’s why what might appear to outsiders as “socialism” works there: Denmark remains one big Danish family, rather than a mere “post-national” assemblage of inhabitants without a core ethos.
When I was there in 2012, there were many Muslim women in hijabs and burkas on the streets of Copenhagen. I understand that after the big influx of Muslim “refugees” in 2015/2016, the Danes have started encouraging/deporting the “refugees” back to their home countries. People forget that such social programs as welfare and free public education were designed to be temporary. Public education went from ending at Grade 8 to being K-12 system. Society deems it important to have an educated population so wants to provide this. Welfare was not designed to be intra-generational nor was public education designed to go on “forever”. At some point, the recipient must start giving back to society.
AOC KNOWS NOTHING. She is fully scripted and managed by very evil men like Soros and other monsters of the left. Pay no attention … she will be gone after 2020.
She is doing more good for Trump than anyone else. The Dems are having fits over this twat and her little cabal of aggrieved, yet, quite successful young colored women. They have all been elected to federal office. You don’t do that if you are down-trodden … or disadvantaged.
They get to be “socialist” because their leadership understands the value of exploiting their natural resources.
Our reign of error by Dustbin is to hope for sunny days for solar panels and his hot air moving the wind turbines.
The new green economy is a raw deal which is a formula for impoverishment, personified by regressive carbon pricing.
The tell us the major polluters will pay. We get our reminder at the gas pumps as the major polluters pass the tax onto us.
Just how is Canada combatting climate change again. What is 2% of 5% of .4% of even the silly modelled warming?
How Canadians vote for this insanity continues to amaze. OTOH out of touch, tin-eared incompetents are a bit out of fashion.
Denmark is essentially a white, homogeneous country consisting of 87% ethnic Danes and less than 13% immigrants. Similar for Finland (under 5%). Sweden is closer to 25% and has the highest number of “problems”. Finland teachers are the lowest paid in the EU.
When people say they want socialism like Denmark and Finland they really mean they want to get rid of immigrants and cut teacher’s salary. If you go by the facts anyway.
“I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy,” Danish PM Lars Løkke Rasmussen Rasmussen
From The Federalist
https://thefederalist.com/2018/08/17/debunking-socialist-myths-90-percent-scandinavias-wealth-privately-owned/
Answer: Yes, and moving away from it as fast as they can.
It seems they have folks who have come to realize that nothing is free and government is not the answer.
They like their bicycles and their tall f**kers.
‘They’re’
Yes (sigh) I know.
In terms of land ownership, Denmark, Sweden and Norway are far more capitalistic than Canada. They enjoy from 70 to 80% privately owned forests (60% of which in numerous small “non-industrial” ownership) as opposed to Canada where 90% is in Crown ownership (95% in BC).
Does a bear shit in the woods?
I heard a rumour decades ago, before internet in fact, that a scandinavian country had a tax rate of OVER 100% at some level of income.
sweden I think it was. ummmmm yup:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomperipossa_in_Monismania
The other statistic my Communist former next door neighbor used to hurl at me was the fantastic health and longevity statistics of the “Socialist” Scandinavian countries. How our “awful” “uncaring” capitalist USA trailed the Scandinavian countries in all the UN health statistics including infant mortality. “Clear evidence” he said, that Capitalism “kills people”.
Funny thing … he never answered my question when I asked what percentage of Scandinavian populations had just arrived from a 3rd world country? Or how many blacks lived in Scandanavia who refused to take their education seriously, and instead took drugs and got serially-pregnant in a quest for greater government support $$? Or how many of their native white population lived like poor white trash; living in remote villages, voluntarily uneducated and living on the welfare dime? My neighbor always refused to provide an HONEST discussion about the REAL demographic differences between Scandanavia and the USA. He never considered there were some unsavory ingredients in America’s “melting pot” of multiple races and cultures. America’s complex stew of cultures and peoples simply cannot be compared to the white cheese fondue of Scandanavia.
And what’s really sad is that our own government refuses to keep DETAILED statistics that correlate key demographic components with ANY negative outcome. And now, MY President is being SUED to stop his proposed census question regarding legal citizenship status. The left don’t ever want an HONEST discussion about RELEVANT statistics. Nope, it’s all about using statistics to deceive.
european nations can only afford to act like socialist nations because they are actually capitalist nations
the money has to come from somewhere to pay for all those socialist programs
in totally socialist nations people are dirt poor
In actual fact, the economy of the U.S. is very, very successful.
According to the “World Factbook” published by the CIA (and yes, in this I think they can be believed)
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html
These are the top twenty political entities whose per capita GDP lead the world, in order from highest:
Liechtenstein, Qatar, Monaco, Macau, Luxembourg, Bermuda, Singapore, Isle of Man, Brunei, Ireland, Norway, Falkland Islands, UAE, Sint Maarten, Kuwait, Gibraltar, Hong Kong, Switzerland, USA, San Marino.
Except for the US, every p.e. has under ten million population, and only Switzerland even comes close to that figure.
Most are very small, with an economy based largely on one source. Liechtenstein (finance), Qatar (oil), Monaco (finance, gambling), Macau (gambling), Luxembourg (finance), Bermuda (tourism), Brunei (oil), Sint Maarten (tourism). I haven’t checked Isle of Man, Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, or San Marino, none of which has even six digit population. By finance I mean generally offering very low tax for foreign businesses.
Singapore, Ireland, Norway, Hong Kong and Switzerland are the five other countries with population in the millions. Switzerland is a traditionally rich country based mostly on finance in the already rich environment of western Europe. Singapore and Hong Kong are rich cities associated with not so rich larger countries. Both essentially based its wealth as free cities as British colonies. Singapore separated from Malaysia to remain so. Hong Kong so far is allowed to be a separate entity, but for how much longer?
Norway has been discussed here. I only want to add one point. I researched the quintile income of both Norway and the U.S. The fourth quintiles are about equal, the U.S. is slightly higher in the fifth quintile, and slightly lower in the third. The biggest differences are in the bottom two quintiles. In Norway, the bottom quintile average 40% of the average income, and the next quintile 60%. In the U.S., the figures are 8% and 21%. (This is for 2011 through 2016.) If you are liberal, you would decry the disparity. However, this only points to the fact that Norway is/was a mostly homogeneous population, whereas the population of the U.S. is not static, with perhaps the bottom percent infused every year by new arrivals with essentially zero income. This is in addition of the large native population with negative income (producing none, and consuming some.) I notice the gap has closed between the U.S. and Norway in the latest figures. Gee, I wonder if this has to do with Norway’s own infusion of non-productive foreigners.
Ireland is an interesting case. Essentially, it is dependent on foreign global companies, especially in software. It has been a pet of the E.U., having been rescued from economic collapse by massive aid as late as the turn of the century. You can say its economy is based on the world economy, and is not a contributor to it with much native productivity.
Sorry if this is overlong, but the main point is the U.S. is the best economy in the world based mostly on productivity within the country that supports such a large population, a substantial portion of which is not productive. (As an example, Japan with a homogeneous population and mostly insular economics, and once touted as a model, is now 42nd with about 70% of U.S. productivity.) Anyone looking for other models is just blind to real economics.