92% of Americans prefer Sweden's "socialistic" economic system

a reply to: Puppylove

Your post reminds me of Bush Sr watching in amazement as the package of gum (i think) was scanned over the supermarket scanner with disbelief. He had no idea of how the real world worked.

My point is do they know about the suffering? Will full ignorance, maybe. They are ssssoooooooo insulated from the unwashed that they maybe oblivious.

qz.com...

Those who suppress knowledge don't care about freedom. Knowledge is freedom. Learn it. Take it and thrive with it. Civilizations are destroyed not by knowledge, but, by greed and tyranny.

If only we had the knowledge to build spacecrafts, many of us would fly out. The Western system is nothing but trap after trap after trap. Money is everything these days.

We need to convert into a space faring civilization. We have all the good food, clean tech and resources to start converting. The longer it takes, the more than likely idiocy will takeover or we will be back to medieval age of conquest and survival. Don't blame Communism. For they will try to call it communism. Unity is peace. Unity is an advantage to move on. Through proper research and resource spending we will have less an issue to start moving colonies to Mars and to Jupiter's Moons.

a reply to: LittleByLittle

The problem with the US ever adopting a Swedish style system is that the American people will refuse to live the Swedish life style that also comes with the Social system your government has developed. Swedes are used to forfeiting over half of their wage (57% income tax versus 0% for our lowest income earners) for the social programs. That also means you forfeit many luxuries that even our poorest enjoy in this nation such as multiple cars, everyone has a smart phone, cable TV, a TV in every room for that matter and houses or flats that are much larger than the average flat in Sweden

a reply to: seasonal

Yet they are not willing to pay 55% or more in taxes.

originally posted by: CrapAsUsual
a reply to: seasonal

Yet they are not willing to pay 55% or more in taxes.

They wouldn't even have to though, that's the whole point.

In reality, the US forks out more for free healthcare and welfare than any other country. Problem is, the citizens of the US refuse to accept an efficient federal welfare & healthcare system... so basically, they end up paying way more in taxes than other countries for various inefficient localized socialist policies, simply because they refuse to accept a single 'efficient' federal system.

US citizens are pretty much perfect candidates for a Darwin award in that regard... they allow there tax dollars to be siphoned away on inefficient state run socialist policies, but refuse to accept an 'efficient' federally run socialist system... just so they have the satisfaction of saying there not a socialist country.

Hello stupid, meet illogically stubborn... lol.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Not to mention the huge, beyond huge, astronomical expenses in the military industrial complex.

The word socialism is extremely twisted in the US, they have the idea that the USSR was a socialist state when in fact it was a dictatorship that used a multitude of covers and excuses to keep the population under control, much like china today.

Just to conclude the post, In Sweden, as far as I know, the home of the Social Democracy, the relations between the citizens and the state institutions are no way proportional to the amount of taxes paid, I mean, in most countries we pay taxes to a central state and this central state/government distributes this collected taxes money according to its political priorities. In Sweden, as far as I know, things are done in the opposite order, taxes are paid to the local communities who then apply it according to the needs and a part of it, a small part goes up to the central state who in their turn redistributes in the usual way. This makes the relation between the citizens and the central state minimal but the relation between the citizens and their community very strong, citizens see how their taxes are spent and control much better what is done.

Communities are responsible for many aspects of life, education, parts of healthcare, roads, and general public spaces and many other aspects I don´t know.


This was told to me by my cousin who went to Stockholm to work a few years ago. This is actually their secret, this is how the people can actually take control of the state. The tax money flow.

a reply to: JAY1980

At least it doesn't work when immigration is putting so much weight on the system. Without cultural Marxism Sweden would be a successful country, like South Korea or Japan.

Only Western countries contracted this deadly disease. I guess the extermination of their culture is scheduled some steps down the line once Western countries have been fully Balkanised.

a reply to: Puppylove

a reply to: Puppylove

Combining the two responses together.

First you never answered my questions.

Next, you have a skewed idea of competition. There is no limited number of jobs or resources, it's not a static system. Wealth is created by a capitalist model.

Next, reality is reality. It's an amusing sound bite to say otherwise, but what you are making for yourself is a bubble, a safe space.

The problem with your idealism is that there are people who will happily take advantage of it. They will profit, then other people who entered into the agreement with altruistic intentions will wonder why they are working so hard to support lazy comrades. The system implodes.

The only two ways to correct for such occurrence is
1) To force people to work for the greater good. But then you have created slaves.
2) To let people walk away. But then you will lose labor and the system will not sustain itself.


Alternatively, you let everyone keep what they earn and sell what they don't want on terms agreed upon with the customer, and suddenly you have incentivized productivity. People realize they will profit by producing a good/service/commodity that other want, and they will only profit by offering quality or else someone else will beat them to the profit.

You can believe in some utopia all you want. I will stick with the system that works, which allows me to earn enough money to contribute time and money to the parts of society I choose to support.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
Problem is, the citizens of the US refuse to accept an efficient federal welfare & healthcare system...

Because 'efficient' and 'central planning' do not coexist.

a reply to: CrapAsUsual

As a Swede I must say that you may be right, we have had a working system. But the culture component of our country is under ferocious attack and control by a soft totalitarian elite of politicians and journalists that have the promotion of multiculturalism as their be-all and end-all goal. Nothing is to interfere with this process and if someone disagrees they are immediately to be ostracised and attacked.

So, yeah. Sweden would have been a good idea if the people weren't so endlessly naive and easy to subject to mind control. Make no mistake, this is the definition of the concept of soft totalitarianism. Immigrants are just a tool, the synthesis and the outcome is the only important aspect.

So I'm not gonna listen to American socialists defending with the policies of Sweden the very same poisonous ideology that is currently in the process of destroying Sweden.

The point is, socialist governments may work - as do other types of governments. But they won't work in a disastrous multicultural society. See, the relativistic cultural Marxism aspect of modern socialism is the poison that is added, I guess one might say to discredit the whole thing. Which probably means they must have something new for us in store waiting, something to spring from all the chaos the immigration and Balkanisation is causing. Some order out of the chaos.

a reply to: CrapAsUsual

I did very much like your post though, I guess as a native of Sweden I don't know exactly how we do things differently so it's useful seeing a contrast like this.

a reply to: seasonal

If we could ever actually see a truly free market, things would actually change for the better. The problem is that our system is "he who has the gold makes the rules" and the rest of us are left out of the equation, without massive amounts of hard work, a lucky break, or some type of outstanding ingenuity.

With that being said, Sweden is going to be a third world country soon enough, and it happens to be a sexual assault playground.

I have never been to Europe. I would like to visit it at some point before it happens. They can have their system, and I will stay here and try to fight back against CRONY capitalism, and hopefully restore true capitalism.

Socialism is an inherently violent system, as the only way to enforce it is through violent consequences. I do not condone violence unless it is in self defense.

If socialist type programs are installed that are purely voluntary, then I agree with that. If a program makes sense, then people will do it.

I have not and will not comply with Obamacare. EVER. They can put me in prison before they get a voluntary dime out of me.

originally posted by: StallionDuck

originally posted by: Hazardous1408

originally posted by: StallionDuck
92% of Americans have the following 2 things pop up in their heads when you mention Sweden.

- Weed
- Redlight District

I'm quite sure that if you explained to those same people what kind of economic system Sweden has, they wouldn't vote for it.


By the way... 92% of the people reading this article swung the opposite way. I think your poller is broken.

Then 92% of Americans are retarded because that would be Holland that had the weed & red light district.
Not Sweden.

lol Touche'

See... That's how much I know about Sweden. I thought Amsterdam was in Sweden. But why would that make Americans retarded? Because we don't pay attention to what city is in what country?

...Do you know where Gonzales is without looking through google?

Case and point

Sure, out front trimming the hedges.

And yes, americans are pretty confused about europe, especially the Nordic countries, Eastern europe, western europe and southern europe.

Everyone knows Amsterdam tho. As long as the pilot knows where it is, it's all good.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: jjkenobi

Are you saying the top 20% should own 80% of the countries net worth because we have too many different people with yards that are too big full of dead grass?

Generally speaking, 20% of people tend to produce 80% of everything. There is something called the 80/20 rule. For example, in business, usually 20% of your customers account for 80% of your revenue/profit. In sales forces, 20% of the sales guys usually generate 80% of the sales.

In life, 20% of the people will have 80% of the wealth.

There is nothing inherently wrong with this... Please explain how your neighbor's net worth affects you personally. It doesn't other than making you jealous.

There will always be people who are more successful than others. Always. Some work harder. Some are lucky. Regardless of the reason, there will never be equity.

I'd love for one of you to tell us when we ever had "income equality". It simply doesn't exist because it is an arbitrary measure.

people think it's wrong because they think there is some kind of limit on thr amout of money in the country. There isn't we could mive the poor into the middle class and it doesn't effect anyone else. The economy expands being wealthy isn't a crime. In fact just takes alot of work and planning. There is million dollar ideas every day. Now why do people think they need to take wealth from someone and give it to someone else??

Here's the simple question why do people believe they are intitled to take away money from another? Next why do people feel they are entitled to get money from someone else?? And as many have done why not create a business and make money. Here's the funny part people don't get the more money you get the more options you get to make money. My wife wanted to start a business I agreed to help I actually worked two jobs as well as her for 3 years to get it started for her. Last year she made about 140k after expenses. What did we do we sacrificed to come up with the money to start her idea.

Most don't make money because they under sell themselves or really don't have any goal to make money. If you want something you find away to do it. If you choose to accept your position and moan a out things like income inequality just tells me you have no goals and are unmotivated. I learned people when they set goals if it's pay off a mortgage or create a business people who are willing to sacrifice and do what's needed always acomplished there goals. We were flat broke for 3 years throwing everything we had towards her goal. Couldn't even tell you at the time what it was like bag lunches and no dining out. Any bill that wasn't needed was gone.

a reply to: CrapAsUsual

n Sweden, as far as I know, things are done in the opposite order, taxes are paid to the local communities who then apply it according to the needs and a part of it, a small part goes up to the central state who in their turn redistributes in the usual way. This makes the relation between the citizens and the central state minimal but the relation between the citizens and their community very strong, citizens see how their taxes are spent and control much better what is done.

Everything is paid directly to the Skatteverket but there is part of the money that is for kommunen and the landsting above the kommun where you live. Depending on what kommun you live in the tax is a certain procent of your income. VAT goes directly to state.

An example
Kommunal skatt 20.24
Landstingsskatt 10.69
Avgift Svenska kyrkan 0.96
Begravningsavgift 0.42

0,96% for the Swedish Christian church if you are a member. 0.42% for burial costs.

And paying 0.42% constantly on burial costs every year is quite high from my point of view.

I should also point out that the environment party in Sweden have made sure that the road infrastructure are not being developed since using cars is an environmental hazard and as a result the road network in southern Sweden suck compared to the road infrastructure in Denmark so there are plenty of examples where Sweden miss manages it's obligation.

Well, the remaining 8% must all be in Ohio then, because I don't know many, if any that want socialism.

95% of all stats are made up. (that's 100% true)

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

There I agree with you. Having Swedes and Brits and Italians and germans in the same town may work, the brits may get drunk, the Italians may sing at night the germans may do german things and the swedes may do nothing but ater a few months they all end up going to the same bars.

With muslims the story it´s different because they don´t want to blend into the others culture. This could not be a problem because probably orthodox jews would do the same, but muslims want to change the other culture and force it to accept their crappy believes.

When you have thousands of muslims, young males, unemployed in one town it´s not hard to see what is going to happen. This is what the German, and Swedish failed to realize. Failed to realize or deliberately supported.

I´m from Portugal, here we had and have several different cultures, we had the natives called Iberus, from whom Julius Caesar once said "They don´t govern themselves and don´t let anyone govern them" which is still true! then in the 6th century we had the muslims, then we had goths, visigoths and swedes, then we had africans as slaves and later we had 1.5 million people returning from the colonies in 1975. 1.5 million arriving in a country of 7 million or so at the time.

Just as a side note, in the 16th century, 10% of Lisbon population was black, in the 19th century you could barely see any black around, they mixed with the general population.

And we´re still here and we are a bit of each culture I mentioned before. But the muslims here have nothing to do with the muslims coming in this migration wave, those people are 500 years late in time, the Portuguese muslims are almost indistinguishable from any other Portuguese.

With all this story I tried to put all this issue in perspective but still not forgetting that a wave of closed minded, young, male and necessarily unemployed muslims arriving at western countries like this will be very disruptive and a factor of civil unrest. If the western governments keep the open doors policy and don´t focus on restoring peace in the origin countries so they can go back what we will have is not only a wrecked middle east but also a wrecked europe.

a reply to: seasonal

I wish people would stop comparing the US to ANY European country. If you want to make it fair compare us the the WHOLE of the EU andthen you MIGHT be close.

Most of these countries you compare us to do have the population of our top 10 cities, never mind the whole country.

So if you wnt to cherry pick you favorite European country to compare, we get to pick or favorite city or state to compare it to. You know we have states with almost no crime, or unemployment, or homeless?

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: jjkenobi

Are you saying the top 20% should own 80% of the countries net worth because we have too many different people with yards that are too big full of dead grass?

Yep. Now if someone was wise they would start a lawn care company to fix that issue and then they would be able to move their way up to that 20%. The American way.

Or they can sit around, complain about it and hope the government comes to fix it. The DNC way

a reply to: dragonridr

Money as potatoes, as grains of sand are not infinite. So if there are two of us and I have 9 out of ten, you will necessarily have one.

You can argue:

"There is nothing inherently wrong with this... Please explain how your neighbor's net worth affects you personally. It doesn't other than making you jealous. "

But no, this is the top of the pyramid argument planted in your head and you just repeat it because you don´t want to be seen a a jealous person. In fact this has nothing to do with wanting something that belongs to other, this has all to do with allowing someone to exploit a sustem that was conceived to allow all to live with dignity.

I ask you. Would it be possible to have a Bill Gates in Djibouti?

It wouldn´t because the Djibouti socio-economic environment is not developed enough to allow someone to generate that kind of wealth.

Millionaires/Billionaires are a product of the society they live in and they owe their wealth to the society where the fortune was achieved.

The hard work of countless people was necessary to evolve a society to a point where these fortunes could be made and societies evolve to provide better living conditions and a life with dignity to the general population, not to germinate billionaires.

Billionaires just take advantage of their power and the society they live in to grow their wealth mercilessly, shamelessly.

What difference would it make to Bill Gates to have 1 billion instead of 50 billion? Or to your wealthy neighbour to have one million instead of 10 million?

The difference is none. So why don´t they stop when they achieve a comfort level?

Because they are greedy and greed is a real sin, not jealousy, if you want to take the discussion that way.