Scandinavian countries are examples of Social Democracies done right. Agree or Disagree?

[Toad-1]

from Wikipedia: The Nordic model refers to the economic and social policies common to the Nordic countries. This includes a comprehensive welfare state and collective bargaining at the national level with a high percentage of the workforce unionized, while being based on the economic foundations of free market capitalism.

Although there are significant differences among the Nordic countries, they all share some common traits. These include support for a "universalist" welfare state aimed specifically at enhancing individual autonomy and promoting social mobility; a corporatist system involving a tripartite arrangement where representatives of labor and employers negotiate wages and labor market policy mediated by the government; and a commitment to widespread private ownership, free markets and free trade.

I completely Agree

I partly agree and partly disagree

I totally disagree

[EpicDweeb]

Let me put it this way... there are essentially no weapons permitted in Sweden of any kind including things like pepper spray. It just so happens that one in three girls are raped before the age of 18.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding that to eat for dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." -Benjamin Franklin.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and I believe good intentions are what drive democracy forward. What society believes to be good and what is truly good may be two totally different things. I think democracy is an inherently bad system because it leaves the open to change based on the whims of a potentially foolish people.

Don't get me wrong... Scandinavian countries are about the closest thing you can get to a good democratic system but they're inherently non-free-market. If workers are unionized then you have a third party involved in regards to wages.

For example: Say a worker with very little to no experience is looking for an entry level job. He's work isn't valuable enough to the business/company to pay him as high as the union requires, and thus he cannot get the job. Due to the union interference of requiring the business to pay a certain amount there are many employees that can't get jobs. It's not worth paying them as much as the unions require and thus they simply are unable to get jobs. Thus it is not a free market as the market decision must meet the requirements of a third party standard... or two since the government is also involved.

Dedication to private property is well and good and I'm sure they're very close to being free market... but they aren't. Beyond that most classical school/Austrian school economists would be quick to point out the flaws in any sort of universal free healthcare system.

When it comes down to it I think there is no perfect system. I don't think it's possible to really "do a social democracy correctly" or to ban weapons and call that a good society (when the result is women not being able to defend themselves from being raped before they're 18). Overall I think it may be better than many other societies... but I can't say that I think they are examples of Social Democracies done right.

[PoliceLivesMatter]

I never understand why some people say “well, so and so program worked in so and so country, so why can’t it work in this country?” There’s too many factors that contribute to the differences between countries to create any direct parallel. You’d have to make sure you account for all of the variables in the countries you’re comparing, and there’s a lot. Factors include but not limited to, population size, money, unemployment rate, culture, history, etc. These things are complex and their explanations are complex as well. I don’t think just because something worked in the Scandinavian countries means it will work in the US in particular. If social democracies flourish in Scandinavian countries great, but it doesn’t mean it’s a model that will work for the US

[ChocoLada]

Finland is not a Scandinavian country, Finnish language is not Nordic, it's Finno-Ugric (related to Hungarian and Estonian).
Scandinavian or Nordic languages are northern branch of Germanic languages: Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Icelandic and Faroese.
Vikings founded Nordic countries, as you can see, Finland is not one of them, sure, they have occupied Finland in the past, but is was not their country by ethnic origin.
thumbs.dreamstime.com/.../...ndinavos-77173068.jpg

And now to answer your question - yes, those countries are a very good example of social democracy done right.

[ChocoLada]

Thank you for MHO

[Catholicgirl22]

Yeah but I also think they have tiny populations with a lot natural resources too.

[Toad-1]

so do you think their model wouln't work in the US?

[Catholicgirl22]

Doubtful. The US has too many people and prefers the system it has unfortunately.

[BlueCoyote]

By capita, the US has FAR more natural resources. There's few countries on the planet that have as many natural resources as the US.
Denmark for instance is quite densely populated and has practically zero natural resources (except the ocean around it).
Also, I wouldn't know why population size matters. These countries aren't particularly rich. In fact, America is much richer. It all comes down to how you set your priorities as a government.

[JimRSmith]

Not entirely, no.

Scandinavia is one of the main places in the world to be plagued by drunken layabouts. I am at a loss to explain why it's tolerated to the extent that it is.

They have an underclass because they pay to have one.

[ThisDudeHere]

From what I know, they've had a pretty slow growth, I've roughly 60 percent taxes and have allowed the regressive left to take hold and let rapists and terrorists in (at least in Sweden).

[madhatters4]

for the most part i agree yes. they have found the right model and balance for a socialist democracy. particularly denmark

[BlueCoyote]

Largely agree. Enough to click "completely agree".

[0112358]

Voted B. Couple things I'd note:

"Social Democracy done right" could mean a couple different things. It could mean "if you want social democracy, it's an example of a well functioning one" or it could mean 'of various flavors of social democracy, they have the right flavor'. Note it doesn't mean 'social democracy is the best system'.

So the first claim, that they are doing a good job of implementing social democracy, i'd strongly agree with. It's very easy to focus simply on the economics or policy of a country: what's its tax rate, how progressive the tax system, are benefits universal or targeted, but hugely important is the -effectiveness- of government institutions. Are they corrupt, lazy, incompetent and poorly run, or -relatively- efficient, effective, professional and competent? On a global scale, most of northern Europe has -effective- and competent government institutions and that's hugely important. Americans have a constant argument: should they each pay directly or via part of their employment for insurance for health care while also paying taxes to cover insurance for the poor (and also paying taxes to provide some smoothing of benefits) … or pay no insurance premiums, receive a higher salary, then pay higher taxes and have tax funded insurance? You can argue a lot about benefits of one vs. the other, but comparing countries with different models, what will matter -fast- is how good is the government at doing what it aims to do with the money? The Scandinavian intuitions are pretty good, so people are pretty content with what they get for their tax dollars.

In terms of 'is it the best model' I like some parts more than others and it depends a little on which country. Fundamentally, I think the Nordic model's scrapping of targeted benefits in favor of universal ones has had a bunch of benefits. At the same time, the universal benefit background allows it to embrace a much higher degree of free market capitalism in the economy than what you'd typically see in france or southern Europe. I'm not convinced that the focus on collective bargaining is useful vs. a negative. But to some extent it depends on the deals that are struck. French unions are notorious for striking, Scandinavian unions are known for striking more pragmatic long term arrangements that are win-win with employers, or at least aiming for that. That's culture though, not just 'system'.

[NYCQuestions1976]

Social Democracy, which is code for "Diet Socialism" or "Diet Communism", can only work if you're complacent with allowing the government to run and dictate every moment of your life. No thanks. You also need a relatively small country with small population OR a population where EVERY SINGLE PERSON has basically the EXACT same life goals. Impossible. Also, all the countries mentioned in this question are in the top 15 for suicides.

The reason social democracy works in Switzerland is because the country is barely larger than Maryland with a small population and the government runs on all of the large amounts of money siphoned from the interest generated from all of the illegal international bank accounts that people set up to avoid paying taxes in their home countries.

Maybe one of the reasons social democracy works in Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark is it's basically dark nearly half the year and no one can really see what's going on. LOL

[LoveLifeHome]

I live in DK and I would say so. Sure you pay taxes through your teeth. But hey, they pay me enough for rent, food and party money for just studying! Also, free health care (except for dentist) and then not to forget that thanks to this, we have a very fast burocratic system, which helps everything flow a bit better.

[Toad-1]

Would you say you are middle class? upper? or what?

[LoveLifeHome]

Good question. I'd say I'm middle class. But that's because in Denmark since the 1960's when the welfare state was imposed, the middle class has been like the great majority of the population. So in other words, if you find someone homeless, it's because of some mental condition or drug abuse.

[cavmanier]

Have you used healthcare or know somebody that's used healthcare frequently there? From what I hear, the downside to healthcare there is long wait times. Do you have thoughts on that?

[Kurαȷ]

Yes and no.
Socially, and democratically, they are doing very well, but their labor and financial freedom leaves a lot to be desired.
Which is to be expected, considering them being welfare states.

But, it begs the question of whether Switzerland, Australia, Canada and New Zealand aren't doing a better job.

[cavmanier]

They have fairly high social services but that is offset from the countries being pro business in terms of low regulations (I think) with low corporate taxes. For example Sweden's corporate tax rate is about 20% and until Trump's recent tax change the average US marginal corporate tax was almost 40% when including state taxes. They also have very little military spending which affects our economy just like other social program expenditures.

[ShortCircuit]

Socialism has never been about practicality. Even if it was sustainable long term, it is a downright unethical system of government. That's that.

... And it's not sustainable because all of the Scandinavian countries are surviving on foreign aide.

[JayParris]

That's capitalism done right. Free market for all, including the workforce. Businesses negotiate and bargain between each other for mutually beneficial contract terms, and the workforce has a right to do the same.

I'm not familiar with their welfare system, but as long as its designed to help in the long-term (stepping stone toward a better life vs reward for lack of effort), then I don't see how anyone can have a problem with it.

[0112358]

-generally- there is a goal of having high work force participation, and that's sort of baked into the idea of a lot of the universal benefits (child care, health care, etc.). It is -indeed- high. I'd have to dig to find history, but:
data.oecd.org/.../...-force-participation-rate.htm

[vishna]

I mostly agree. I wish America had similar policies and people didn't have to worry so much about things like paid maternal/paternal leave, healthcare, etc.

[dragonfly6516]

From what I've heard, they only look good on paper, and have their fair share of issues, because of how "open" they are.

[Whatthefluff]

I don't know much about modern Scandinavian government, but seeing as they have low crime rates, etc. they must be doing something right

[doogo]

Denmark stopped their program because it was not working

[Toad-1]

how about the other? how are they doing?

[SirRexington]

Its the best we've seen so far. I wish America would employ a similar style.

Wasn't Adams and Locke fans of a similar system?

[ZeussLightningBolt]

I think they're examples of social democracies done wrong
High taxes. High suicide rate. Difficult to become successful

[A-man-22]

No I don't think they are done right but not done wrong either.
They are socialist but can't get things like the high levels of rape or suicide sorted out.

[Errorlikeits1999]

Bunch of Islam cucks now, if you want to say that 'works' that's on you.

[Lance1965]

They have it right or as close to right as it can ever be. The USA could learn a lot from those countries but will they... I doubt it.

[LegateLanius]

It works for them. I don't think it could work for the US

[BlueCoyote]

Of course it could. Worked under FDR.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@LegateLanius I agree. The population is too great and the country itself is large for it to work. It's diet Socialism.

[QueenofCups]

Don't know enough to answer.

[Secretgardenblood]

You know me @Abdkilani

[AbdKilani]

heheh yes xd

[HereIbe]

"Social democracy", possibly. Socialism, no.

[AlbanianYoungLady]

Disagree