What Americans Don’t Get About Nordic Countries

[biostud]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/bernie-sanders-nordic-countries/473385/

But this vision of homogenous, altruistic Nordic lands is mostly a fantasy. The choices Nordic countries have made have little to do with altruism or kinship. Rather, Nordic people have made their decisions out of self-interest. Nordic nations offer their citizens—all of their citizens, but especially the middle class—high-quality services that save people a lot of money, time, and trouble. This is what Americans fail to understand: My taxes in Finland were used to pay for top-notch services for me.

I think it is pretty spot on. It's not we are a bunch of socialist hippies, but just as much as we want to secure everybody we foremost want to secure ourselves and our family.

 

[dainthomas]

It's American's God-given right to take the small percentage we save on taxes and turn around and give it to a private company who will screw us on deductibles and copays.

 

[Phokus]

Truman wanted to give us universal healthcare, but congress was afraid that blacks would have the same level of healthcare as whites. That's what it boils down to in our country.

 

[piasabird]

The US Government just wastes all our money building websites and doing studies to determine if gays are horney when they look at toads or some such stupidity. Then we bail out banks when we could have just given that money to citizens to pay off their houses. It would have had the same effect.

 

[LPCTech]

But there is a difference. Most nordic people are smart and know WHAT is in their OWN interests. Most Americans dont know what is good for them or not and value sticking-it to people they hate over getting something for themselves. Also Americans are preyed upon by people on the radio and TV telling them what is good for them when it isnt, then they are too embarrassed to change their position and too proud to admit they are wrong so they double down on stupid. Also, religion, racism etc.

example:
"All those social programs are for the muslims and the blacks and mexicans!! They aint takin my money!!" -said from trailer park by minimum wage worker

Our problem is stupidity and those taking advantage of it.

 

[glenn1]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/bernie-sanders-nordic-countries/473385/

But this vision of homogenous, altruistic Nordic lands is mostly a fantasy. The choices Nordic countries have made have little to do with altruism or kinship. Rather, Nordic people have made their decisions out of self-interest. Nordic nations offer their citizens—all of their citizens, but especially the middle class—high-quality services that save people a lot of money, time, and trouble. This is what Americans fail to understand: My taxes in Finland were used to pay for top-notch services for me.

I think it is pretty spot on. It's not we are a bunch of socialist hippies, but just as much as we want to secure everybody we foremost want to secure ourselves and our family.

There's nothing wrong with the author feeling that way, but that's not a convincing argument for the rest of us. Apply this same logic ("my taxes in Finland were used to pay for top-notch services for me") against something other than government services and you'll see how it's not really an argument at all. An "all-inclusive" model of service delivery doesn't by itself create more value than a small core package of services with extra needs being paid for a la carte. Some of those Nordic style high-quality services may as the author say "save people a lot of money, time, and trouble" for some and be completely unused by others and ultimately you're more likely to realize more overall value by not paying for services before you know you'll have a need. The OP author is making the same arguments to establish value proposition for Nordic style social welfare that people who "invest" in vacation rental timeshares or "Pre-Paid Legal" services make, and I find none of the 3 very convincing.

 

[LPCTech]

Basically rich people have convinced poor people to give them all their money and not want to give it to the government because "private sector can do it better" but example after example shows that not to be true and "government waste" is far less than rich people keeping all the money and providing the lowest quality possible.

 

[Atreus21]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/bernie-sanders-nordic-countries/473385/

But this vision of homogenous, altruistic Nordic lands is mostly a fantasy. The choices Nordic countries have made have little to do with altruism or kinship. Rather, Nordic people have made their decisions out of self-interest. Nordic nations offer their citizens—all of their citizens, but especially the middle class—high-quality services that save people a lot of money, time, and trouble. This is what Americans fail to understand: My taxes in Finland were used to pay for top-notch services for me.

I think it is pretty spot on. It's not we are a bunch of socialist hippies, but just as much as we want to secure everybody we foremost want to secure ourselves and our family.

I still think that Finland having about 1.6% of the US population is relevant.

 

[glenn1]

Basically rich people have convinced poor people to give them all their money and not want to give it to the government because "private sector can do it better" but example after example shows that not to be true and "government waste" is far less than rich people keeping all the money and providing the lowest quality possible.

So you think it would be a good deal for those in the U.S. making median income to pay Finish income tax rates? That means a total tax wedge 50% higher; mostly due to income taxes (29.8% for an average yearly income of 37,400 €) and 24% VAT.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

It's American's God-given right to take the small percentage we save on taxes and turn around and give it to a private company who will screw us on deductibles and copays.

God bless the corporate states of America!!!

 

[BurnItDwn]

If we are going to pay a lot of taxes, we may as well get our money's worth.
That more or less seems like the most logical course of action.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

I still think that Finland having about 1.6% of the US population is relevant.

It's not....

 

[dainthomas]

So you think it would be a good deal for those in the U.S. making median income to pay Finish income tax rates? That means a total tax wedge 50% higher; mostly due to income taxes (29.8% for an average yearly income of 37,400 €) and 24% VAT.

Finland also has half the per capita debt. Doesn't that kind of indicate our tax burden is artificially low for the amount the government spends? What would our tax rate be if we decided to cut the debt in half?

 

[ElFenix]

What would our tax rate be if we decided to cut the debt in half?

in % GDP? over what time frame?

 

[Jhhnn]

Finland also has half the per capita debt. Doesn't that kind of indicate our tax burden is artificially low for the amount the government spends? What would our tax rate be if we decided to cut the debt in half?

It indicates that Finland doesn't control their own currency but are rather part of the Eurozone.

 

[Jhhnn]

There's nothing wrong with the author feeling that way, but that's not a convincing argument for the rest of us. Apply this same logic ("my taxes in Finland were used to pay for top-notch services for me") against something other than government services and you'll see how it's not really an argument at all. An "all-inclusive" model of service delivery doesn't by itself create more value than a small core package of services with extra needs being paid for a la carte. Some of those Nordic style high-quality services may as the author say "save people a lot of money, time, and trouble" for some and be completely unused by others and ultimately you're more likely to realize more overall value by not paying for services before you know you'll have a need. The OP author is making the same arguments to establish value proposition for Nordic style social welfare that people who "invest" in vacation rental timeshares or "Pre-Paid Legal" services make, and I find none of the 3 very convincing.

Kee-rist. That last bit is like arguing that SS is the same thing as investing in Trump Baja.

The rest overlooks the fact that gambling always means losers.

 

[Fern]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/bernie-sanders-nordic-countries/473385/

But this vision of homogenous, altruistic Nordic lands is mostly a fantasy. The choices Nordic countries have made have little to do with altruism or kinship. Rather, Nordic people have made their decisions out of self-interest. Nordic nations offer their citizens—all of their citizens, but especially the middle class—high-quality services that save people a lot of money, time, and trouble. This is what Americans fail to understand: My taxes in Finland were used to pay for top-notch services for me.

I think it is pretty spot on. It's not we are a bunch of socialist hippies, but just as much as we want to secure everybody we foremost want to secure ourselves and our family.

OK.

Please state in US$'s the amount of taxes you paid and then list the services you received. Pls assign your estimate of the monetary value for each service, at least those you can. (Obviously things national defense and highways would be something you cannot estimate, However, by assigning a value to things like health care etc we can get an idea of the value, even if in aggregate, of all those for which no estimate is possible.)

TIA

Fern

 

[chucky2]

"But this vision of homogenous, altruistic Nordic lands is mostly a fantasy"

Nordic lands have tens of millions of illegal invaders in them (along with their spawn) sucking up lower wage work and a large poorer class that has no problem generation over generation sucking up social services with little intention of really getting off them? Who knew...?

 

[Sonikku]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/bernie-sanders-nordic-countries/473385/

But this vision of homogenous, altruistic Nordic lands is mostly a fantasy. The choices Nordic countries have made have little to do with altruism or kinship. Rather, Nordic people have made their decisions out of self-interest. Nordic nations offer their citizens—all of their citizens, but especially the middle class—high-quality services that save people a lot of money, time, and trouble. This is what Americans fail to understand: My taxes in Finland were used to pay for top-notch services for me.

My taxes in America were used to pay for a military as big as the next ten countries combined.

What you Finland people don't understand about America is that we might slowly be turning to shit domestically, but that mainland is better protected from outside forces than any country in the world*.

*Except when we train and arm terrorists and said terrorists use said American training and weapons against us.

 

[flexy]

(Ethnical/Racial) Diversity of a society along w/ human nature sure play a major role.

If you live in a very diverse society like the US, you're naturally surrounded by numerous groups of people who are (ethnically/racially) "different" to you and which are, often, AS PER HUMAN NATURE, seen less favorably as your own group.

(Someone was correct a few weeks ago citing a study where the result was sorta like that multiculturalism doesn't work because diverse groups tend to stay together, form relations within each other - RATHER THAN "ASSIMILATING" w/ and adapting to other groups)

If you are surrounded by ethnic/racial groups that are different to you, you won't see yourself as part of one society where everyone, you included, may "pay in" and it will benefit anyone else, you included.

You may develop a more paranoid and egoistic mind set, unwilling to participate in (and being part of) a society where there are many who don't think like you, have a different religion, race etc... NOT mainly because you might be "racist" but because this behaviour may REALLY be part of our human nature.

Finland doesn't have this problem, obviously. I assume that Fins can a lot more easier see themselves as a part of a homogeneous society where everyone plays their part because they ARE a homogeneous society.

This doesn't just apply to ethnic/racial diversity....worse even, there is a culture in celebrating extreme black/white thinking also when it comes to politics in the US, eg. "liberals" "VERSUS" "conservatives". This is even actively supported by politicians.

"Hey, liberals are not even true Americans" <--- Mantra stuff there.

If you live in a such a society where there are more divisions than things that bond a society ...then you'll have a hell of a time getting people to accept a more "socialist" way of thinking that what they do benefits "everyone including myself".

 

[Victorian Gray]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/bernie-sanders-nordic-countries/473385/

But this vision of homogenous, altruistic Nordic lands is mostly a fantasy. The choices Nordic countries have made have little to do with altruism or kinship. Rather, Nordic people have made their decisions out of self-interest. Nordic nations offer their citizens—all of their citizens, but especially the middle class—high-quality services that save people a lot of money, time, and trouble. This is what Americans fail to understand: My taxes in Finland were used to pay for top-notch services for me.

I think it is pretty spot on. It's not we are a bunch of socialist hippies, but just as much as we want to secure everybody we foremost want to secure ourselves and our family.

Read that a few days ago. Thought it made some damn good points. Americans seem to have a problem understanding how a functioning political/social system can actually work. I guess because theirs has been broken for so long.

 

[DrDoug]

Truman wanted to give us universal healthcare, but congress was afraid that blacks would have the same level of healthcare as whites. That's what it boils down to in our country.

I once read a blog comment that perfectly captured this mentality in our country:

“The salient fact of American politics is that there are fifty to seventy million voters each of who will volunteer to live, with his family, in a cardboard box under an overpass, and cook sparrows on an old curtain rod, if someone would only guarantee that the black, gay, Hispanic, liberal, whatever, in the next box over doesn’t even have a curtain rod, or a sparrow to put on it.”

Yup.

 

[michal1980]

Basically rich people have convinced poor people to give them all their money and not want to give it to the government because "private sector can do it better" but example after example shows that not to be true and "government waste" is far less than rich people keeping all the money and providing the lowest quality possible.

how cute how many of you liberals believe that there is a fixed amount of money and the rich just take it from the poor.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

lol @ 3-fold higher consumption taxes being minor

lol @ America having unaffordable college

I'd like to know what the difference is between any of these "Nordic" systems, and, say, the Spain or France. Everyone knows that Finland has excellent schools and excellent standardized exam scores. So does South Korea. I'd imagine that Spain and France have social programs with more in common with Scandinavia than they do with South Korea, yet Spain and France will consistently rank lower. Simply saying that Finland does it "smart" is about as meaningful as Trump saying he's going to do it "great".

EDIT: Also, from what I'm finding, Sweden's international test scores have been gradually falling over the last decade or so. I'm not sure if there are studies showing a discrepancy between Swedish natives vs immigrants, but I'd imagine that heterogeneity is at least partially responsible for that decline.

 

[Jhhnn]

My taxes in America were used to pay for a military as big as the next ten countries combined.

What you Finland people don't understand about America is that we might slowly be turning to shit domestically, but that mainland is better protected from outside forces than any country in the world*.

*Except when we train and arm terrorists and said terrorists use said American training and weapons against us.

The "better protected" part mostly comes from 2 oceans & only 2 neighbors, both of whom are friendly & considerably less powerful.

When the Civil War ended Lincoln knew that the Union faced no existential threats from foreign armies.

The purpose of our massive military is primarily to project power, not to defend the country.