Why Socialist Policies in Sweden & Norway Initially Were Successful

Initially...

Maybe, but don't call it "socialist." Americans hate anything that might imply that one should put common good before personal profit.

They were (Norway still is) very homogenous countries and there is a lot of pressure to not think too highly of yourself or better than others.

I think it's a more collective consciousness born from years of living in the cold and dark. You had to help each other out to get through.

There is also shame if you abuse the benefits - it still happens, but there is a definite backlash from friends or family.

There is no fucking way they could do it here. Too many grifters and lazy asses.

R3, Thanks for your response. Always wondered how Norway avoided potential problems with grifters.

[QUOTE]I think it's a more collective consciousness born from years of living in the cold and dark

There's no collective conscious here, it's only me ,me, me!

[quote]Americans hate anything that might imply that one should put common good before personal profit.

In order to put common good before personal profit or personal benefit, you need to be brought up with the consciousness of belonging to a community. That's the main reason why I don't see "socialism" being adopted here. It would take a generation or two to change the mindset.

Nordic people are highly intelligent.

Not really r7.

Americans who want things from the government instead of paying for them themselves want someone else to pay the taxes to fund them too. In European countries, the people are willing to pay a lot of their own money in taxes in exchange for benefits. AOC, for example, is already pushing the view that people at the top will pay and everyone else will get a lot of free stuff. That's not the way it works.

You can't have Norway and Sweden in America until the middle class is willing to fund its own government benefits, which is never going to happen.

Yes really r8.

wont work, cant work. americans are woefully and proudly undereducated who worship ann ryan.

R3, I think the Protestantism, rather austere and with no priestly middleman, may have helped too. Of course the reverse of that is the kind of loneliness and uncertainty that Ingmar Bergman, a preacher's son, explored in his films. By contrast look at the homogeneity of theocratic Muslim states, where people live very different lives.

Not particularly r10. They're doing better than the poor countries, but that's to be expected, given the many effects of extreme poverty. But compared with wealthy countries (and then again, noth Korea) not so impressive.

*north

Are Norwegians allowed to birth many children whether or not they can initially afford it? So curious re how the details of Socialist policies are put into effect and administered. Do they have the equivalent of food stamps? Are recipients required to buy healthy food rather than junk?

This--

[quote] You can't have Norway and Sweden in America until the middle class is willing to fund its own government benefits, which is never going to happen.

Is a completely untrue statement.

The reason these countries can afford all this stuff is that, unlike our American government which has given away government assets to the largest political donors, the Scandis have held onto ownership and profit from their oil companies. They have some of the largest sovereign wealth funds in the world--which use the profits from their petro dollars (in fact, they are conventionally called "Oil Funds") to fund much of their social benefits. The personal income tax in Norway may be like 39% this year, but that dwarfs the per person amount in the sovereign fund.

When AOC--or anyone--talks about increasing taxes at the "very top" be sure you know who she is talking about. We're not talking about people who do any actual work for their money. They are the billionionaire oligarchs who hang around their yachts, likely inherited their wealth, and have a team of financial advisers that actually manage what they have.

You're talking about people who's grandparents bribed their way into owning, into perpetuity, natural resources like oil that should be for the good of the entire country.

You're talking about hedge fund managers who make 500 million or more per year who achieve those numbers by breaking the system with front-running algos. They pay a piffling fine whenever they get caught, and they go on from there.

^^whose

Sweden and Norway have never been socialist, dummy OP. They are capitalist countries with a strong emphasis on social policy.

Social isn't Socialism

Socialist countries are notorious for economic failure, instability, lack of human rights and rule of law. There is no socialist country that has a functioning democracy.

You can't have Norway and Sweden's system here. First, they believe in totally free markets, which means little to no corporation regulation, and second, their social benefits system is privatized. GW Bush proposed privatizing social security and the country wasn't having it and we all know where the Republicans stand on deregulation. What democratic socialists want are all the social benefits of Sweden but with the oversight of France's system. In other words....they want a unicorn.

R18, My thread title specifies "Socialist Policies" and not pure Socialism but go ahead and call me a dummy if it makes you feel better about yourself.

Meanwhile, sincere thanks to all of the other posters who've provided insightful answers on this relevant topic.

Actually, r16, I dont think you are correct. In order to raise a lot of income tax revenue, income tax rates in Scandinavian countries are rather high except for in Norway. Denmark’s top marginal effective income tax rate is 60.4 percent. Sweden’s is 56.4 percent. Norway’s top marginal tax rate is 39 percent.

However, the rates are not necessarily the most important feature of the Scandinavian income tax systems. In fact, the United States’ top marginal income tax rate is higher than Norway’s and only 18 percent lower than Sweden’s, yet raises 40 percent less income and payroll tax revenue than Norway and 50 percent less than Sweden.

Scandinavian income taxes raise a lot of revenue because they are actually rather flat. In other words, they tax most people at these high rates, not just high-income taxpayers.

r19 doesn't know what he's talking about. The health and education features of the Nordic system are TAX FUNDED - not privatized. However, corporations are not highly regulated and these Nordic countries do believe in the free market system . It's totally doable here. However, we've had 100 years (and I'm not joking) of anti-union propaganda, anti-governmental safety net propaganda, anti-universal health care propaganda. And judging by some of the responses above (about the grifters who would take advantage) that propaganda has been highly effective. The Nordic countries also have a huge public sector of workers. 30% of the work force works for the government. Before this system would work here, we'd literally need to do a five year period of education to UNDO the 100 years of propaganda we've received. There used to be a required course in Florida (probably still is as far as I know) called Americanism vs. socialism. (Not capitalism vs. socialism).

We need some actual Scandinavians to weigh in here, because people are making all sorts of untrue statements about their societies and economies. Taxes are high, no doubt about it - and for everyone, not just the rich. But people see the result in their own lives. There isn't anxiety about losing a job, losing health care, losing housing. One of the reasons that America's health is declining is that people are in a constant state of anxiety and stress about our lack of economic security.

socialist

noun

a person who advocates or practises socialism

You are still a dummy OP! Go back to reddit or facebook. On DL it's adults talking.

We pay way more for way less in America, we just don't call them taxes. Go ahead and add up the cost of the services that are provided in the "socialist" countries that you must pay for in America and it's much more than any taxes in any country in the world.

R24's comment, especially in regards to medical care, is also an important part of the puzzle.

R22, the link above you at r21 is from me, r19, so, yes, I do know what I'm talking about. And, yes, social security is mostly privatized.