5 ms·

> Without inequality you'd also have to give up Teslas, SpaceX, and all those initiatives Bill Gates is investing in. Sounds great. I’d rather have Nordic-styl

> Without inequality you'd also have to give up Teslas, SpaceX, and all those initiatives Bill Gates is investing in. Sounds great. I’d rather have Nordic-style social democracy.

WalterBright 7y ago
Norway relies heavily on Teslas :-) and something like 20% of the GDP is pumped out of ground into the government.
- claudeganon 7y ago
  That’s true! Those lousy Norwegians, free riding on American innovation... I wish we had been smart enough to nationalize our oil and gas industries back in the day as well. I wouldn’t have had to spend so much of my adult life hearing wonks go on about about slashing benefits for the elderly or things like Medicaid block grants.
  - WalterBright 7y ago
    The oil & gas industry in the US is 8% of GDP, not 20%. The US oil & gas industry pays about a 37% average income tax rate. Nationalizing that industry isn't going to be a bonanza for the government.
    - claudeganon 7y ago
      Sure, but I’m talking about the history of these industries’ private ownership and it’s impact on US history and politics. For example, imagine the US without the Koch brothers or any of the other fossil fuel dynasties. Or if radical labor movements had seized on Norway’s model in the 19th century.
rayiner 7y ago
Nordic countries are better described as implementing “democratic capitalism” rather than “democratic socialism.” The starting point is a capitalist market economy, not a socialist economy. See: https://mises.org/power-market/swedish-ex-prime-minister-rebukes-bernie-socialism-only-destroys https://mises.org/power-market/swedish-ex-prime-minister-reb.... Sweden receives top rankings in business and economic freedom: https://www.heritage.org/index/country/sweden https://www.heritage.org/index/country/sweden. Sweden has drastically cut corporate taxes, to the same levels as Trump: https://www.reuters.com/article/sweden-government-tax-idUSL8N1R33JT https://www.reuters.com/article/sweden-government-tax-idUSL8.... Sweden has long been aggressively privatizing public services, including partially privatizing their social security: https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=5033569; https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&ar... https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sweden-partially-privatized-its-social-security-heres-how-it-has-worked-out-2019-09-06 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sweden-partially-privatize... Norway and Sweden also have more billionaires per capita than the United States: https://www.insider.com/countries-ranked-by-billionaires-in-proportion-to-population-2015-7 https://www.insider.com/countries-ranked-by-billionaires-in-...
- claudeganon 7y ago
  I’d prefer a Sweden in the 70s, but where they succeeded in turning industries over to workers and put the IKEA guy in prison for tax dodging and helping Nazis escape prosecution. And yes, the neoliberal turn that actually happened has been going bad for most everyone but the rich, but I’d take even where they are today.
- jahaja 7y ago
  As usual, you are cherry-picking wildly and implying stuff that just aren't there. The welfare state of Sweden and the Nordic countries that have laid the foundation of these states success is being dismantled rapidly by right-wing politicians bent on neoliberal policies. This have recently led to a crisis in health-care, education, and a burst in increased inequality. The reputation of Swedish welfare state that you are trying to associate with neoliberal policies is just blatantly dishonest.
  - rayiner 7y ago
    I'm citing to article's describing Sweden's economic regulations, corporate taxation regime, history of privatization, and educational system. These aren't "cherry-picked examples"--they're basic pillars of a country's policy that you look to in deciding whether to characterize a country as "socialist" or "capitalist." Sweden has never been socialist. It got rich through lassaiz-faire capitalism: https://elgar.blog/2014/09/09/embracing-capitalism-the-real-success-of-swedens-universal-welfare-state/ https://elgar.blog/2014/09/09/embracing-capitalism-the-real-... In the 1970s and 1980s, Sweden experimented with a mixed economy, with a large public sector and extensive price controls. That experiment was a failure: > In the 1970s, policy became more anti-capitalist. In 1983, Sweden even decided to implement a partial socialization of company profits, the so-called wage earner funds. Economic problems grew more and more severe, and when the boom of the 1980s turned into recession in the early 1990s, Sweden was hit much harder than other countries.’ In the 1990s, Sweden changed course. It deregulated industries, cut corporate taxes, and privatized large sectors of the economy. When people point to the "Nordic model" today, they are pointing to the ability of countries like Sweden to have strong economic growth combined with a robust welfare state. But the "Nordic model" is starts with a capitalist foundation not a socailist one: > The history of Sweden, however, also shows that the financing of a generous welfare state requires a highly competitive business sector. The best way to promote a combination of prosperity and equality is not to fight capitalism with high capital taxes, but rather to use capitalism as an engine of growth and combine it with a well-designed welfare state that provides a social safety net while preserving the incentives to work and provide for oneself. To give you a concrete example that illustrates the larger approach: if you take the subway in Stockholm, you're riding in train cars owned and operated by private companies. If you take the subway in New York, you're riding in a government owned-and-operated system. The Swedish approach is to rely on market forces when possible, not government command-and-control. It isn't to demonize the private sector, but to unleash it. To put it differently, the term "democratic socialism" means you start with a socialist economy and make it more democratic. The Nordic model does the opposite. It starts with a capitalist economy, and makes it more democratic, by taxing the wealth generated by the market to provide welfare services. That's the "Nordic model" today. Of course maybe there are unrepentant socialists who pine for the 1970s, but the Swedes have doubled down on capitalism and deregulation and have been perusing that strategy for almost 30 years now, after having tried alternatives.

> Without inequality you'd also have to give up Teslas, SpaceX, and all those initiatives Bill Gates is investing in. Sounds great. I’d rather have Nordic-style social democracy.

WalterBright 7y ago

Norway relies heavily on Teslas :-) and something like 20% of the GDP is pumped out of ground into the government.

claudeganon 7y ago
That’s true! Those lousy Norwegians, free riding on American innovation... I wish we had been smart enough to nationalize our oil and gas industries back in the day as well. I wouldn’t have had to spend so much of my adult life hearing wonks go on about about slashing benefits for the elderly or things like Medicaid block grants.
- WalterBright 7y ago
  The oil & gas industry in the US is 8% of GDP, not 20%. The US oil & gas industry pays about a 37% average income tax rate. Nationalizing that industry isn't going to be a bonanza for the government.
  - claudeganon 7y ago
    Sure, but I’m talking about the history of these industries’ private ownership and it’s impact on US history and politics. For example, imagine the US without the Koch brothers or any of the other fossil fuel dynasties. Or if radical labor movements had seized on Norway’s model in the 19th century.

rayiner 7y ago

Nordic countries are better described as implementing “democratic capitalism” rather than “democratic socialism.” The starting point is a capitalist market economy, not a socialist economy. See: https://mises.org/power-market/swedish-ex-prime-minister-rebukes-bernie-socialism-only-destroys https://mises.org/power-market/swedish-ex-prime-minister-reb.... Sweden receives top rankings in business and economic freedom: https://www.heritage.org/index/country/sweden https://www.heritage.org/index/country/sweden. Sweden has drastically cut corporate taxes, to the same levels as Trump: https://www.reuters.com/article/sweden-government-tax-idUSL8N1R33JT https://www.reuters.com/article/sweden-government-tax-idUSL8.... Sweden has long been aggressively privatizing public services, including partially privatizing their social security: https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=5033569; https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&ar... https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sweden-partially-privatized-its-social-security-heres-how-it-has-worked-out-2019-09-06 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sweden-partially-privatize... Norway and Sweden also have more billionaires per capita than the United States: https://www.insider.com/countries-ranked-by-billionaires-in-proportion-to-population-2015-7 https://www.insider.com/countries-ranked-by-billionaires-in-...

claudeganon 7y ago
I’d prefer a Sweden in the 70s, but where they succeeded in turning industries over to workers and put the IKEA guy in prison for tax dodging and helping Nazis escape prosecution. And yes, the neoliberal turn that actually happened has been going bad for most everyone but the rich, but I’d take even where they are today.
jahaja 7y ago
As usual, you are cherry-picking wildly and implying stuff that just aren't there. The welfare state of Sweden and the Nordic countries that have laid the foundation of these states success is being dismantled rapidly by right-wing politicians bent on neoliberal policies. This have recently led to a crisis in health-care, education, and a burst in increased inequality. The reputation of Swedish welfare state that you are trying to associate with neoliberal policies is just blatantly dishonest.
- rayiner 7y ago
  I'm citing to article's describing Sweden's economic regulations, corporate taxation regime, history of privatization, and educational system. These aren't "cherry-picked examples"--they're basic pillars of a country's policy that you look to in deciding whether to characterize a country as "socialist" or "capitalist." Sweden has never been socialist. It got rich through lassaiz-faire capitalism: https://elgar.blog/2014/09/09/embracing-capitalism-the-real-success-of-swedens-universal-welfare-state/ https://elgar.blog/2014/09/09/embracing-capitalism-the-real-... In the 1970s and 1980s, Sweden experimented with a mixed economy, with a large public sector and extensive price controls. That experiment was a failure: > In the 1970s, policy became more anti-capitalist. In 1983, Sweden even decided to implement a partial socialization of company profits, the so-called wage earner funds. Economic problems grew more and more severe, and when the boom of the 1980s turned into recession in the early 1990s, Sweden was hit much harder than other countries.’ In the 1990s, Sweden changed course. It deregulated industries, cut corporate taxes, and privatized large sectors of the economy. When people point to the "Nordic model" today, they are pointing to the ability of countries like Sweden to have strong economic growth combined with a robust welfare state. But the "Nordic model" is starts with a capitalist foundation not a socailist one: > The history of Sweden, however, also shows that the financing of a generous welfare state requires a highly competitive business sector. The best way to promote a combination of prosperity and equality is not to fight capitalism with high capital taxes, but rather to use capitalism as an engine of growth and combine it with a well-designed welfare state that provides a social safety net while preserving the incentives to work and provide for oneself. To give you a concrete example that illustrates the larger approach: if you take the subway in Stockholm, you're riding in train cars owned and operated by private companies. If you take the subway in New York, you're riding in a government owned-and-operated system. The Swedish approach is to rely on market forces when possible, not government command-and-control. It isn't to demonize the private sector, but to unleash it. To put it differently, the term "democratic socialism" means you start with a socialist economy and make it more democratic. The Nordic model does the opposite. It starts with a capitalist economy, and makes it more democratic, by taxing the wealth generated by the market to provide welfare services. That's the "Nordic model" today. Of course maybe there are unrepentant socialists who pine for the 1970s, but the Swedes have doubled down on capitalism and deregulation and have been perusing that strategy for almost 30 years now, after having tried alternatives.