It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Economic publications, such as "The Nordic Model - Embracing globalization and sharing risks", characterize the system as follows:
-An elaborate social safety net in addition to public services such as free education and universal healthcare.
-Strong property rights, contract enforcement, and overall ease of doing business.
-Public pension schemes.
-Low barriers to free trade. This is combined with collective risk sharing (social programmes, labour market institutions) which has provided a form of protection against the risks associated with economic openness.
-Little product market regulation. Nordic countries rank very high in product market freedom according to OECD rankings.
-Low levels of corruption. In Transparency International's 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index all five Nordic countries were ranked among the 11 least corrupt of 178 evaluated countries.
-High degrees of labour union membership. In 2008, labour union density was 67.5% in Finland, 67.6% in Denmark, and 68.3% in Sweden. In comparison, union membership was 11.9% in the United States and 7.7% in France.
-A partnership between employers, trade unions and the government, whereby these social partners negotiate the terms to regulating the workplace among themselves, rather than the terms being imposed by law. Sweden has decentralised wage co-ordination, while Finland is ranked the least flexible. The changing economic conditions have given rise to fear among workers as well as resistance by trade unions in regards to reforms. ---At the same time, reforms and favourable economic development seem to have reduced unemployment, which has traditionally been higher. Denmark's Social Democrats managed to push through reforms in 1994 and 1996 (see flexicurity).
-Sweden at 56.6% of GDP, Denmark at 51.7%, and Finland at 48.6% reflects very high public spending. One key reason for public spending is the very large number of public employees. These employees work in various fields including education, healthcare, and for the government itself. They often have lifelong job security and make up around a third of the workforce (more than 38% in Denmark). The public sector's low productivity growth has been compensated by an increase in the private sector’s share of government financed services which has included outsourcing. Public spending in social transfers such as unemployment benefits and early-retirement programmes is high. In 2001, the wage-based unemployment benefits were around 90% of wage in Denmark and 80% in Sweden, compared to 75% in the Netherlands and 60% in Germany. The unemployed were also able to receive benefits several years before reductions, compared to quick benefit reduction in other countries.
-Public expenditure for health and education is significantly higher in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway in comparison to the OECD average.
-Overall tax burdens (as a percentage of GDP) are among the world's highest; Sweden (51.1%), Denmark (46% in 2011), and Finland (43.3%), compared to non-Nordic countries like Germany (34.7%), Canada (33.5%), and Ireland (30.5%)
The main lesson to learn from the Nordics is not ideological but practical. The state is popular not because it is big but because it works. A Swede pays tax more willingly than a Californian because he gets decent schools and free health care. The Nordics have pushed far-reaching reforms past unions and business lobbies. The proof is there. You can inject market mechanisms into the welfare state to sharpen its performance. You can put entitlement programmes on sound foundations to avoid beggaring future generations. But you need to be willing to root out corruption and vested interests. And you must be ready to abandon tired orthodoxies of the left and right and forage for good ideas across the political spectrum. The world will be studying the Nordic model for years to come.
Originally posted by Freedom ERP
reply to post by Cabin
Not a chance. Please do some research and get a balanced view. The Economist is far from balanced and does what it is told to do.
Please research the case of The Johansson family. I do not want to live in a country that does this or banned the right for citizens to home school.
And then there is the murder of Olof Palme.
Originally posted by ibiubu
I've been to Sweden and Finland a few times. Wonderful places. It is true that they have high taxes, but they get something of value for it. There's no doubt in my mind that the success of scandinavian countries is a direct result of the intelligence and moral integrity of it's people. I have never been to a place with such kind and caring people.
The model that fails to get mentioned much in the US MSM is the quality of their educational system.
The Finns are number 1 in science and number 2 in reading. They do not take standardized tests until they are 16 and attend class fewer hours per year than a US student. They encourage individual thinking and ethics. And everybody thinks the Chinese tiger moms are on the right path...pffffttttt.
I can remember Not so many years ago that the Good 'Ol U.S.A. was the role model for the ENTIRE Planet.
Originally posted by Szarekh
As someone else has already linked to and said, the "Nordic Model" Is destructive and soul stealing,simply put, it happens slowly and over time. (Remind you of any other model?)
Originally posted by Szarekh
It has all these Social and Political problems BECAUSE of the Nordic system. It's Tax system and welfare have destroyed it economy and the soul of it's people. It's destroyed small business, and inflated the already dangerous unions into a monstrous abomination, that is NOTHING like what unions were originally made for.Even then they are still no match for monopolized and titan corporation. So worse service, less jobs,less quality, less quantity even,and fewer options.
-The United States has the second lowest share of self-employed workers (7.2 percent).
-The United States has among the lowest shares of employment in small businesses in manufacturing - only 11.1 percent of the U.S. manufacturing workforce is in enterprises with fewer than 20 employees. Eighteen other rich countries have a higher share of manufacturing employment in small enterprises, including Germany (13.0 percent), Sweden (14.4 percent), and France (18.0 percent).
-U.S. small businesses are particularly weak in high-tech. The United States, for example, has the second lowest share of computer-related service employment in firms with fewer than 100 employees and the third lowest share of research and development related employment in firms with fewer than 100 employees.
Despite our national self-image as a nation of small businesses and entrepreneurs, the United States
small-business sector is proportionately not as large an employer as the small-business sectors in the
rest of the world’s rich economies. One interpretation of these data is that self-employment and
small-business employment may be a less important indicator of entrepreneurship than we have long
thought. Another reading of the data, however, is that the United States has something to learn from
the experience of other advanced economies, which appear to have had much better luck promoting
and sustaining small-business employment.
Originally posted by Szarekh
The Nordic system for America?
You may as well put on brown or black shirts and give the fascist salute to the Capital building if you actually believe in the system.