Comments on: The Swedish Welfare State

By: domajot

domajot — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 22:24:58 +0000

Arguments like this drive me nuts, because it’s always either/or and bad/good.
The social welfare state probably does discourage personal initiative and business entreneurship.
Capitalism probably does the reverse, but it is also conducive to a disregard for, and even expoitation of, those on the lowest rungs.

Every country has to cope with what is happening at this moment. It should be a question of adjustment, not see-dawing between two opposite poles.

Those making a fetish of the free market paradigm point to China as as their banner bearer, but they don’t talk about sweatshops and the forced relocation of farmers.

No one economic system can accomplish everything. It’s a question of balancing the scale in a rational matter by weighing the gains ans losses of going in either direction.

Sweden and France will have to make adjustments sooner or later. I hope they do it cautiously.

By: Alan G

Alan G — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:42:40 +0000

” the broad sweep of history during the past half century, which demonstrates that prosperity comes to nations with limited constitutional government, secure property rights, and a free economy”

You mean like the US, whose government (to the despair of economic conservatives like Andrew Sullivan) continues to grow despite various promises to reduce government?

And how about efficiency? I thought free markets were supposed to increase efficiency–but if this is so, why does Britain pay less per-person for health care (and have overall better health) and why do France and Belgium have better per-hour productivity?

Could it be that sometimes (not always) government intervention promotes greater efficiency?

And this discussion hasn’t even touched on quality of life, which various surveys rate better in countries with more regulated economies (Sweden, Holland, Denmark) than in the more free US.

By: Alan G

Alan G — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:32:51 +0000

Um, unless I’m mistaken the more heavily regulated countries of Scandanavia and parts of Europe are usually rated better on standards of living than the supposedly more free-market US. And, countries with government single-payer systems for health care like Britain have lower per-person costs and overall better health than the more private system we have in the US.
And more economically-regulated countries like France and Belgium have higher per-hour productivity than the US (though the US leads in per-worker productivity).

And as for the “broad sweep of history during the past half century“, the record seems to be more mixed than you admit.

Communism has failed, and socialism isn’t doing much better. But we’ve seen a leftist/socialist revival in Central and South America. In this country, to the dismay of economic conservatives like Andrew Sullivan, the government keeps growing and increasing spending.

Indeed, if you go back farther than a half-century, to the 1920′s or 1930′s and compared the government then and now, it has in fact grown enormously. Programs like Social Security and Medicare, which are popular now, were considered “socialism” back then. And as for defense spending…well, in 1938 the US Army was 19th in size. Now it’s part of the world’s only superpower.

By: Dave Schuler

Dave Schuler — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:30:49 +0000

Sweden is one of the most ethnically homogeneous countries in the world. It might be instructive to look at the poverty, infant mortality, etc. rates among the Saami minority there before we generalize the Swedish experience too much.

By: nkasoff

nkasoff — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:12:50 +0000

It would have no effect if progressives looked at Sweden. After all, they are able to ignore the broad sweep of history during the past half century, which demonstrates that prosperity comes to nations with limited constitutional government, secure property rights, and a free economy. These facts haven't stopped them from cheering for those governments which practice precisely the opposite, from Sweden to Venezuela. Nick Kasoff The Thug Report

By: Michael van der Galien

Michael van der Galien — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 14:53:42 +0000

Alan: in the Netherland unemployment is… 5% or 4%.

Our economy is gaining strength. More entrepreneurs, more business activities, more investments, etc.

By: Paul Silver

Paul Silver — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 14:44:23 +0000

Are businesses and entrepreneurs migrating to more friendly countries?

By: Alan G

Alan G — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 14:36:57 +0000

I’m curious as to how those economic figures from Sweden compare to other countries in the region. And if non-economic factors like demographics is considered. Does the article address this? If not, then you can’t be certain if it’s specific to Sweden or to all of Europe.

And I don’t think I need to point out why you would need to be cautious regarding figures from a libertarian article about the Swedish welfare state.