|
DomYngBlk -> RE: Is all American conservatism based upon fear? (11/1/2010 7:18:17 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY
quote:
ORIGINAL: thornhappy
quote:
ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY
I do ask what kind of society that I want, and I want one in which there is the maximum amount of individual freedom, and individual responsibility, where morality and sympathy for those less fortunate lead to direct charity, channelled through small personal organizations who have direct contact and understanding of those that they help, and where political and business leaders are shamed when their organizations display acts of impersonal cruelty and greed.
I believe that the history of mankind shows that "more government" leads to the antithesis of this sort of society.
Firm
Like Somalia? Nigeria?
BTW, what do you think of Norway, Sweden, etc.?
Ok, good point.
Let me qualify that by saying "excessive government".
I've never claimed, nor ever will claim that government is unnecessary, or that some taxes are not appropriate.
That takes care of your first set of examples, so lets move on to your next set: the Nordic countries.
First, an article:
What’s going on up North?: Scandinavia Dominates Global Prosperity Index
Tuesday 26th October 2010
Free Markets the key to Nordic nations’ strong performances
The four major Nordic countries of Norway, Denmark, Finland and Sweden are among the most prosperous in the world, according to Legatum Institute’s comprehensive 2010 Prosperity Index, published today.
...
However, the Legatum Prosperity Index finds that the reasons for the Scandinavians’ success are more complex than the usual argument focusing on the region’s large welfare states. Recent research has shown that far from being highly regulated and dominated by the public sector, the Nordic economies were among the most aggressive reformers in the 1980s and 1990s.
After the economic crisis of the early 1990s, Scandinavian countries underwent “neoliberal” reforms – freer trade, deregulation, and cutting back on welfare state expenditure. In the mid-90s, Denmark liberalised the labour market and now the World Bank considers it the most flexible labour market in Europe. Sweden also lowered many of its trade barriers in the mid-90s, and since then, all Nordic countries have followed relatively free trade policies.
At the same time, the Nordic states have high tax rates, and large welfare states. The Index finds that Denmark, Finland, and Sweden have the highest rates of social trust in the world, evident in the strong social bond between citizens and which allows the fair provision of high unemployment benefits partnered with a liberal, flexible labour market with a low level of job protection.
Although the Nordic economies feature large public sectors, the four countries scored highly in the Entrepreneurship and Opportunity sub-index because ‘an overwhelming majority of citizens in each country have confidence that they can climb life’s ladder regardless of socio-economic status’.
High taxation does not stifle growth in these because citizens believe that individuals can set up their own businesses and succeed in the market. The Nordic countries top the Index on public perceptions that working hard will get them ahead financially, irrespective of their social background.
...
Dr. Lenihan continued, “The 2010 Prosperity Index, shows that a high level of public spiritedness allows states such as Norway, Denmark and Sweden, to foster high levels of economic and social wellbeing.”
Another:
Political Earthquake Shakes Up Sweden
By STEPHEN CASTLE
Published: September 20, 2010
STOCKHOLM — Worthy, high-minded and often utterly predictable, Swedish politics has rarely offered much by way of excitement. Now an electoral earthquake seems to have changed all that.
Elections on Sunday gave an anti-immigration party its first parliamentary seats and deprived the governing coalition of its majority, plunging the country into rare political instability.
Meanwhile the Social Democrats, architects of the modern Swedish state and one of Europe’s most successful political parties, recorded their worst performance since World War I.
Behind the upheaval lie structural changes in Swedish politics and a battle over how to preserve the cradle-to-grave welfare system.
Though the success of the center-right suggests a long-term shift in politics, analysts say Swedes remain deeply attached to their welfare system and want change to be gradual, not radical.
These articles are representative samples of things I'll discuss.
First, do not confuse, necessarily a "welfare state" with "more government". One of the reasons for the success of the Nordic model in the last few decades has been an increasing emphasis on the capitalist system, and a freeing of government restrictions on business.
This has been particularly successful in those countries because of a high level of social trust, due to a generally homogeneous society.
This social trust allows a societal agreement on many things, including large labor unions, and extensive social benefits paid by high taxes, because of the reduced level of conflict, and the reduced perception of "freeloaders" in their system.
Absent that societal trust, then the system would likely break down, or become much less successful.
It seems with increasing immigration, that that trust is indeed breaking down, and people are starting to be less and less enchanted with the system as it is.
In short, the Nordic countries are outliers, and have been successful due to the very thing that is seen as a great evil in the US by some: a racially and ethnically homogeneous population, where there was strong agreement on the morality and methods of government, and the majority of the people acted and performed as expected. Entrepreneurship was encouraged, and capitalism was generally seen as a positive, and business are generally trusted by their employees due to a common morality that such a homogeneous population allows.
As this breaks down, I suspect that this will change, and there are now indications of such a possible breakdown in social trust in all of the Nordic countries. It will be a shame if such a cycle continues, but unless they change their immigration polices (and maybe not even then, due to the already existing large cultural minorities), then they may see repressive (or at least much less liberal) governments in the near future.
So, yes, "excessive government" is always bad in the long run.
Firm
Then if you agree that taxes are necessary then you'd also agree the the defining "excessive" is in the eyes of the definer. So all of the hyperbole about Socialists and Communists running rampant throughout the land is simply not true per your post. Correct? Or are you going to slither your way around that one too. lol
|
|
|
|
