ADVERTISEMENT

Bernie's Scandinavia doesn't exist anymore

NCPitt

All P I T T !
Mar 12, 2009
56,526
22,911
113
Fareed Zakaria: Bernie Sanders’ Scandinavian Ideal Is A Fantasy

Excerpts:

Sanders’s vision of Scandinavian countries, as with much of his ideology, seems to be stuck in the 1960s and 1970s, a period when these countries were indeed pioneers in creating a social market economy. In Sweden, government spending as a percentage of gross domestic product doubled from 1960 to 1980, going from approximately 30 percent to 60 percent. But as Swedish commentator Johan Norberg points out, this experiment in Sanders-style democratic socialism tanked the Swedish economy. Between 1970 and 1995, he notes, Sweden did not create a single net new job in the private sector. In 1991, a free-market prime minister, Carl Bildt, initiated a series of reforms to kick-start the economy. By the mid-2000s, Sweden had cut the size of its government by a third and emerged from its long economic slump.

...

Take billionaires. Sanders has been clear on the topic: “Billionaires should not exist.” But Sweden and Norway both have more billionaires per capita than the United States — Sweden almost twice as many. Not only that, these billionaires are able to pass on their wealth to their children tax-free. Inheritance taxes in Sweden and Norway are zero, and in Denmark 15 percent. The United States, by contrast, has the fourth-highest estate taxes in the industrialized world at 40 percent.

...

It is true that these countries have a generous safety net and, in order to fund it, high taxes. What is not often pointed out, however, is that in order to raise enough revenue, these taxes fall disproportionately on the poor, middle and upper middle class. Denmark has one of the highest top income tax rates in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 55.9 percent, but that rate is applied to anyone making 1.3 times the average national income. In the United States, this would mean that any income above $65,000 would be taxed at the rate of 55.9 percent. In fact, the highest tax rate in the United States, 43 percent, applies to income that is 9.3 times the national average, which means that only those with incomes over approximately $500,000 pay this rate…

A 2008 OECD report found that the top 10 percent in the United States pay 45 percent of all income taxes, while the top 10 percent in Denmark pay 26 percent and in Sweden 27 percent. Among wealthy countries, the average is 32 percent. The basic point is worth underlining because the American left seems largely unaware of it, and it has only become more true over the past decade: The United States has a significantly more progressive tax code than Europe, and its top 10 percent pays a vastly greater share of the country’s taxes than their European counterparts.
 
So which is it. They are socialists and on the path to ruin? Or they aren't?

Did Fareed plagerise this work too?
 
So which is it. They are socialists and on the path to ruin? Or they aren't?

Did Fareed plagerise this work too?

wow. You have Bernie bro syndrome bad. You refuse to acknowledge any facts that destroy your child like belief in the utopia than the commie is promising. (Everything wlll be free and only the billionaires will be paying)

the article confirms what ive been saying all along. Taxes will go up significantly for those who can least afford to pay them. The Scandinavian countries are run nothing like commie boy wants to run this country’

and I’ll add this which wasn’t in the article. Commie boy is for open borders and has said AMYONE a who comes to this country illegally or otherwise will get free healthcare and education. He will end deportations and Ice. He will stop the practice of preventing criminal aliens from coming back to the US. That policy alone (which he vows to do with executive order) disqualified him as a serious candidate. Only a moron would support someone like that. The cost of doing that is not even remotely in any of his plans. But for people who have a brain the cost is not even close to being the biggest problem with that.

as an aside this was not always Bernie’s position. For most of his time and even during his last campaign he’s said illegal immigration hurts American workers as it suppresses pay. Looks like Bernie has become woke to get a few more votes.

I’m sure you’ll either ignore that catastrophic policy position as well or come up with some lame defense
 
Fareed Zakaria: Bernie Sanders’ Scandinavian Ideal Is A Fantasy

Excerpts:

Sanders’s vision of Scandinavian countries, as with much of his ideology, seems to be stuck in the 1960s and 1970s, a period when these countries were indeed pioneers in creating a social market economy. In Sweden, government spending as a percentage of gross domestic product doubled from 1960 to 1980, going from approximately 30 percent to 60 percent. But as Swedish commentator Johan Norberg points out, this experiment in Sanders-style democratic socialism tanked the Swedish economy. Between 1970 and 1995, he notes, Sweden did not create a single net new job in the private sector. In 1991, a free-market prime minister, Carl Bildt, initiated a series of reforms to kick-start the economy. By the mid-2000s, Sweden had cut the size of its government by a third and emerged from its long economic slump.

...

Take billionaires. Sanders has been clear on the topic: “Billionaires should not exist.” But Sweden and Norway both have more billionaires per capita than the United States — Sweden almost twice as many. Not only that, these billionaires are able to pass on their wealth to their children tax-free. Inheritance taxes in Sweden and Norway are zero, and in Denmark 15 percent. The United States, by contrast, has the fourth-highest estate taxes in the industrialized world at 40 percent.

...

It is true that these countries have a generous safety net and, in order to fund it, high taxes. What is not often pointed out, however, is that in order to raise enough revenue, these taxes fall disproportionately on the poor, middle and upper middle class. Denmark has one of the highest top income tax rates in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 55.9 percent, but that rate is applied to anyone making 1.3 times the average national income. In the United States, this would mean that any income above $65,000 would be taxed at the rate of 55.9 percent. In fact, the highest tax rate in the United States, 43 percent, applies to income that is 9.3 times the national average, which means that only those with incomes over approximately $500,000 pay this rate…

A 2008 OECD report found that the top 10 percent in the United States pay 45 percent of all income taxes, while the top 10 percent in Denmark pay 26 percent and in Sweden 27 percent. Among wealthy countries, the average is 32 percent. The basic point is worth underlining because the American left seems largely unaware of it, and it has only become more true over the past decade: The United States has a significantly more progressive tax code than Europe, and its top 10 percent pays a vastly greater share of the country’s taxes than their European counterparts.
Thanks. I have been looking for this.
 
So which is it. They are socialists and on the path to ruin? Or they aren't?

Did Fareed plagerise this work too?
Did you read it? They were socialists who failed like all socialist countries do. They turned to capitalism for a lifeline. They are still socialist in their safety net programs but everyone shares in the cost unlike the Bernie imagined model.

This might explain those "happiness" surveys. They are happy to be where they are after experiencing worse.
 
Did you read it? They were socialists who failed like all socialist countries do. They turned to capitalism for a lifeline. They are still socialist in their safety net programs but everyone shares in the cost unlike the Bernie imagined model.

This might explain those "happiness" surveys. They are happy to be where they are after experiencing worse.

Not to mention Chinas economy didnt start to take off until they embraced capitalism in segments of their economy. But hey lets not learn from all the other failures and make a drastic move towards a system that history says over and over again is an unmitigated disaster. The only people who benefit from Socialism are the very people that Sanders rails against, the elite ruling class.
 
Not to mention Chinas economy didnt start to take off until they embraced capitalism in segments of their economy. But hey lets not learn from all the other failures and make a drastic move towards a system that history says over and over again is an unmitigated disaster. The only people who benefit from Socialism are the very people that Sanders rails against, the elite ruling class.
One thing we have never heard, and I did research and could not find anything, is in these "successful" Socialist countries of Scandanavia and Western Europe that so many on the left champion, I have yet to find any leader saying the following: "a billionaire is a failure of the system".
Think about that statement. What it REALLY means. It means the government wants to put a cap on what you can make. So hey, Bill Gates, develop Microsoft, and the government will thank you very much for lining their coiffures more, as they decide to spend your revenue amongst their party members.

No way in Sweden or Norway or Denmark or even France or England or Germany has there been this disdain on the rich, that a leader has openly pledged to eliminate and basically prevent. Now, we have seen rhetoric like this, just recently in Venezuela. Famously in Cuba and the Soviet Union of course. This is what I can't understand. People seem to be so comfortable that Bernie is talking about Sweden, but his comments are more like Chavez or Castro.

The Party of Science (except Biology) obviously needs to learn more about Economics and History.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fk_Pitt and NCPitt
Fareed Zakaria: Bernie Sanders’ Scandinavian Ideal Is A Fantasy

Excerpts:

Sanders’s vision of Scandinavian countries, as with much of his ideology, seems to be stuck in the 1960s and 1970s, a period when these countries were indeed pioneers in creating a social market economy. In Sweden, government spending as a percentage of gross domestic product doubled from 1960 to 1980, going from approximately 30 percent to 60 percent. But as Swedish commentator Johan Norberg points out, this experiment in Sanders-style democratic socialism tanked the Swedish economy. Between 1970 and 1995, he notes, Sweden did not create a single net new job in the private sector. In 1991, a free-market prime minister, Carl Bildt, initiated a series of reforms to kick-start the economy. By the mid-2000s, Sweden had cut the size of its government by a third and emerged from its long economic slump.

...

Take billionaires. Sanders has been clear on the topic: “Billionaires should not exist.” But Sweden and Norway both have more billionaires per capita than the United States — Sweden almost twice as many. Not only that, these billionaires are able to pass on their wealth to their children tax-free. Inheritance taxes in Sweden and Norway are zero, and in Denmark 15 percent. The United States, by contrast, has the fourth-highest estate taxes in the industrialized world at 40 percent.

...

It is true that these countries have a generous safety net and, in order to fund it, high taxes. What is not often pointed out, however, is that in order to raise enough revenue, these taxes fall disproportionately on the poor, middle and upper middle class. Denmark has one of the highest top income tax rates in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 55.9 percent, but that rate is applied to anyone making 1.3 times the average national income. In the United States, this would mean that any income above $65,000 would be taxed at the rate of 55.9 percent. In fact, the highest tax rate in the United States, 43 percent, applies to income that is 9.3 times the national average, which means that only those with incomes over approximately $500,000 pay this rate…

A 2008 OECD report found that the top 10 percent in the United States pay 45 percent of all income taxes, while the top 10 percent in Denmark pay 26 percent and in Sweden 27 percent. Among wealthy countries, the average is 32 percent. The basic point is worth underlining because the American left seems largely unaware of it, and it has only become more true over the past decade: The United States has a significantly more progressive tax code than Europe, and its top 10 percent pays a vastly greater share of the country’s taxes than their European counterparts.
My concern is that a lot of young folks would burst their skulls after reading this. They wouldn't understand it. Disclaimer: Lots of Trump voters wouldn't, either.
 
My concern is that a lot of young folks would burst their skulls after reading this. They wouldn't understand it. Disclaimer: Lots of Trump voters wouldn't, either.
Lots of Trump voters wouldn't, either...they being the ones who gave Garth Brooks hell for wearing a "Sanders 20" Lions jersey at a concert in Detroit...
 
Lots of Trump voters wouldn't, either...they being the ones who gave Garth Brooks hell for wearing a "Sanders 20" jersey in a concert in Detroit...
Wearing a "Sanders" shirt with his chance of being allowed to be the nominee (20%) was a mistake.
 
Fareed Zakaria: Bernie Sanders’ Scandinavian Ideal Is A Fantasy

Excerpts:

Sanders’s vision of Scandinavian countries, as with much of his ideology, seems to be stuck in the 1960s and 1970s, a period when these countries were indeed pioneers in creating a social market economy. In Sweden, government spending as a percentage of gross domestic product doubled from 1960 to 1980, going from approximately 30 percent to 60 percent. But as Swedish commentator Johan Norberg points out, this experiment in Sanders-style democratic socialism tanked the Swedish economy. Between 1970 and 1995, he notes, Sweden did not create a single net new job in the private sector. In 1991, a free-market prime minister, Carl Bildt, initiated a series of reforms to kick-start the economy. By the mid-2000s, Sweden had cut the size of its government by a third and emerged from its long economic slump.

...

Take billionaires. Sanders has been clear on the topic: “Billionaires should not exist.” But Sweden and Norway both have more billionaires per capita than the United States — Sweden almost twice as many. Not only that, these billionaires are able to pass on their wealth to their children tax-free. Inheritance taxes in Sweden and Norway are zero, and in Denmark 15 percent. The United States, by contrast, has the fourth-highest estate taxes in the industrialized world at 40 percent.

...

It is true that these countries have a generous safety net and, in order to fund it, high taxes. What is not often pointed out, however, is that in order to raise enough revenue, these taxes fall disproportionately on the poor, middle and upper middle class. Denmark has one of the highest top income tax rates in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 55.9 percent, but that rate is applied to anyone making 1.3 times the average national income. In the United States, this would mean that any income above $65,000 would be taxed at the rate of 55.9 percent. In fact, the highest tax rate in the United States, 43 percent, applies to income that is 9.3 times the national average, which means that only those with incomes over approximately $500,000 pay this rate…

A 2008 OECD report found that the top 10 percent in the United States pay 45 percent of all income taxes, while the top 10 percent in Denmark pay 26 percent and in Sweden 27 percent. Among wealthy countries, the average is 32 percent. The basic point is worth underlining because the American left seems largely unaware of it, and it has only become more true over the past decade: The United States has a significantly more progressive tax code than Europe, and its top 10 percent pays a vastly greater share of the country’s taxes than their European counterparts.
Can someone forward this to SMF in case he misses this thread
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fk_Pitt
Did you read it? They were socialists who failed like all socialist countries do. They turned to capitalism for a lifeline. They are still socialist in their safety net programs but everyone shares in the cost unlike the Bernie imagined model.

This might explain those "happiness" surveys. They are happy to be where they are after experiencing worse.

First of all, the article's premise is wrong. Besides the article being stunningly short on info from such a respected journalist, Bernie's pitch is not 'let's give socialism a try'. His pitch is that we already have socialism and it works well. And that we need to extend our socialism to increase healthcare coverage for all, expand affordable higher education (and for trade schools), increase the minimum wage (which we already have), etc.

Second, he seems to want to focus the article on Scandinavia, but then cherry picks data from individual countries to attempt a point, and then cherry picks individual data points. For example, he compares nuclear power generation in Sweden and the US by using 40% vs 20%. But fails to point out that Sweden also generates 55% of their electricity from renewable sources. In the US it's more like 15%.

If you want to argue that more people in Scandinavia contribute to their socialism programs, that's a fair point. But (and I haven't looked into that data) I'd guess that they have far more people in the middle range of income then we do. So it would make more sense for them.

Now, I have heard on here all this year how terrible the socialism is in Scandinavia. That those countries are going to eventually do themselves in with the socialism. Now, ALL OF THE SUDDEN, some here seem to be suggesting that things are going great there. So which is it? They are doing great because of the social democracy, or they are all going down the tubes because of it. You can't have it both ways.
 
First of all, the article's premise is wrong. Besides the article being stunningly short on info from such a respected journalist, Bernie's pitch is not 'let's give socialism a try'. His pitch is that we already have socialism and it works well. And that we need to extend our socialism to increase healthcare coverage for all, expand affordable higher education (and for trade schools), increase the minimum wage (which we already have), etc.

Second, he seems to want to focus the article on Scandinavia, but then cherry picks data from individual countries to attempt a point, and then cherry picks individual data points. For example, he compares nuclear power generation in Sweden and the US by using 40% vs 20%. But fails to point out that Sweden also generates 55% of their electricity from renewable sources. In the US it's more like 15%.

If you want to argue that more people in Scandinavia contribute to their socialism programs, that's a fair point. But (and I haven't looked into that data) I'd guess that they have far more people in the middle range of income then we do. So it would make more sense for them.

Now, I have heard on here all this year how terrible the socialism is in Scandinavia. That those countries are going to eventually do themselves in with the socialism. Now, ALL OF THE SUDDEN, some here seem to be suggesting that things are going great there. So which is it? They are doing great because of the social democracy, or they are all going down the tubes because of it. You can't have it both ways.
I hope you’re not asking that question of me because I don’t think that Scandinavia is doing great.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT