Sweden downsizing its welfare state

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Modax
Padawan Learner
Posts: 278
Joined: 2008-10-30 11:53pm

Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Modax »

The article has a strong conversative bias but as far I can tell its factually accurate. I think its a real shame, and this news couldn't come at a worse, or more ironic time, as the article wastes no time in pointing out. I can't imagine this is too popular with the Swedish public, though.

link
Forbes wrote: Sweden's Public Downsizing
Anita Raghavan, 07.15.09, 06:00 PM EDT
Forbes Magazine dated August 03, 2009

Think the answer to America's problems is bigger government? Swedish Finance Minister Anders Borg has seen the result up close and says it's not pretty for the economy or investors.

Anders Borg has a message for those who look to government to take over health care, rescue the financial system and run troubled corporations: I have seen the future--and it doesn't work.

As the finance minister of Sweden, Borg is the chief financial officer of a country long known as a walking billboard for a social welfare state. In Borg's view, the 1970s and 1980s were lost decades for Sweden. Left-leaning politicians pushed government spending, excluding investment outlays, from 22% of gross domestic product in 1970 to 30% in 1980. Real growth fell from an average of 4.4% annually in the 1960s to 2.4% in the 1970s and remained low for the next two decades.
Article Controls

"Like many societies, we went too far in our welfare-state ambitions," say Borg (pronounced "Bor-ee").

These days President Obama is overseeing the largest increase in the U.S. government's share of the economy since it was conducting a world war almost seven decades ago. Economic stimulus, bailouts and expanded health care will all have to be paid for someday with either taxes or inflation. Borg is pushing Sweden in the opposite direction, encouraging the legislature to cut taxes, cap spending and privatize parts of health care.

"If you're working yourselves upwards in taxes and deficits, we're working ourselves downwards," says Borg. (FORBES recently interviewed him in Berlin, where he had delivered a speech.)

If you think Borg has the right idea, put your money on it. Sell some U.S. stocks and buy some Swedish ones (see table, below).

Borg, 41, doesn't look like a finance minister or fiscal conservative. The Stockholm native wears a long ponytail and gold loop earring. His hippie appearance hides a dyed-in-the-wool free marketeer who champions the idea of "making work pay." That is a revolutionary concept in a country where the penalty for working has historically been high taxes and the reward for staying home a comfortable welfare or unemployment check.

In a 1988 debate that is now a YouTube favorite of conservative Swedes, Borg calls for a "night watchman's state" in which the government provides security but little else. In a book from that era, The Sleeping People, Borg's boss, Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, compared the effects of Sweden's welfare state to the plague and aids.

"It was a very youthful comment," Borg says of his call for near-elimination of government. "When you become older, you get children. [He is married with three children.] You change your views."

Or you go into politics and tone them down. Borg was born into a family of Social Democrats. He became disenchanted after concluding the indulgent government was turning Sweden into a "boring, stagnant society." Borg's idols were free marketeers Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.

After studying political science, economic history and philosophy at Uppsala University, Borg worked for four years as a political advisor to then prime minister Carl Bildt. Following Sweden's 1990s financial crisis, when it bailed out its own banks, he became a securities analyst. The first thing he noticed was how little faith investors had in Sweden because of the size of its government sector. He came away a firm believer in free markets and sound government finances.

Next year Sweden's government is projected to be on the hook for gross financial liabilities equal to 57% of GDP, which is up from 48% two years ago. The debt of U.S. government entities, by contrast, is expected to nearly equal GDP by next year, versus 63% in 2007, says the Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development.

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.

Though no longer the rabble-rouser he was in his youth, Borg has a penchant for throwing listeners off-balance with an impish smile and unstatesmanlike comments. He chides the U.S. for its huge deficits and ballooning entitlements. "The U.S. needs to produce more, export more and save more," he suggests, savoring the irony that it should look to Sweden for free-market guidance. Even its Social Democrats quickly privatized banks after bailing them out in the 1990s.

Since sweeping to power in 2006, Reinfeldt's center-right Alliance has been shrinking Sweden's welfare state. The government is resisting calls to rescue its struggling auto industry. To hear Borg tell it, his government isn't inspired by coldhearted Darwinism but by cold, hard evidence that the easier the state makes life for people, the easier they take it.

Sweden has long had among the most lavish unemployment benefits in the OECD, and when Borg's Alliance came to power one-quarter of Swedes were subsisting on the government dole through unemployment or sickness benefits. That figure is now down to 20%. As part of its makeover, the government tightened sickness and unemployment benefits to strip Swedes of some of the world's highest sickness absentee rates (40.2 days yearly when Borg's government came into power, 34.6 days now).

Borg's prescription for growth is simple: cut taxes. His government has slashed the tax rate on low incomes from 30.7% to 17.1%. The combined tax take (national and local; income and other) has fallen by 2.5 percentage points in three years to 46.6% of gross domestic product.

Borg's enemies accused him of using "black-market cleaners" in his home. The finance minister counters he was cleared in an investigation--the cleaners' wages didn't reach the threshold above which taxes are due--and that he's not an antitax extremist.

"Given that we're taking money out of people's paychecks, we have to be responsible," he says of his low-tax ethos. As for domestic help, Borg has proposed a cash-for-cleaners policy in which individuals would receive annual 50,000 kroner ($6,300) tax credits for employing any in-home help.

Among other tax cuts: Reinfeldt has done away with a wealth tax and cut corporate and property taxes. Those are on top of the Social Democrats' elimination of inheritance taxes before Borg came to power, as well as investment of a portion of the state's pension assets in the stock market--something reminiscent of George W. Bush's failed attempt to reform Social Security.

As the U.S. takes over some corporations outright, and offers others financial lifelines, Sweden is unloading scores of industries. It is selling state-owned pharmacies and plans to put its remaining 37% stake in telecom incumbent TeliaSonera ( TLSNF.PK - news - people ) on the block when market prices improve. Last spring it unloaded Absolut Vodka. A distillery, Borg notes drily, is not a core function for either a welfare state or a night watchman's state.

Swedish health care is getting a whiff of free marketeering, too. The government's abolition of the "Stop Law" is expected to give a green light to hospital privatization, and starting next year local authorities will have to offer private primary care options.

Investors in Sweden may already be reaping modest dividends. Since the Alliance government came to power, the OMX Stockholm 30 Index has lost an annualized 11.3% of its value (in dollar terms), which is 1.8 percentage points better than the S&P 500 and 2.2 percentage points ahead of the MSCI EAFE Index.

Borg says he's risking not only his nation's future but also his own money on free markets.

"I'm not a rich man, but what little I have I invest in Swedish stocks" via index funds, he says.
User avatar
Lonestar
Keeper of the Schwartz
Posts: 13321
Joined: 2003-02-13 03:21pm
Location: The Bay Area

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Lonestar »

I bet 500 Quatloos that the "downsized" Swedish welfare state will still be an order of magnitude more "socialist" than the US welfare state.
"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."
User avatar
Gil Hamilton
Tipsy Space Birdie
Posts: 12962
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:47pm
Contact:

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Gil Hamilton »

And yet some how democratic socialism seems to work in Scandinavian countries without the sky falling and everyone living in abject poverty with all their shit being taken way by the state. Go figure.
"Show me an angel and I will paint you one." - Gustav Courbet

"Quetzalcoatl, plumed serpent of the Aztecs... you are a pussy." - Stephen Colbert

"Really, I'm jealous of how much smarter than me he is. I'm not an expert on anything and he's an expert on things he knows nothing about." - Me, concerning a bullshitter
Rahvin
Jedi Knight
Posts: 615
Joined: 2005-07-06 12:51pm

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Rahvin »

"Strong conservative bias" is an understatement.
That is a revolutionary concept in a country where the penalty for working has historically been high taxes and the reward for staying home a comfortable welfare or unemployment check.
There's not a single mention of the quality of life enjoyed by Swedes with such a strong public support structure. Not a damned thing about what they get for their tax money, except for the above comment - lots of talk about the cost and nothing about the benefits.

20-25% of the population receives benefits from unemployment or disability? Those numbers alone mean little. Are they receiving full benefits, or are they working part-time and using government aid to fill in the gaps? Are those on disability legitimately disabled? Unless there is actual rampant abuse in the system, I fail to see the problem.

30-40 days of annual sickness absenteeism sounds pretty high...but how do they compare to other nations, both with and without strong government welfare programs? Are the citizens healthier and/or happier because of it?

The article talks about lower GDP growth, but that's not always a bad thing - jsut look at the runaway growth the US has been experiencing. Is Sweden's growth sustainable over the long term? If so, again I don't see a problem. I'd rather be taxed for the majority of my income if I'm guaranteed to have at least reasonable living conditions and health care than to go with a system like we have here in the US where I have very little protection if I lsoe my job.
"You were doing OK until you started to think."
-ICANT, creationist from evcforum.net
User avatar
Rightous Fist Of Heaven
Jedi Master
Posts: 1201
Joined: 2002-09-29 05:31pm
Location: Finland

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Rightous Fist Of Heaven »

No the sky isn't falling nor is everyone existing in abject poverty here in one of those Democratic Socialist countries. However, I do find it peculiar that here in our joyous paradise of Finland, I have the pleasure of paying 25% of my annual income in taxes. Now, paying that out of 37,000$ annual income in a country where a VAT of 17% is applied to food and 22% to practically every other consumer product, is kind of annoying. To compile on this lump of shit is the fact that our glorious nation is one of the most expensive ones to live in in the entire world. So, this particular taxpayer has about had it with this magnificent "Tax the motherfuckers to death for eternal welfare for everyone" State.

End rant.
"The ones they built at the height of nuclear weapons could knock the earth out of its orbit" - Physics expert Envy in reference to the hydrogen bombs built during the cold war.
Rahvin
Jedi Knight
Posts: 615
Joined: 2005-07-06 12:51pm

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Rahvin »

Rightous Fist Of Heaven wrote:No the sky isn't falling nor is everyone existing in abject poverty here in one of those Democratic Socialist countries. However, I do find it peculiar that here in our joyous paradise of Finland, I have the pleasure of paying 25% of my annual income in taxes. Now, paying that out of 37,000$ annual income in a country where a VAT of 17% is applied to food and 22% to practically every other consumer product, is kind of annoying. To compile on this lump of shit is the fact that our glorious nation is one of the most expensive ones to live in in the entire world. So, this particular taxpayer has about had it with this magnificent "Tax the motherfuckers to death for eternal welfare for everyone" State.

End rant.
You could always come on over here. You can take home a lot more of what you earn...and wind up with a lower standard of living (excluding the ultra-rich) and virtually no functioning safety net if you get sick.

Of course, after Social Security taxes, state taxes, income tax, etc, I lose around 20-30% of my check too. And that's before I pay hundreds of dollars monthly for health coverage. We don't have such a large VAT, but sales tax here is over 9%.

Somehow I don't think you'd be much better off financially over here, and you'd have less security to show for it.
"You were doing OK until you started to think."
-ICANT, creationist from evcforum.net
User avatar
ArmorPierce
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2002-07-04 09:54pm
Location: Born and raised in Brooklyn, unfornately presently in Jersey

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by ArmorPierce »

Rightous Fist Of Heaven wrote:No the sky isn't falling nor is everyone existing in abject poverty here in one of those Democratic Socialist countries. However, I do find it peculiar that here in our joyous paradise of Finland, I have the pleasure of paying 25% of my annual income in taxes. Now, paying that out of 37,000$ annual income in a country where a VAT of 17% is applied to food and 22% to practically every other consumer product, is kind of annoying. To compile on this lump of shit is the fact that our glorious nation is one of the most expensive ones to live in in the entire world. So, this particular taxpayer has about had it with this magnificent "Tax the motherfuckers to death for eternal welfare for everyone" State.

End rant.
Little surprise for you. A single American making $37,000 can expect to have approximately 25% of their pay check taken out for taxes and we don't have the social welfare benefits that you guys do.
Brotherhood of the Monkey @( !.! )@
To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift. ~Steve Prefontaine
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer are in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
User avatar
CJvR
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2926
Joined: 2002-07-11 06:36pm
Location: K.P.E.V. 1

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by CJvR »

Well the current regime came to power mostly because it didn't campaign on the old right wing program of system change and dismantling the welfare systems. If anything the current goverment is the least conservative, non Social-democratic, ever.
That the goverment don't wan't to write a blank check to the auto industry has to do with the expensive experience of the faliure to salvage the Swedish shipyards back 70'ies. If SAAB is able to produce a plan with reasonable hopes to succeed as a company they will likely get som aid.
Sweden is about as far from the US example as you can get without leaving the liberal market economy model completly, if you campaigned here on remaking the Swedish system into what the US system is today you would be lucky to get 5% of the vote. Borg is reforming from a position very far away from the US system indeed.
Sweden also had a huge budget deficit during the 90'ies that almost turned out real bad, this has resulted in some fiscal responsibility among the politicians and population. There are different opinions on how to achive a net surplus over time, taxes or reduced services, but taxing and spending as well taxcuts and deficits are both rather discredited at the moment.
I thought Roman candles meant they were imported. - Kelly Bundy
12 yards long, two lanes wide it's 65 tons of American pride, Canyonero! - Simpsons
Support the KKK environmental program - keep the Arctic white!
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Darth Wong »

Rightous Fist Of Heaven wrote:No the sky isn't falling nor is everyone existing in abject poverty here in one of those Democratic Socialist countries. However, I do find it peculiar that here in our joyous paradise of Finland, I have the pleasure of paying 25% of my annual income in taxes. Now, paying that out of 37,000$ annual income in a country where a VAT of 17% is applied to food and 22% to practically every other consumer product, is kind of annoying. To compile on this lump of shit is the fact that our glorious nation is one of the most expensive ones to live in in the entire world. So, this particular taxpayer has about had it with this magnificent "Tax the motherfuckers to death for eternal welfare for everyone" State.

End rant.
Ah yes, the grass is always greener ...

Maybe you should take a serious look at how life works in laissez-faire capitalist paradise, before you assume you would be happier.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Oni Koneko Damien
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3852
Joined: 2004-03-10 07:23pm
Location: Yar Yar Hump Hump!
Contact:

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Oni Koneko Damien »

Rightous Fist Of Heaven wrote:No the sky isn't falling nor is everyone existing in abject poverty here in one of those Democratic Socialist countries. However, I do find it peculiar that here in our joyous paradise of Finland, I have the pleasure of paying 25% of my annual income in taxes. Now, paying that out of 37,000$ annual income in a country where a VAT of 17% is applied to food and 22% to practically every other consumer product, is kind of annoying. To compile on this lump of shit is the fact that our glorious nation is one of the most expensive ones to live in in the entire world. So, this particular taxpayer has about had it with this magnificent "Tax the motherfuckers to death for eternal welfare for everyone" State.

End rant.
...so wait, you get to take home 75% of your pay, have free health care, an incredible social support system, a job situation that allows several times the sick and holiday leave of the US system, and a highly effective social safety net should you get hit by a stream of bad luck?

Do you have any idea how much I would give to be living in a situation like that? Do you have any idea how much the woman I consider my mother, who is a medical invalid fighting desperately to keep a tiny apartment in Chicago with barely enough medical aid to cover her own medication, let alone rent, power and food, would give to be living in a situation like that? Do you have any idea how much two of my best friends, sisters, one of whom has cancer and the other one who dropped out of college and pretty much gave up her entire future to make sure her sister can survive under dubious and unreliable insurance, would give to live in a system like that?

Sure, you're probably making that little rant out of massive ignorance, but from over here you sound like a spoiled, whiny little brat.
Gaian Paradigm: Because not all fantasy has to be childish crap.
Ephemeral Pie: Because not all role-playing has to be shallow.
My art: Because not all DA users are talentless emo twits.
"Phant, quit abusing the He-Wench before he turns you into a caged bitch at a Ren Fair and lets the tourists toss half munched turkey legs at your backside." -Mr. Coffee
User avatar
His Divine Shadow
Commence Primary Ignition
Posts: 12791
Joined: 2002-07-03 07:22am
Location: Finland, west coast

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by His Divine Shadow »

I pay about 8.5% in taxes thanks to tax deductibles because I gotta commute and the state doesn't offer any rail or bus I can use instead.

End result when factoring in the high cost of owning a car in Finland, then then the high fuel costs almost compensates, it's still a net loss for me but greately reduced.

As for the conservatives we got here, I dunno to me the differences they propose in the systems are only small adjustments, nothing revolutionary at all, so in the end it's more or less the same, i.e. the most generous welfare system in the world.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.
User avatar
Glocksman
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7233
Joined: 2002-09-03 06:43pm
Location: Mr. Five by Five

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Glocksman »

His Divine Shadow wrote:I pay about 8.5% in taxes thanks to tax deductibles because I gotta commute and the state doesn't offer any rail or bus I can use instead.

End result when factoring in the high cost of owning a car in Finland, then then the high fuel costs almost compensates, it's still a net loss for me but greately reduced.

As for the conservatives we got here, I dunno to me the differences they propose in the systems are only small adjustments, nothing revolutionary at all, so in the end it's more or less the same, i.e. the most generous welfare system in the world.
That's low even by US standards unless you're a poor boy.
Last year, my AGI was $25,032.00 and my effective Federal tax rate according to TurboTax was 7.71%
Of course that's not factoring in my state's 3.4% income tax, 7% sales tax, county income tax, etc against that $25k in income either.

Not to mention the 20% of the $5000 or so a year that my health insurance (my employer pays the other 80%) costs me.
Shit, how hard is it for a tone deaf 42 year old of average intelligence to learn Finnish and emigrate? :lol:
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."- General Sir Charles Napier

Oderint dum metuant
User avatar
His Divine Shadow
Commence Primary Ignition
Posts: 12791
Joined: 2002-07-03 07:22am
Location: Finland, west coast

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by His Divine Shadow »

I make about 20k a year in euros so I'm no rich guy. My girlfriend makes about as much as me so we're a 40k household between the two of us, since she has walking distance to her job she pays I think 18% in taxes.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.
User avatar
Glocksman
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7233
Joined: 2002-09-03 06:43pm
Location: Mr. Five by Five

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Glocksman »

His Divine Shadow wrote:I make about 20k a year in euros so I'm no rich guy.
True, and differences between Finland and the US in how taxes are applied in each individual state can make comparisons difficult.
For example, my state has 3.4% income tax and a 7% state sales tax.
Plus my county has adopted its own income tax (I don't remember the rate but it's less than 1%) and we have a 1% 'food and beverage tax' leveled against restaurants and other dining establishments.

In Indiana, both grocery items and newspapers are exempt from the sales tax.
In other states, both are taxed.

Some states have no income tax, but instead rely on higher property and sales taxes.

All bullshit aside, though, I'd gladly accept a 17% Federal tax levy against my $25k if it meant we had quality universal health care.
Sure, I'd pay a bit more every year in taxes than I do currently in premiums, but it also means that being laid off doesn't mean I lose my health care either.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."- General Sir Charles Napier

Oderint dum metuant
User avatar
Rightous Fist Of Heaven
Jedi Master
Posts: 1201
Joined: 2002-09-29 05:31pm
Location: Finland

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Rightous Fist Of Heaven »

ArmorPierce wrote:
Rightous Fist Of Heaven wrote:No the sky isn't falling nor is everyone existing in abject poverty here in one of those Democratic Socialist countries. However, I do find it peculiar that here in our joyous paradise of Finland, I have the pleasure of paying 25% of my annual income in taxes. Now, paying that out of 37,000$ annual income in a country where a VAT of 17% is applied to food and 22% to practically every other consumer product, is kind of annoying. To compile on this lump of shit is the fact that our glorious nation is one of the most expensive ones to live in in the entire world. So, this particular taxpayer has about had it with this magnificent "Tax the motherfuckers to death for eternal welfare for everyone" State.

End rant.
Little surprise for you. A single American making $37,000 can expect to have approximately 25% of their pay check taken out for taxes and we don't have the social welfare benefits that you guys do.
The costs of living in general in the US are significantly lower than in Finland. Oh, I wouldn't have a problem with paying 25% in taxes if the VAT for food was 5% for example. Or the costs of transportation were half of what they are now. This is not the case. In addition to having a high income taxation, Finland has extremely high costs of living.
Oni Koneko Damien wrote:...so wait, you get to take home 75% of your pay, have free health care, an incredible social support system, a job situation that allows several times the sick and holiday leave of the US system, and a highly effective social safety net should you get hit by a stream of bad luck?
Take home 75%? Not quite. Thanks to Finland's insanely high taxation in the area of transportation, I have the priviledge and joy to pay another 2500$ in order to even GET TO WORK. On top of that, the Government is so kind as to slap a 17% VAT on food. So no, I don't get to take 75% home.

Our health care isn't free. The average cost of our "free" health care for every working person is 6,000$ a year. On top of that, if you have to use that health care for ANY reason you have to pay for it. Nevermind the fact that you are already paying 6000$ a year for it in taxes. I remember when I was hospitalized for three days many years back. The cause wasn't critical. Nevertheless, the cost of those three days rose up to around 10,000$. Do note that no intensive care was required during this time. It was mainly monitoring and a few treatments. Thank fucking god I had an insurance to cover for the costs generated by this usage of our "free" healthcare. Otherwise I would have been screwed.

Highly effective social safety net? Oh really? I was once unemployed for two months. Two fucking months during which I did not receive a single cent of support from our glorious social safety net. This resulted in me very nearly losing my apartment and generally being fucked. A woman who I was involved with for a while also hit a similar situation. She got laid off from her workplace. She immediately applied for social support while looking for a new job, she has an apartment to pay for and getting something to eat is kind of important as well. In five months, she received a whopping 750$ after a four month period during which our "effective" social safety net lost her papework TWICE, and denied support on false pretenses once. I could supply you with dozens upon dozens of examples such as these ones. All of which I have witnessed happening myself. So, forgive me if I take your claim that we have a "highly effective social safety net" with a bucketfull of fucking salt.
Do you have any idea how much I would give to be living in a situation like that? Do you have any idea how much the woman I consider my mother, who is a medical invalid fighting desperately to keep a tiny apartment in Chicago with barely enough medical aid to cover her own medication, let alone rent, power and food, would give to be living in a situation like that? Do you have any idea how much two of my best friends, sisters, one of whom has cancer and the other one who dropped out of college and pretty much gave up her entire future to make sure her sister can survive under dubious and unreliable insurance, would give to live in a system like that?
I symphatize for the situation these people who're close to you are. However, the situation your mother is in is no worse than the situation my grandmother was in during the years before she died. Or any of my relatives who have died during these last 10 years. I've watched our system "take care" of them. Luckily, all of my grandparents had children who devoted their own money in supporting them. I'm trying to disabuse you of the notion of a Social Welfare Paradise of Finland where no one is poor, no one is suffering and the Government catches you if you fall. An insurance in Finland for covering sudden medical expenses or sudden loss of employment are a fuckton more reliable than our Government supplied social security systems. This is from pure experience.
ure, you're probably making that little rant out of massive ignorance, but from over here you sound like a spoiled, whiny little brat.
Go fuck yourself pal. The ignorance is yours in trying to gauge the true living conditions of a country you know exactly nothing about. Except for the posters and cream encrusted cake that call the Democratic Socialistic People's Republic of Finland the greatest fucking place on Earth where no-one suffers and everyone is well. Everyone who dares to say otherwise is a whiny little brat. :roll:
"The ones they built at the height of nuclear weapons could knock the earth out of its orbit" - Physics expert Envy in reference to the hydrogen bombs built during the cold war.
User avatar
Julhelm
Jedi Master
Posts: 1468
Joined: 2003-01-28 12:03pm
Location: Brutopia
Contact:

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Julhelm »

Rahvin wrote:"Strong conservative bias" is an understatement.

There's not a single mention of the quality of life enjoyed by Swedes with such a strong public support structure. Not a damned thing about what they get for their tax money, except for the above comment - lots of talk about the cost and nothing about the benefits.

20-25% of the population receives benefits from unemployment or disability? Those numbers alone mean little. Are they receiving full benefits, or are they working part-time and using government aid to fill in the gaps? Are those on disability legitimately disabled? Unless there is actual rampant abuse in the system, I fail to see the problem.

30-40 days of annual sickness absenteeism sounds pretty high...but how do they compare to other nations, both with and without strong government welfare programs? Are the citizens healthier and/or happier because of it?

The article talks about lower GDP growth, but that's not always a bad thing - jsut look at the runaway growth the US has been experiencing. Is Sweden's growth sustainable over the long term? If so, again I don't see a problem. I'd rather be taxed for the majority of my income if I'm guaranteed to have at least reasonable living conditions and health care than to go with a system like we have here in the US where I have very little protection if I lsoe my job.
The 1/4 figure probably stems from the fact that under the Social Democrat regime, you would automatically be retired on medical grounds if you were sick for longer than one year, and after that there is no "unretirement".
User avatar
ArmorPierce
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2002-07-04 09:54pm
Location: Born and raised in Brooklyn, unfornately presently in Jersey

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by ArmorPierce »

Lets see. Approximately 25% tax on annual income, so lets say about $9,000. 7% sales tax in NJ. $7,000 property tax for a modest single family home = 18% tax on $37,000 in NJ (http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/in ... xml&coll=1), . Lets say health care cost someone 170 a month (I don't know the average cost of heal car for a healthy single person but the average at http://www.ehealthinsurance.com seemed to be about this number) that is over $2,000 a year. For sales tax I couldn't get a per person number, only number i got was 6.85 billion per year in Jersey in 2001. A rough estimate is to average that with the state's population. With a population of 8,414,350, that is approximately $800 paid in sales tax annually.

So, in New Jersey, tax expense for a young single individual making $37,000 is approximately $16,800 which is 45% of income. Add to that $2,000 for health care expense, $18,800 and that's approximately 51% of income to taxes and health insurance. How much of your income is taxed?

That is not taking into account transportation costs which in NJ you basically need a car. Not to mention college debt that we have to pay for after college.
Our health care isn't free. The average cost of our "free" health care for every working person is 6,000$ a year. On top of that, if you have to use that health care for ANY reason you have to pay for it. Nevermind the fact that you are already paying 6000$ a year for it in taxes. I remember when I was hospitalized for three days many years back. The cause wasn't critical. Nevertheless, the cost of those three days rose up to around 10,000$. Do note that no intensive care was required during this time. It was mainly monitoring and a few treatments. Thank fucking god I had an insurance to cover for the costs generated by this usage of our "free" healthcare. Otherwise I would have been screwed.
Okay I think this is misleading. First, not every individual would pay $6,000 per year. Richer individuals would pay a bigger cut. Further, according to this http://www.yle.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/2008/ ... 91190.html and the translation that I got from it (unless the translation is wrong) the per person average is $4,000, not $6,000. If you want to calculate the individual tax burden like that, then in the United States, we spend $7,439 per person. So almost double than Finland per person and we still have to buy private health care on top of that!

The second part, you're health care is the government health care, correct? They paid the bill? Obviously no one is arguing that health care is not paid by anyone and that doctors and nurses are all just working out of the goodness of their heart.
Last edited by Edi on 2009-07-28 11:49am, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Requested change of word moderate >> modest
Brotherhood of the Monkey @( !.! )@
To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift. ~Steve Prefontaine
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer are in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
User avatar
Edi
Dragonlord
Dragonlord
Posts: 12461
Joined: 2002-07-11 12:27am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Edi »

Righteous Fist of Heaven, I have a number of anecdotes from my family, friends and acquaintances that generally run counter to what you've said here, so if you want to get into trading anecdotes, I'm willing to go for it.

My sister got hospitalized with some pretty severe lung problems due to an extended and vicious bout of pneumonia and other problems and it didn't cost my family anything. That was very recently. The only times I've had to pay anything for being hospitalized was once for a private hospital. Haven't had to pay anything besides the basic administrative fee they charge at the clinics anywhere unless it has been a private outfit (like when I had my wrist checked last winter to see if it was broken, it was Sunday).

I've been on unemployment, student grants and other such in the past and I have never had any problems with the bureaucracy. Neither have members of my family or my friends when they've had to use it. So maybe if you happen to live in what sounds like most incompetently run part of Bumfuck, Mosquito's Asshole, the Boonies, your kind of experiences are typical. I haven't seen anything of the kind.
Warwolf Urban Combat Specialist

Why is it so goddamned hard to get little assholes like you to admit it when you fuck up? Is it pride? What gives you the right to have any pride?
–Darth Wong to vivftp

GOP message? Why don't they just come out of the closet: FASCISTS R' US –Patrick Degan

The GOP has a problem with anyone coming out of the closet. –18-till-I-die
User avatar
Surlethe
HATES GRADING
Posts: 12269
Joined: 2004-12-29 03:41pm

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Surlethe »

Article wrote:His hippie appearance hides a dyed-in-the-wool free marketeer who champions the idea of "making work pay." That is a revolutionary concept in a country where the penalty for working has historically been high taxes and the reward for staying home a comfortable welfare or unemployment check.
Yeah, and I'll bet that you can make more money and live more comfortably staying home unemployed than you can working, right? I hate how these libertarians always overstate the disincentive to work a welfare state creates: sure, it will push the marginally employed people out of the work force, but it won't have any effect on the vast majority of people, except to give them something to grumble about.
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
F. Douglass
User avatar
Surlethe
HATES GRADING
Posts: 12269
Joined: 2004-12-29 03:41pm

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Surlethe »

Righteous Fist of Heaven wrote:Our health care isn't free. The average cost of our "free" health care for every working person is 6,000$ a year. On top of that, if you have to use that health care for ANY reason you have to pay for it. Nevermind the fact that you are already paying 6000$ a year for it in taxes. I remember when I was hospitalized for three days many years back. The cause wasn't critical. Nevertheless, the cost of those three days rose up to around 10,000$. Do note that no intensive care was required during this time. It was mainly monitoring and a few treatments. Thank fucking god I had an insurance to cover for the costs generated by this usage of our "free" healthcare. Otherwise I would have been screwed.
If your health care comes out of your tax bill, it's pretty fucking disingenuous for you to claim that it's $6000 a year on top of taxes.
Highly effective social safety net? Oh really? blah blah blah anecdotes
Dude, if you want to successfully make this sort of argument, you really need some honest-to-god statistics to support it. Anecdotes are worth shit for persuading reasonable people.
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
F. Douglass
User avatar
Rightous Fist Of Heaven
Jedi Master
Posts: 1201
Joined: 2002-09-29 05:31pm
Location: Finland

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Rightous Fist Of Heaven »

ArmorPierce wrote:Lets see. Approximately 25% tax on annual income, so lets say about $9,000. 7% sales tax in NJ. $7,000 property tax for a modest single family home = 18% tax on $37,000 in NJ (http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/in ... xml&coll=1), . Lets say health care cost someone 170 a month (I don't know the average cost of heal car for a healthy single person but the average at http://www.ehealthinsurance.com seemed to be about this number) that is over $2,000 a year. For sales tax I couldn't get a per person number, only number i got was 6.85 billion per year in Jersey in 2001. A rough estimate is to average that with the state's population. With a population of 8,414,350, that is approximately $800 paid in sales tax annually.

So, in New Jersey, tax expense for a young single individual making $37,000 is approximately $16,800 which is 45% of income. Add to that $2,000 for health care expense, $18,800 and that's approximately 51% of income to taxes and health insurance. How much of your income is taxed?
You can correct me on these figures since I'm not an expert in US taxation system and the figures are a result of quick googling. A single taxpayer under 65 and not blind with standard deductions would have a Federal Income Tax Rate of 18.1%. Added to that, the average State Income Tax in NJ is 6.61%. This comes out to 24.71%. In addition, the sales tax of 7% only applies to certain consumer items. Exemptions include most food items for at-home preparation, medicines, clothing (except fur items), footwear, and disposable paper products for use at home. Our 22% VAT applies on everything except food. Food "only" has a VAT of 17%.

Again, when taking into consideration much higher cost of living in Finland, the disrepancy grows even higher. In addition, Finland has the fourth highest VAT level in the entire world and one of the highest Income Taxation levels in the entire world. What accounts as a middle-income worker for us receives roughly 40% of their wage after the median tax wedge has been applied.
That is not taking into account transportation costs which in NJ you basically need a car. Not to mention college debt that we have to pay for after college.
Transportation costs are a lot higher in Finland. Like a doublewide fuckload higher.
Okay I think this is misleading. First, not every individual would pay $6,000 per year. Richer individuals would pay a bigger cut. Further, according to this http://www.yle.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/2008/ ... 91190.html and the translation that I got from it (unless the translation is wrong) the per person average is $4,000, not $6,000. If you want to calculate the individual tax burden like that, then in the United States, we spend $7,439 per person. So almost double than Finland per person and we still have to buy private health care on top of that!

The second part, you're health care is the government health care, correct? They paid the bill? Obviously no one is arguing that health care is not paid by anyone and that doctors and nurses are all just working out of the goodness of their heart.
It was an average, and my figure was based on the working population. Not total population since the working percentage of the population is the portion that actually pays for the healthcare. Yes, the Government pays the bill to provide for healthcare which's effectiveness is much criticized these days. The private sector is quickly gaining in cost-effectiveness and the quality of provided healthcare.
Edi wrote:Righteous Fist of Heaven, I have a number of anecdotes from my family, friends and acquaintances that generally run counter to what you've said here, so if you want to get into trading anecdotes, I'm willing to go for it.

My sister got hospitalized with some pretty severe lung problems due to an extended and vicious bout of pneumonia and other problems and it didn't cost my family anything. That was very recently. The only times I've had to pay anything for being hospitalized was once for a private hospital. Haven't had to pay anything besides the basic administrative fee they charge at the clinics anywhere unless it has been a private outfit (like when I had my wrist checked last winter to see if it was broken, it was Sunday).
Oh believe me, I pretty much touched the tip of the iceberg with my examples. After all, my point from the beginning was to provide the point of view of a person who is actually living in a welfare state.

Is your sister under 18? As you quite well know, healthcare is free until you turn 18. Now THAT, is a positive side of our healthcare system. From my hospitalization incident, I still have the documentation to show for the costs. The medication wasn't free nor was the brief time at the hospital. Now, in my understanding, Free Healthcare means I don't need to pay for it in addition to the taxes I already am paying.
I've been on unemployment, student grants and other such in the past and I have never had any problems with the bureaucracy. Neither have members of my family or my friends when they've had to use it. So maybe if you happen to live in what sounds like most incompetently run part of Bumfuck, Mosquito's Asshole, the Boonies, your kind of experiences are typical. I haven't seen anything of the kind.
Congratulations then! You have been quite lucky. Very goddamn lucky since I can't recall a single time when the bureaucracy of our venerable Welfare State would have worked properly in the instances I've had to deal with it. Not once. No, I dont live in Jesus Christ's Asshole. Although, Tampere sometimes sure does feel like it. I admit that my experiences dont actually describe the way the system is supposed to work. In my observation though, the Finnish Welfare system looks great on paper. Not so super in practice.

By the way, the Social Welfare I should have received during the time I really really needed it would have barely covered my rent and unavoidable bills. Arranging for eating and transportation was a bit more difficult. In the case of the woman whom I dated for a while, the social support she should (keyword, "should" ) have received could have just and just covered the interest in her mortgage and food. However, since KELA never got around to paying more than 500€ (which was based on her previous employment before she got laid off from the last one), I had to loan her money so she wouldn't be kicked out of her home. The answer from KELA when we asked what would they do about the missing papework was simply "These things can happen. You need to re-submit the paperwork.". So, in my own PERSONAL experience, the Social Safety Net has failed time after another to provide the help it should when it's needed the most.
Surlethe wrote: If your health care comes out of your tax bill, it's pretty fucking disingenuous for you to claim that it's $6000 a year on top of taxes.
Pardon my wording, I meant that I involuntarily already pay 6,000$ a year for healthcare. In the last ten years, I've required medical assistance in a medical facility precisely five times. No major operations, surgeries etc. If I required those, I luckily have an insurance to cover them in a private facility. Since the waiting times for public healthcare, when you need anything more done than a ceritifcate for sick leave, are insane.
Dude, if you want to successfully make this sort of argument, you really need some honest-to-god statistics to support it. Anecdotes are worth shit for persuading reasonable people.
From my first post, my point has been to provide the observations of someone who has lives and works in one of Welfare Finland's largest cities. I had no intention to start arguing about something I actually live through. My sincere apologies for the lack of statistics in describing my own life in Glorious Welfare Finland :roll:
"The ones they built at the height of nuclear weapons could knock the earth out of its orbit" - Physics expert Envy in reference to the hydrogen bombs built during the cold war.
User avatar
FSTargetDrone
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7878
Joined: 2004-04-10 06:10pm
Location: Drone HQ, Pennsylvania, USA

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by FSTargetDrone »

Glocksman wrote:For example, my state has 3.4% income tax and a 7% state sales tax.
Plus my county has adopted its own income tax (I don't remember the rate but it's less than 1%) and we have a 1% 'food and beverage tax' leveled against restaurants and other dining establishments.

In Indiana, both grocery items and newspapers are exempt from the sales tax.
In other states, both are taxed.

Some states have no income tax, but instead rely on higher property and sales taxes.
Likewise, Pennsylvania has a 6% sales tax, but Philadelphia has a 7% sales tax. In PA, most kinds of clothing is not taxed, but some kinds are (some fur, expensive formal wear and sport clothing, etc.). Generally, most food is not taxed, but soft drinks are. Gasoline and cigarettes are heavily taxed (26.2 cents per gallon and $1.35 per pack, respectively). Conversely, Delaware has no sales tax. I imagine other states are just as varied with rates and what is taxed.
Image
Rahvin
Jedi Knight
Posts: 615
Joined: 2005-07-06 12:51pm

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Rahvin »

I pay about 25% in combined Fed/State taxes from each paycheck.

I pay another 8% of my check for health coverage.

If I go to a doctor, I still need to pay copays for basically everything. No procedure is covered at 100% - I have 20% deductibles for most charges, and $20 copays for most simple visits and prescriptions. So my actual medical expenditures are yearly a lot more than 8% of my income. I haven't been to the doctor in years, and I still have to pay. When I eventually go, I'll just have to pay extra.

Sales tax here, as I said, is around 9%. It does apply to clothing, but not to groceries.

Unemployment here sucks. Hard. If I were to lose my job, I would receive less than half of what I make right now - probably closer to 25%. I'd immediately need to try to move to a cheaper apartment and cut off all nonessential services - and I'd have to dip into savings to do so. I've been on unemployment here before. It's unpleasant - and I made less money back then, so the pay disparity was lower. Lost paperwork and slow bureaucracy are, apparently, just as omnipresent in countries without social safety nets as those with them.

My healthcare would disappear, unless I want to pay for COBRA coverage - which would be far more than I could afford on unemployment. The disparity is so great that COBRA may as well not exist.

My girlfriend is currently on my health insurance. She has a pre-existing condition that costs quite literally thousands of dollars every month. Right now we're fine - $100 worth of copays for medication every month takes care of her. But if I lost my job...she'd die. Not exaggerating. There are programs in California for people with her medical condition, but the ones for the absolutely poor just got cut. Her family is not independently wealthy. She wouldn't be accepted by private health insurance, and even if we could find one the premiums would be roughly what I make in my current salary. The gross. She would gradually become more sick. Even if I were to find another job within 6 months, she would almost certainly suffer long-term consequences from not being able to take her medication, assuming she didn't die in even that short time.

Sacramento doesn't exactly have a low cost of living either. We aren't San Francisco or New York certainly, but neither are we Bumfuck, Flyoversotta. I pay $1100 monthly for my reasonable apartment. If I went cheap, I could squeeze that down to around $700-800, but I'd have to move to a one-bedroom, greatly increase my commute distance and thus travel costs, and live in a far less-savory area. I'm not sure what you pay in Finland for a 1-2 bedroom apartment. I spend roughly $350-400 per month to feed myself and my girlfriend. We eat reasonably, and shop cheaply. We supplement this with eating out now and again. I could probably cut that by 25%, maybe 30% if absolutely necessary. I have no idea how much you spend with your VAT.

It would appear that our taxation rates aren't all that different...you just get a lot more for your money. If I spoke the language and had the money, I'd move to one of the "socialist" European countries like Finland in a heartbeat. You have absolutely no clue what it's like living in a society where losing your job means losing your health coverage.
"You were doing OK until you started to think."
-ICANT, creationist from evcforum.net
User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7956
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by ray245 »

Rightous Fist Of Heaven wrote: From my first post, my point has been to provide the observations of someone who has lives and works in one of Welfare Finland's largest cities. I had no intention to start arguing about something I actually live through. My sincere apologies for the lack of statistics in describing my own life in Glorious Welfare Finland :roll:
So you are essentially saying that the Finland welfare system is not perfect? I think everyone here already knew that.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.
User avatar
Julhelm
Jedi Master
Posts: 1468
Joined: 2003-01-28 12:03pm
Location: Brutopia
Contact:

Re: Sweden downsizing its welfare state

Post by Julhelm »

Rightous Fist Of Heaven wrote:By the way, the Social Welfare I should have received during the time I really really needed it would have barely covered my rent and unavoidable bills. Arranging for eating and transportation was a bit more difficult.
That is my own experience from being on social welfare here in Sweden. 500€ a month to cover all living costs and that's that. Hardly what you'd call a life of luxory.
Post Reply