3 ms·

Please find a single respectable historian of economy or similar that shares the view that the current era is the era of social democracy rather than neoliberal

Please find a single respectable historian of economy or similar that shares the view that the current era is the era of social democracy rather than neoliberalism and large scale privatizations of formerly social democratic mixed economies? But since you are HNs most blatant free market fundamentalist (proven by the ridiculous claim above that social spending alone constitutes social democracy, not to even mention the revisionism) I'm not expecting much more than tone policing.

CryptoPunk 5y ago
Narratives, popularized by the elite, like the very large and highly paid public sector bureaucracy, are irrelevant to the truth. The truth is revealed by scientific evidence, which in the social sciences, constitutes socioeconomic statistics. What are your thoughts on the statistics I provided earlier, which I'll reproduce here: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-longrun https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-long... ? >>proven by the ridiculous claim above that social spending alone constitutes social democracy, not to even mention the revisionism You should ask yourself why you are so angry and so intent on trying to discredit my completely reasonable effort to support my position, while the evidence you yourself provided is so absurdly flimsy, like minimum wage (which only affects 4% of jobs) not rising fast enough, and social mobility decreasing (which could very plausibly be due to any number of anti-free-market developments, like 1. growing regulatory restrictions stratifying the position of incumbents in the market, 2. growing government spending creating a more nepotistic economy that favors elite interests, like public sector unions, who tend to have the strongest political connections). I have to ask, given around 40% of the economy now consists of the state, or those funded by it: do you perhaps have a financial conflict of interest in this debate? Do you work in the public sector, or otherwise hold a unionized job, which would make you a direct beneficiary of the state growing its control over the economy? But to your point: the share of the economy that is forcefully redistributed by the state, for the purpose of funding social welfare programs, is in fact a completely reasonable proxy for the extent to which social democracy plays a role in a society. Do you have a more direct proxy? As an aside, trying to gaslight critics of the social democratic establishment with this kind of bad-faith response profoundly damages the public discourse, and I urge you to stop doing it.
- cloudfifty 5y ago
  Extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence to warrant the effort. A single generic social spending figure doesn't meet that. Why won't you just provide a single respectable, non-lobbyist, historian/economists that supports your claim?
  - CryptoPunk 5y ago
    A massive increase in overall social welfare spending, as a share of GDP, is indeed an strong indication of a move toward a more social democratic economic structure. What contorted theory do you have to come up with to explain how it wouldn't indicate such? Why ignore statistics and look for an argument from authority?
    - cloudfifty 5y ago
      Alright, since you can't even come up with a single one it's pointless to spend any effort on extraordinary claims that have no backing beyond your own strange imagination. And no, a single social spending figure doesn't constitute an ideological era of social democracy. It's an absurd and frankly pathetic suggestion. If you actually interested in an objective look at this you'd have an easy time googling up mountains of work that goes against your claim of an social democratic era, but that would obviously be off-brand to a free market fanatic trying to justify why the last 30-40 years of neoliberalism is finally starting to crack.

CryptoPunk 5y ago

Narratives, popularized by the elite, like the very large and highly paid public sector bureaucracy, are irrelevant to the truth. The truth is revealed by scientific evidence, which in the social sciences, constitutes socioeconomic statistics. What are your thoughts on the statistics I provided earlier, which I'll reproduce here: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-longrun https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-long... ? >>proven by the ridiculous claim above that social spending alone constitutes social democracy, not to even mention the revisionism You should ask yourself why you are so angry and so intent on trying to discredit my completely reasonable effort to support my position, while the evidence you yourself provided is so absurdly flimsy, like minimum wage (which only affects 4% of jobs) not rising fast enough, and social mobility decreasing (which could very plausibly be due to any number of anti-free-market developments, like 1. growing regulatory restrictions stratifying the position of incumbents in the market, 2. growing government spending creating a more nepotistic economy that favors elite interests, like public sector unions, who tend to have the strongest political connections). I have to ask, given around 40% of the economy now consists of the state, or those funded by it: do you perhaps have a financial conflict of interest in this debate? Do you work in the public sector, or otherwise hold a unionized job, which would make you a direct beneficiary of the state growing its control over the economy? But to your point: the share of the economy that is forcefully redistributed by the state, for the purpose of funding social welfare programs, is in fact a completely reasonable proxy for the extent to which social democracy plays a role in a society. Do you have a more direct proxy? As an aside, trying to gaslight critics of the social democratic establishment with this kind of bad-faith response profoundly damages the public discourse, and I urge you to stop doing it.

cloudfifty 5y ago
Extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence to warrant the effort. A single generic social spending figure doesn't meet that. Why won't you just provide a single respectable, non-lobbyist, historian/economists that supports your claim?
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  A massive increase in overall social welfare spending, as a share of GDP, is indeed an strong indication of a move toward a more social democratic economic structure. What contorted theory do you have to come up with to explain how it wouldn't indicate such? Why ignore statistics and look for an argument from authority?
  - cloudfifty 5y ago
    Alright, since you can't even come up with a single one it's pointless to spend any effort on extraordinary claims that have no backing beyond your own strange imagination. And no, a single social spending figure doesn't constitute an ideological era of social democracy. It's an absurd and frankly pathetic suggestion. If you actually interested in an objective look at this you'd have an easy time googling up mountains of work that goes against your claim of an social democratic era, but that would obviously be off-brand to a free market fanatic trying to justify why the last 30-40 years of neoliberalism is finally starting to crack.