Sweden Gives Up on the Welfare State

(N.b. - This is actually a rearranged and expanded version of this post from last Thursday. I happened to stumble across the printed version of the cited article on Sweden over my morning tea earlier today, so I wanted to revisit this with more details and emphasis on Sweden. — Sk.)

Last month (28 June) saw the 300th anniversary of the pivotal Battle of Poltava. Poltava was a watershed in the history of eastern Europe (and the world), as it marked the emergence of Peter the Great’s Russia as a major power - and the dashing of any hopes for Ukrainian independence for the next 282 years.

A third consequence was that Poltava marked the end of Sweden’s long run as a major power with an extensive and far-flung empire. After Poltava, Sweden gave up on its imperial status - and largely withdrew from the rough-and-tumble of continental politics.

Nowadays, Sweden is giving up on another long run - its run as the “model” welfare state.

More below the fold.

Sweden Gives Up on the Welfare State

I did a search and didn't see this posted yet.

Well, it looks like the country that everybody points too as a model for socialism, is abandoning the system in favor of a more free market system. One section of the article that stuck out to me was this:

Tax rates in Sweden for the low income was before they cut it too 17.1% was 30.7%. Also government spending was at one time 30% of GDP. To put that into perspective take this quote from the article.

Those were lost decades indeed. If Sweden were a U.S. state, its GDP per capita would place it near the bottom among the fifty states, on a par with Mississippi.

It also mentions how emerging markets were not allowed to emerge, not because of the government policy, but because the tax rates kept them snuffed out.

There is more at the link and other articles that linked in the article too. So if this is he path America is moving along this is what we have to look forward too. Of course I don't see it being as smoothly run as Sweden is.

[edit on 27-7-2009 by Hastobemoretolife]

30% of their money went just to run the government there?!

Now why do people want to try that here?

reply to post by LordBaskettIV


Because people aren't told the truth about the system.

People think they can have all this "free" stuff without paying for it or the rich and corporations paying for it.

That isn't even the worst part about it. The worst part about it is the fact that economic growth is almost stagnate. It also teaches people to be lazy and not have to work for a living which is a bad thing for society.

The most interesting part, is that they are trying to break it's death grip on the country, but it's hard to tell people that are dependent upon the government(taxpayer) they need to go get jobs. It will take a few generations to move the country forward.

I think the article is a bit slanted. There's a better one in Forbes that makes it clear the it didn't start with Anders Borg and isn't some extremist turning of everything over to the private sector and cutting out public serves. It's more about lifting the aspects that stifle free markets.

Borg says it's quite possible to combine "a flexible, market-oriented system with the traditional values of Sweden." By "traditional" he means valuing social cohesion, a publicly financed safety net of some sort and gender equality. Parity between the sexes is a tenet of the Social Democratic swing of the 1980s and, Borg says, of the Viking era.

Sweden's Public Downsizing

reply to post by EnlightenUp


Yea, moving to the system that was once America. There isn't a problem with some public services and very few social safety nets, but the main point of the article is that the model for socialism is trying to break away for it.

It doesn't work, central planning is a failed system.

The most frustrating thing is that while all of this socialist bull fails and pushes bankruptcy across the globe idiots in the US just keep pushing for it. How stupid do you have to be to jump off the same bridge as all your buddies when it's pretty clear there's nothing but rocks at the bottom?

Keep in mind this fake-as-hell pseudo-capitalism we've been under since the New Deal is a crock in its own right.

Christ people. There are more than these two options of socialism vs. Corporatism. Try real liberty for a change.

[edit on 27-7-2009 by thisguyrighthere]

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


I agree. It would be nice when our rights are actually the supreme law of the land.

One day we will see it though.