I think I've found part of an explanation for why Americans generally don't understand Sweden's model

[Salem1]

Here are the videos.




Now, my opinion on this is that this is only part of the explanation. Nearly all Americans I've talked with here on TWC repeat the same old arguments like broken records even when refuted. It's not their fault, they just don't know more than that - I've certainly never heard of anyone who spent a year living in Sweden or interviewed people in both places to make a kind of valid comparison.

Then I happened upon this. I'm not an expert on this which is why I don't have any real educated opinion on this but I'm learning more and more and some of what I've learned so far is that we all need to learn more. I thought one thing chimed particularily well - Sweden essentially feels and functions similarily to a small town, America does not, which makes the countries different but not on a level observable by statistics and such. Rather the difference is in the mentality of people which is never ever spoken of - the problem always comes from clearly observable stuff like X economic thing. It's easy to explain, easy to blame and misdirect people with etc., the problem (or whatever you wanna call it) is never the mentality. Mentality isn't something that people consciously think about and live by but it permeates their society.

[Xanthippus of Sparta]

Interesting stuff. But, I know this is not completely unbiased, considering the source (refering to reason tv).

Seems like Sweden's greatest asset economically is their flexibility.

They're not afraid to change with the times and make adjustments, unlike Americans.

You gotta have balance.

What the video does not mention is that the US economy is overwhelmingly in favor of high earners and corporate profits right now...and has been for some time... at the expense of many.

Clearly a full on welfare state is not the answer, I think few would argue that. What I would argue is for the penedlum to swing in another direction than it has been.

[MathiasOfAthens]

The American Economy and is entirely directed toward defense spending. Eisenhower warned about it when he left office but no one listen. The bad guy was Russia and the fear of a world war created what we now have. Reagen only increased this war spending and arms race despite the fall of the SU. Despite Gorbachev's disarmament and wishes to work together and save this world. Reagen was a religious fanatic - an Evangelist. He literally believed in the end times and judgement day. Just like Jerry Falwell. During meetings Reagen would bring up Ezekiel and talk about the end times. He believed the end is nigh. What with Libya and Ethiopia going Red.


Good videos I watched the second one and I thought it was very accurate. Our countries are very different but I think part of the Swedish system can be adapted in small parts to the American system over time.

[Last Roman]

The American Economy and is entirely directed toward defense spending.

Not true. At all. While one would have to be a complete idiot to say that we don't spend a good chunk on our military, to say that our economy is there to solely prop up our defense spending is equally silly.

Anyhoo, per the video

I watched the first one, and I couldn't agree more with what they said. Particularly when they mention that your system must change with the times. Americans tend to get stuck in a particular idea and don't want to budge from it. We have to realize that you can't be right all the time, and that change is necessary.

[Xanthippus of Sparta]

The American Economy and is entirely directed toward defense spending. Eisenhower warned about it when he left office but no one listen.

I think you could make a pretty effective arguement that it is. What I would argue is that huge defense spending rose during the Cold War, and even after, politically it refused to go away. The reduction in the military budget after the fall of the USSR was very small....maybe 6, 7%. Republicans made huge defense budgets part of their party platform and Democrats would not act aganist it for fear of being called weak on national security. Ironic, because fewer foreign entanglements would improve our national security by leaps and bounds. Seeing as the majority of our recent enemies were in part propped up or even created by US foreign policy decisions (Noreiga...Saddam Hussein...the Taliban, Iran, etc.).

Am I saying that defense spending is the number one facet of the US economy? No...but the military-industrial complex and the Pentagon do get a very disproportiate amount of taxpayer dollars.

Well weren't US states originally pretty much independent countries with a loose and de-centralised government tying them together? But of course over time that has changed. Will there ever be a return to this with states have more power and the Federal government of America just being a loose tie? You could then have the more liberal states have bigger governments, more liberal policies (healthcare), and the more conservative ones the opposite.

Indeed. But, you gotta understand that if Americans are considered apathetic towards politics at a national level, you can only imagine what state level politics are like. Extremely low voter turnout (especially when an election is state-only), lack of knowledge, etc. Plus, state governments by and large are more inefficent and corrupt than the Federal government.

Plus, there is no true Social Democratic movement in the US that would be able to push for healthcare programs, etc. similar to what many European countries have. Big business is just too powerful in US politics. The Public Option was tabled very prematurely during the recent Health Care debate, even though it may have had the votes to pass, and the majority of Americans wanted it. Wonder why...

[MathiasOfAthens]

Nope, I'm dead serious. Since Truman our economy has been directed to prop up the military. Literacy rate compared to other countries, were around 27 or something. Instead of Social, education or environment our tax money has been spent on the military. We spend way too much on the defense sector, lobbyists buy votes in congress just like how Insurance execs are buying space in the Republican ranks right now for the upcoming contest in November.

Obviously not every last drop of tax money goes to the defense sector. But we spend way too much.

[Boyar Son]

Nope, I'm dead serious. Since Truman our economy has been directed to prop up the military. Literacy rate compared to other countries, were around 27 or something. Instead of Social, education or environment our tax money has been spent on the military. We spend way too much on the defense sector, lobbyists buy votes in congress just like how Insurance execs are buying space in the Republican ranks right now for the upcoming contest in November.

Obviously not every last drop of tax money goes to the defense sector. But we spend way too much.

sometimes i walk through school and wonder if half the people deserve what they get for free. the students want to around in school, can't blame the teachers. most of the time.

[Thorn777]

This issue is actually high up the European agenda, and I started a thread on it some weeks back with the German equivalent at the center. And all across Europe you hear conservatives to social-dems say: "export our economic model to the outside, instead of the outside competing ours to death".

Interesting subject. Certainly hope the world including the US will become more like us instead of everyone going on with the craziness with only some crabs on top.

"Am Deutschen(Europäischen) Wesen soll die Welt genesen" lol a bit arrogant though.

[Dr. Croccer]

A very good point. The Swedish model only works effectively in a state in which the administration is well-oiled, and in which there is such an effective transfer system. The US currently is simply far too bureaucratic for it to work. Similairly, the advantages of the transfer model would fail in the current US economy. In the video it's been said that over 80% of the taxes Swedes pay get returned to them in one way or another. The US spends over 20% of it's spending on the military alone.

[Salem1]

A very good point. The Swedish model only works effectively in a state in which the administration is well-oiled, and in which there is such an effective transfer system. The US currently is simply far too bureaucratic for it to work. Similairly, the advantages of the transfer model would fail in the current US economy. In the video it's been said that over 80% of the taxes Swedes pay get returned to them in one way or another. The US spends over 20% of it's spending on the military alone.

Indeed. I think I now know why Americans seem to regard ''the state'' as something opposed to and different from the people, because the state serves those who own it, not the people. Here, the state is more accessible and I believe rather ''tame'' & relatively ''friendler'' - again, much like a small town versus a huge metropolis - than in America. Americans don't know that 80%+ of our taxes get sent back to us in one way or another and because their state is simply less efficient than ours, they think that there's something wrong with Sweden since a state in their world can't function properly.

Sweden isn't perfect but I sincerely believe that Sweden runs relatively more efficiently than America does.

[Last Roman]

Indeed. I think I now know why Americans seem to regard ''the state'' as something opposed to and different from the people

That goes back to the very founding of the country, where government was seen as something not to be trusted. Rightfully so, sometimes.

[Armenum]

I love Sweden's model, but the problem given the size and scope of the US one cannot apply the same identical model to the US. Plus, it's cultural. From history, there's a general Mistrust of government in America, and this is evident in the American political system which is very divided and hieratic. Maybe It would work better at a State level...

[Salem1]

I love Sweden's model, but the problem given the size and scope of the US one cannot apply the same identical model to the US. Plus, it's cultural. From history, there's a general Mistrust of government in America, and this is evident in the American political system which is very divided and hieratic. Maybe It would work better at a State level...

It probably would work better at a state level, yes. After all, Sweden's population is 9.4 million, covering a space slightly larger than California - it's more like a state than a country compared to USA. But I don't believe that it's impossible to recreate at a governmental level at all, nothing should be regarded as impossible. I don't think our tribal ancestors thought administration at this level could work either. It's just a challenge - one made more challenging by America's inefficience, mistrust and so on. Swedes don't go around yelling ''yay! flowers!'' about the government - on the contrary we blame it a lot. But I believe that were Americans to come here, they wouldn't for the most part understand what we're complaining about. It's all relative of how well something functions, like developed vs developing countries' complaints.

[Armenum]

It probably would work better at a state level, yes. After all, Sweden's population is 9.4 million, covering a space slightly larger than California - it's more like a state than a country compared to USA. But I don't believe that it's impossible to recreate at a governmental level at all, nothing should be regarded as impossible. I don't think our tribal ancestors thought administration at this level could work either. It's just a challenge - one made more challenging by America's inefficience, mistrust and so on. Swedes don't go around yelling ''yay! flowers!'' about the government - on the contrary we blame it a lot. But I believe that were Americans to come here, they wouldn't for the most part understand what we're complaining about. It's all relative of how well something functions, like developed vs developing countries' complaints.

Well weren't US states originally pretty much independent countries with a loose and de-centralised government tying them together? But of course over time that has changed. Will there ever be a return to this with states have more power and the Federal government of America just being a loose tie? You could then have the more liberal states have bigger governments, more liberal policies (healthcare), and the more conservative ones the opposite.

[Dr. Oza]

american system is not flexible at all.. madisonian theory which essentially drafted the constitution makes change very hard.. america is in essence a conservative nation, its hard to change bad things here.. unfortunately

[Phier]

A recent study that examined over 5,800 Swedish patients on a wait list for heart surgery found that the long wait has consequences far worse than pain, anxiety or monetary cost.29 In this study, the median wait time was found to be 55 days. While on the waiting list, 77 patients died. The authors' statistical analysis led them to conclude that the "risk of death increases significantly with waiting time."30 Another study found a mean wait time of 55 days for heart surgery in Sweden and a similar rate of mortality for those on the waiting list.31 Finally, a study in the Swedish medical journal Lakartidningen found that reducing waiting times reduced the heart surgery mortality rate from seven percent to just under three percent.32

Oddly searching for wait time for heart surgery in the US, I couldn't find any. Google did cheerfully give me links to wait times in GB, Canada and New Zealand though.

The Swedes are the most genetically identical people on earth for a large population (its why they were used as study subjects so often), with a similar culture, work ethic, etc. The US is nothing like Sweden, California might as well be a separate country from Appalachia.

As it is Sweden has had major problems with immigration and their system and immigration from outside Europe is relatively new to Sweden.

Sweden's 'homogeneous' society is not going to be so homogeneous, good luck with that 'system'.

[pchalk]

Oddly searching for wait time for heart surgery in the US, I couldn't find any. Google did cheerfully give me links to wait times in GB, Canada and New Zealand though.

The Swedes are the most genetically identical people on earth for a large population (its why they were used as study subjects so often), with a similar culture, work ethic, etc. The US is nothing like Sweden, California might as well be a separate country from Appalachia.

As it is Sweden has had major problems with immigration and their system and immigration from outside Europe is relatively new to Sweden.

Sweden's 'homogeneous' society is not going to be so homogeneous, good luck with that 'system'.

at least from what i read on this board, it doesnt seem like there is a swede who doesnt think their current immigration policy is a healthy thing in their country. one thing u do say is most certainly right while it may sacrifice the benefits of diversity is that the least diverse populations most certainly will be easier for their government to please. different cultures in the same nation will oppose on a lot of values and needs which leads to a lot of the seesaw movements in policy that is common in the US. some of in this thread i can see already understand the US is large and americans as a group have very diverse subgroups.

[mrmouth]

Sweden's 'homogeneous' society is not going to be so homogeneous, good luck with that 'system'.

I think the obvious difference is waiting, or not getting treated at all. Or perhaps even worse, getting treatment at the expense of everyone else.

The only people I see defending anything about the US' system are people who have never truly had to use it for anything significant.

[roy34543]

Besides, id point out, most major swedish parties if im not mistaken are running on the basis of somewhat lessening the high-taxes high social services model. Not to a great extent, buts its worth noting.

[Dr. Oza]

under the articles of confederation but thats only a couple of years.. after madison and co wrote the constitution, and hamilton instituted his financial system, by 1795ish , usa was pretty much unified, at least compared to before

the big thing is that even though the tenth amendment give any powers not given to federal gov to states, federal law supersedes state,

and forgetting that, anti-socialism propaganda in the 50s basically brainwashed all subsequent generations to hate any form of socialism... even though nations like sweden have benefited from socialism

and still.. states do choose welfare plans to a level

the south for example pays much less and has a lesser time period

whereas the north and california and colorado have more payments and a longer period of it