6 ms·

From the US live in Norway now. In Norway there are a lot of political parties that can matter. All depends on the election. Some grow, some dont, new ones are

From the US live in Norway now. In Norway there are a lot of political parties that can matter. All depends on the election. Some grow, some dont, new ones are added, old ones go away. That is a dynamic that is entirely missing in the US. We have parties in the European left and we have parties on the European right, parties in the middle, green party etc etc. I try to get people to understand that we do not have a single party that is far right enough to compare with the Democrats in the US. (Discussing the Republicans is just hard). There is no left in US politics. and you could say that there is no right in Norway. The party considered to be "far right" would never think about advocating doing away with universal healthcare. The same for our main right party (Høyre == Right) would not attempt such a thing either.

beaconstudios 5y ago
It's really strange to think that the American left (AOC, Bernie) are fighting for such radical concepts as social healthcare, free education and paid maternity leave. I'm from the UK, the most capitalist European country and we had all three until we regressed on university fees thanks to our wonderful Conservative party.
- lucaspm98 5y ago
  There's a reason for that. The majority of countries with these socialized services have suffered from the corruption, bureaucracy, and taxation innate with government control. This is with the notable exception of a few countries with vast natural resources providing an economic baseline, and likely more importantly a relatively small and homogenous population with similar needs and opinions.
  - freeflight 5y ago
    > The majority of countries with these socialized services have suffered from the corruption, bureaucracy, and taxation innate with government control. The majority of these countries rank better on these metrics than the US does. > This is with the notable exception of a few countries with vast natural resources providing an economic baseline I can only think of one notable exception on that front, that being Norway with it's oil resources. > more importantly a relatively small and homogenous population with similar needs and opinions How exactly do you define "homogenous population" and why do you think "needs and opinions" are inherent to certain types of "population", which you apparently seem to use as a synonym for race?
    - lucaspm98 5y ago
      Scandinavian welfare system is only possible because Scandinavian countries are more or less small and homogeneous. Social stigma is huge part in making sure people do not freeload and do not abuse social safety nets. That social stigma will not work in big, diverse and marred by identity politics countries like the US or even Canada (in my opinion).
      - freeflight 5y ago
        > That social stigma will not work in big, diverse and marred by identity politics countries like the US or even Canada (in my opinion). The social system analogue to the US is not Canada, Canada's policies in that regard are way more resembling of European systems than the US's, that applies not only to welfare systems, but also crime and incarceration [0]. As such, Canada is very much an example of how at least part of these policies can also work in North America, even with its allegedly exceptional scale and diversity. [0] https://youtu.be/wtV5ev6813I https://youtu.be/wtV5ev6813I
  - beaconstudios 5y ago
    The US is one of the wealthiest MEDC countries, and "homogeneous population" is just racist drivel.
    - maccolgan 5y ago
      If you can't understand why people would be more motivated for pay for socialized services when people who consume those services are more like themselves, you need to reflect on your worldview.
      - beaconstudios 5y ago
        Call me crazy, but I think that human beings are fundamentally the same and deserve basic dignity. I believe it is actually you who needs to justify people extending less empathy to people of a different race. That seems like racism to me, and I thought we were supposed to be trying to move past that.
    - lucaspm98 5y ago
      Scandinavian welfare system is only possible because Scandinavian countries are more or less small and homogeneous. Social stigma is huge part in making sure people do not freeload and do not abuse social safety nets. That social stigma will not work in big, diverse and marred by identity politics countries like the US or even Canada (in my opinion). Actually, cultural traits penetrate all aspects of their economic system not just welfare system. For example due to social norms business competition between two businesses may not be as adversarial as it is normally seen in the US, unions are not as adversarial in relation to corporations and corporations are not as adversarial toward unions, government bureaucrats are not as adversarial (and boneheaded) toward businesses as in the US and so on.
      - beaconstudios 5y ago
        Canada has socialised healthcare, so you just disproved your own point.
        5y ago
- alibarber 5y ago
  Tuition fees were introduced in 1998, under a Labour government. Sure, at a tenth of their current rate but still, under a different government.
  - beaconstudios 5y ago
    Ah you're right it was Blair - in that case, I blame the other Conservative party; Blairite Labour.
AndyMcConachie 5y ago
From the US and live in The Netherlands now. Europeans can understand the Republican party through their own history. They're basically just corporate fascists. Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece all had very similar corporate fascists governments for many years and their policies, politics and backers very closely tracked those of the contemporary American Republican party. Whereas the Dems are a better spoken, slightly more watered down and cuddly version of the same.
- DoingIsLearning 5y ago
  I agree with the GP comment that the GOP has no right wing parallel in Europe. But your comparison with European Fascism is both innacurate and historically disrespectful. Literally all the fascist regimes in the countries you listed were Military coups in their origin and were all fairly economically inept regimes. They also included all out media censorship, political prisoners, prisoner torture and interrogation, political assasinations, and genuine terror across civil society.
  - xtracto 5y ago
    > They also included all out media censorship, political prisoners, prisoner torture and interrogation, political assasinations, and genuine terror across civil society Could it be a matter of comparing Policies vs strategies/tactics?
    - DoingIsLearning 5y ago
      Charitable, but if we look at it from a policy standpoint, all the dictatorships listed were Economic Interventionists and heavy spenders on public infrastructure. Basically the polar opposite of GOP (except for QE and bank bailout interventionism).
seneca 5y ago
The illegal immigrant population alone in the US is estimated to be between 10 and 28 million. The entire population of Norway is about 5.5 million. Perhaps the two countries have very different political realities.
ashtonkem 5y ago
One of my general beliefs is that political competition is necessary for healthy and responsive governance. Everywhere I've ever lived with single party rule has devolved into myopic and unresponsive governance. The exact details vary depending on which party had total control, but the general issues remain. A party that is competing for voters is one that produces new ideas, and tries to persuade voters that they're the best choice. A party that wins by default focuses on base service and winning primaries, which often doesn't worry as much about governing well. Unfortunately the US will never have the level of political diversity that is the norm in parliamentary democracies because FPTP heavily favors two party rule, and the two parties will never let go of FPTP for fairly obvious reasons. So the issue is, how can we make our system more dynamic given that the best solution, a change to our elector system, is probably out of reach?
VirusNewbie 5y ago
In terms of abortion rights, immigration, progressive taxation, and a host of other issues the US is to the left of Norway. I think people spend more time consuming the news than becoming familiar with the actual policies and laws of countries. In case you anyone misunderstands my claim, these are the facts: the US has more progressive taxation both on income tax and corporate tax, a minimum wage, and more liberal abortion laws (case vs planned parenthood ruling).
- ThinkBeat 5y ago
  When it comes to abortion law it seems dependent upon state, An extreme example right now is TX. (I think that will be overturned soon but it is still there for now.) For the rest of the states some are some are not. States https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-abortion-laws https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-abo... vs Norway https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/1975-06-13-50 https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/1975-06-13-50 For immigration, the US has much higher figured if you add it all together. US also offers many more way to move there. If you look at asylum however the US takes in 0.02% per population per year. Whereas Norway has taken over 0.7% per year. The US population is made up of 14% vs Norway at 15% immigrants The immigrant population in Norway is far more diverse than it is to the US. https://www.faktisk.no/artikler/z4nyj/norge-er-et-av-landene-som-har-tatt-imot-lavest-antall-flyktninger-i-hele-europa https://www.faktisk.no/artikler/z4nyj/norge-er-et-av-landene... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_Stat... https://www.faktisk.no/artikler/z4nyj/norge-er-et-av-landene-som-har-tatt-imot-lavest-antall-flyktninger-i-hele-europa https://www.faktisk.no/artikler/z4nyj/norge-er-et-av-landene... https://www.imdi.no/tall-og-statistikk/ https://www.imdi.no/tall-og-statistikk/ Minimum wage is true, in that the US has one and Norway does not. However the negotiated wages between the unions and the business sector have been "almengjøring" which means they dictate what wages need to be, even when the company you work for is not a direct part and even if you as an employee do not belong to a union. That is backed by Norwegian law This is per sector. Most sectors now have it Some dont. Where it does exist, it is far higher than the US minimum wage. You cannot live on minimum wage in the US. So it is below what is reasonable and humane. A big problem is in the construction business were the builders love to hire Eastern European migrants for a lot less than what the law dictators. This is illegal but very common As far as taxation goes I dont have time right now to really dig into it. I know I pay about 42% taxes on my income. 25% VAT on most things, but there are exceptions, for healthy food and many other things. I paid a lot less in the US :)

beaconstudios 5y ago

It's really strange to think that the American left (AOC, Bernie) are fighting for such radical concepts as social healthcare, free education and paid maternity leave. I'm from the UK, the most capitalist European country and we had all three until we regressed on university fees thanks to our wonderful Conservative party.

lucaspm98 5y ago
There's a reason for that. The majority of countries with these socialized services have suffered from the corruption, bureaucracy, and taxation innate with government control. This is with the notable exception of a few countries with vast natural resources providing an economic baseline, and likely more importantly a relatively small and homogenous population with similar needs and opinions.
- freeflight 5y ago
  > The majority of countries with these socialized services have suffered from the corruption, bureaucracy, and taxation innate with government control. The majority of these countries rank better on these metrics than the US does. > This is with the notable exception of a few countries with vast natural resources providing an economic baseline I can only think of one notable exception on that front, that being Norway with it's oil resources. > more importantly a relatively small and homogenous population with similar needs and opinions How exactly do you define "homogenous population" and why do you think "needs and opinions" are inherent to certain types of "population", which you apparently seem to use as a synonym for race?
  - lucaspm98 5y ago
    Scandinavian welfare system is only possible because Scandinavian countries are more or less small and homogeneous. Social stigma is huge part in making sure people do not freeload and do not abuse social safety nets. That social stigma will not work in big, diverse and marred by identity politics countries like the US or even Canada (in my opinion).
    - freeflight 5y ago
      > That social stigma will not work in big, diverse and marred by identity politics countries like the US or even Canada (in my opinion). The social system analogue to the US is not Canada, Canada's policies in that regard are way more resembling of European systems than the US's, that applies not only to welfare systems, but also crime and incarceration [0]. As such, Canada is very much an example of how at least part of these policies can also work in North America, even with its allegedly exceptional scale and diversity. [0] https://youtu.be/wtV5ev6813I https://youtu.be/wtV5ev6813I
- beaconstudios 5y ago
  The US is one of the wealthiest MEDC countries, and "homogeneous population" is just racist drivel.
  - maccolgan 5y ago
    If you can't understand why people would be more motivated for pay for socialized services when people who consume those services are more like themselves, you need to reflect on your worldview.
    - beaconstudios 5y ago
      Call me crazy, but I think that human beings are fundamentally the same and deserve basic dignity. I believe it is actually you who needs to justify people extending less empathy to people of a different race. That seems like racism to me, and I thought we were supposed to be trying to move past that.
  - lucaspm98 5y ago
    Scandinavian welfare system is only possible because Scandinavian countries are more or less small and homogeneous. Social stigma is huge part in making sure people do not freeload and do not abuse social safety nets. That social stigma will not work in big, diverse and marred by identity politics countries like the US or even Canada (in my opinion). Actually, cultural traits penetrate all aspects of their economic system not just welfare system. For example due to social norms business competition between two businesses may not be as adversarial as it is normally seen in the US, unions are not as adversarial in relation to corporations and corporations are not as adversarial toward unions, government bureaucrats are not as adversarial (and boneheaded) toward businesses as in the US and so on.
    - beaconstudios 5y ago
      Canada has socialised healthcare, so you just disproved your own point.
      - 5y ago
alibarber 5y ago
Tuition fees were introduced in 1998, under a Labour government. Sure, at a tenth of their current rate but still, under a different government.
- beaconstudios 5y ago
  Ah you're right it was Blair - in that case, I blame the other Conservative party; Blairite Labour.

AndyMcConachie 5y ago

From the US and live in The Netherlands now. Europeans can understand the Republican party through their own history. They're basically just corporate fascists. Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece all had very similar corporate fascists governments for many years and their policies, politics and backers very closely tracked those of the contemporary American Republican party. Whereas the Dems are a better spoken, slightly more watered down and cuddly version of the same.

DoingIsLearning 5y ago
I agree with the GP comment that the GOP has no right wing parallel in Europe. But your comparison with European Fascism is both innacurate and historically disrespectful. Literally all the fascist regimes in the countries you listed were Military coups in their origin and were all fairly economically inept regimes. They also included all out media censorship, political prisoners, prisoner torture and interrogation, political assasinations, and genuine terror across civil society.
- xtracto 5y ago
  > They also included all out media censorship, political prisoners, prisoner torture and interrogation, political assasinations, and genuine terror across civil society Could it be a matter of comparing Policies vs strategies/tactics?
  - DoingIsLearning 5y ago
    Charitable, but if we look at it from a policy standpoint, all the dictatorships listed were Economic Interventionists and heavy spenders on public infrastructure. Basically the polar opposite of GOP (except for QE and bank bailout interventionism).

seneca 5y ago

The illegal immigrant population alone in the US is estimated to be between 10 and 28 million. The entire population of Norway is about 5.5 million. Perhaps the two countries have very different political realities.

ashtonkem 5y ago

One of my general beliefs is that political competition is necessary for healthy and responsive governance. Everywhere I've ever lived with single party rule has devolved into myopic and unresponsive governance. The exact details vary depending on which party had total control, but the general issues remain. A party that is competing for voters is one that produces new ideas, and tries to persuade voters that they're the best choice. A party that wins by default focuses on base service and winning primaries, which often doesn't worry as much about governing well. Unfortunately the US will never have the level of political diversity that is the norm in parliamentary democracies because FPTP heavily favors two party rule, and the two parties will never let go of FPTP for fairly obvious reasons. So the issue is, how can we make our system more dynamic given that the best solution, a change to our elector system, is probably out of reach?

VirusNewbie 5y ago

In terms of abortion rights, immigration, progressive taxation, and a host of other issues the US is to the left of Norway. I think people spend more time consuming the news than becoming familiar with the actual policies and laws of countries. In case you anyone misunderstands my claim, these are the facts: the US has more progressive taxation both on income tax and corporate tax, a minimum wage, and more liberal abortion laws (case vs planned parenthood ruling).

ThinkBeat 5y ago
When it comes to abortion law it seems dependent upon state, An extreme example right now is TX. (I think that will be overturned soon but it is still there for now.) For the rest of the states some are some are not. States https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-abortion-laws https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-abo... vs Norway https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/1975-06-13-50 https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/1975-06-13-50 For immigration, the US has much higher figured if you add it all together. US also offers many more way to move there. If you look at asylum however the US takes in 0.02% per population per year. Whereas Norway has taken over 0.7% per year. The US population is made up of 14% vs Norway at 15% immigrants The immigrant population in Norway is far more diverse than it is to the US. https://www.faktisk.no/artikler/z4nyj/norge-er-et-av-landene-som-har-tatt-imot-lavest-antall-flyktninger-i-hele-europa https://www.faktisk.no/artikler/z4nyj/norge-er-et-av-landene... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_Stat... https://www.faktisk.no/artikler/z4nyj/norge-er-et-av-landene-som-har-tatt-imot-lavest-antall-flyktninger-i-hele-europa https://www.faktisk.no/artikler/z4nyj/norge-er-et-av-landene... https://www.imdi.no/tall-og-statistikk/ https://www.imdi.no/tall-og-statistikk/ Minimum wage is true, in that the US has one and Norway does not. However the negotiated wages between the unions and the business sector have been "almengjøring" which means they dictate what wages need to be, even when the company you work for is not a direct part and even if you as an employee do not belong to a union. That is backed by Norwegian law This is per sector. Most sectors now have it Some dont. Where it does exist, it is far higher than the US minimum wage. You cannot live on minimum wage in the US. So it is below what is reasonable and humane. A big problem is in the construction business were the builders love to hire Eastern European migrants for a lot less than what the law dictators. This is illegal but very common As far as taxation goes I dont have time right now to really dig into it. I know I pay about 42% taxes on my income. 25% VAT on most things, but there are exceptions, for healthy food and many other things. I paid a lot less in the US :)