Evening Star Posted January 23, 2011 Report Posted January 23, 2011 Curious what you guys think of this article that argues that the Nordic social democratic model is actually good for business and entrepreneurship: http://www.inc.com/magazine/20110201/in-norway-start-ups-say-ja-to-socialism.html It's not especially rigourous but it seems to make some good points. I'm predisposed to liking it though. Quote
nicky10013 Posted January 23, 2011 Report Posted January 23, 2011 (edited) It is true. Sure they have a hefty tax load but they dump a LOT of money into research and development. Most people take it for granted that the largest, most successful and most innovative companies are from the US. If you look at lists of companies by those categories all the top performers are EU companies. Edited January 26, 2011 by Charles Anthony deleted re-copied Opening Post Quote
Esq Posted January 23, 2011 Report Posted January 23, 2011 (edited) I think forced socialism is "unfree" That is why I strongly support the Social Party's "pay for" funding system. Where people vote (with their money) on what they would like to fund. Anyone can propose programs. Those programs are moderated into priority by an advisory council - a council formed on a 1 vote = 1 vote basis, everyone can either keep or give their 1 vote, and that vote always counts as 1 vote. The council is just ranked on a basis of individuals who accumulate the most votes. Votes that can change by registering the vote with yourself or someone else. The programs themselves are managed by the government or whatever directing agency or organization is outlined in the payfor. The Federal Government raises funds for essential personnel through mechanisms such as licenses, royalties, and leases. That is through land, trade, and residual income. Any shortfalls are equally adjusted by supply at source. Capitalism is allowed to flurish by material assets and foreign exchange. People only require Canadian money if they have tax deeded property, need to pay fees to the government, or owe royalties. This is a perfect free and democratic socialism, that is production and employment tax free. No one pays for what they create, only what they hold - example if they own property, if they gain rights to access for extraction of communal resources. 0% income taxes. 0% goods and services taxes In that place self funded programs. Poverty protection. Governmental programs for creation of social housing, food cooperatives, and support for manufacture of essential goods. Voluntary participation - and the right to work! Forget about all the political programs, all the partisan programs. You only pay for what you would like to support. You can ask why pay? Well what do you need? We can critically look at the few government programs out there, and you got to ask yourself what exactly is $300+ billion a year going to.... Sadly most is just political diversions. Unneeded. Let business manage itself. Let the government set the limits, let people do the work. ------------ High taxes are slavery!!!! Who cares about start ups what we need are finishers! Edited January 23, 2011 by Esq Quote
Pliny Posted January 23, 2011 Report Posted January 23, 2011 (edited) Isn't the mantra supposed to be Business and entrepreneurs are the materialist scum of the earth and profit is evil or is that just unless taxes are exorbitantly high? And happiness does not come in the form of a pill. Norway Edited January 26, 2011 by Charles Anthony deleted re-copied Opening Post Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
dre Posted January 23, 2011 Report Posted January 23, 2011 Isn't the mantra supposed to be Business and entrepreneurs are the materialist scum of the earth and profit is evil or is that just unless taxes are exorbitantly high? And happiness does not come in the form of a pill. Norway Isn't the mantra supposed to be Business and entrepreneurs are the materialist scum of the earth No no... thats just a caricature/strawman that you apply to a bunch of imaginary people that only exist inside your head. Glad I could help! Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Pliny Posted January 23, 2011 Report Posted January 23, 2011 No no... thats just a caricature/strawman that you apply to a bunch of imaginary people that only exist inside your head. Glad I could help! You mean you're a figment of my imagination? Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
Bonam Posted January 24, 2011 Report Posted January 24, 2011 (edited) How many of the world's most successful entrepreneurs are in Scandinavia? Not many. The article says they have many entrepreneurs per capita. Perhaps that is true. But how many of these actually manage to create a growing and prosperous businesses, rather than a family business that barely scrapes by? The Nordic social model of course is good for this kind of entrepreneurship: anyone who wants to can give it a shot, and if they fail and lose all their money, the safety net will catch them. So of course many will try. But how many succeed? Edited January 26, 2011 by Charles Anthony deleted re-copied Opening Post Quote
Pliny Posted January 24, 2011 Report Posted January 24, 2011 How many of the world's most successful entrepreneurs are in Scandinavia? Not many. The article says they have many entrepreneurs per capita. Perhaps that is true. But how many of these actually manage to create a growing and prosperous businesses, rather than a family business that barely scrapes by? The Nordic social model of course is good for this kind of entrepreneurship: anyone who wants to can give it a shot, and if they fail and lose all their money, the safety net will catch them. So of course many will try. But how many succeed? The first hurdle they will reach is the tax bill. If they can manage that they will probably decide it isn't worth the hassle. It's the same in Sweden, after a few years of scraping by most take a break and relax for a few years on the government's dime generally not overcoming the inertia to get started again. Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
dre Posted January 24, 2011 Report Posted January 24, 2011 You mean you're a figment of my imagination? No your fallacious claim that Im anti business definately is though. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Evening Star Posted January 24, 2011 Author Report Posted January 24, 2011 The first hurdle they will reach is the tax bill. If they can manage that they will probably decide it isn't worth the hassle. It's the same in Sweden, after a few years of scraping by most take a break and relax for a few years on the government's dime generally not overcoming the inertia to get started again. See, going by the per-capita GDP, unemployment rates, and public finances of Nordic countries, this seems like it must be blatantly false. As it is, I find Bonam's contention a little more believable. This list isn't so bad for a small country though: http://www.transnationale.org/countries/swes.php Quote
kimmy Posted January 25, 2011 Report Posted January 25, 2011 How many of the world's most successful entrepreneurs are in Scandinavia? Not many. The article says they have many entrepreneurs per capita. Perhaps that is true. But how many of these actually manage to create a growing and prosperous businesses, rather than a family business that barely scrapes by? The Nordic social model of course is good for this kind of entrepreneurship: anyone who wants to can give it a shot, and if they fail and lose all their money, the safety net will catch them. So of course many will try. But how many succeed? Probably more than would succeed without the assistance. Which is, not surprisingly, why our own government goes to great lengths to assist Canadian entrepreneurs. (I suspect the US has many similar programs as well). One might argue that when it comes to entrepreneurship and small business (and maybe even not-so-small business) we're already a socialist state. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
Bonam Posted January 25, 2011 Report Posted January 25, 2011 Probably more than would succeed without the assistance. More than would succeed without the assistance, but is it more than would succeed if taxes were substantially lower, which they necessarily would be in a less socialist society? Quote
Wild Bill Posted January 25, 2011 Report Posted January 25, 2011 More than would succeed without the assistance, but is it more than would succeed if taxes were substantially lower, which they necessarily would be in a less socialist society? Now you're getting near the pith of it, Bonam! The more socialistic a country the more it tends to discourage entrepreneurship. An extreme example would be Stalinist Russia. Several times in his history Stalin recognized that his economy was shot and his people were starving. Not that this truly bothered him but when things like that go on for too long people start to blame those on top, like him! So he would relax the reins and let entrepreneurs go to town. Very quickly things would be humming along tickety-boo. Stalin of course would take all the credit. Once the heat was off Uncle Joe would haul back on the reins and confiscate the businesses generated by the "nouveaux riche". Any that complained would be locked up as "lackeys of the running dog capitalists", or whatever. Back to the old Stalinist status quo until the next time he figured his economy needed a shot in the arm. Sounds to me like we're talking some parallels here. A socialist government decides that it needs more entrepreneurship, since its own policies have stamped it out. So it comes up with a form of capitalism that it can control. Seems a bit too much of a "Catch-22" to be very successful. Let's look back at how they're doing in a couple of years. Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Evening Star Posted January 25, 2011 Author Report Posted January 25, 2011 Now you're getting near the pith of it, Bonam! The more socialistic a country the more it tends to discourage entrepreneurship. An extreme example would be Stalinist Russia. Several times in his history Stalin recognized that his economy was shot and his people were starving. Not that this truly bothered him but when things like that go on for too long people start to blame those on top, like him! So he would relax the reins and let entrepreneurs go to town. Very quickly things would be humming along tickety-boo. Stalin of course would take all the credit. Once the heat was off Uncle Joe would haul back on the reins and confiscate the businesses generated by the "nouveaux riche". Any that complained would be locked up as "lackeys of the running dog capitalists", or whatever. Back to the old Stalinist status quo until the next time he figured his economy needed a shot in the arm. Sounds to me like we're talking some parallels here. A socialist government decides that it needs more entrepreneurship, since its own policies have stamped it out. So it comes up with a form of capitalism that it can control. Seems a bit too much of a "Catch-22" to be very successful. Let's look back at how they're doing in a couple of years. They've had more than a couple of years already though. Sweden was ruled pretty consistently by social democrats from 1932 onwards ( http://www.pitt.edu/~heinisch/ca_swed.html ), to the point that the policies of right-wing parties would still probably be more social democratic than some of the NDP's policies. Norway also introduced social democratic policies by no later than the 40s. Both countries have been enjoying strong levels of productivity and employment for a long time. They have been used as models since the 1970s at least. Norway is ranked as having the third highest PPP and the world's strongest currency ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway#Economy ). The Legatum Prosperity Index also ranks the Nordic countries highly: http://www.prosperity.com/rankings.aspx . There's no comparison with Stalinist Russia. The article was from an American business magazine, by the way. Quote
August1991 Posted January 26, 2011 Report Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) Now you're getting near the pith of it, Bonam! The more socialistic a country the more it tends to discourage entrepreneurship. An extreme example would be Stalinist Russia.I somehow think modern day Sweden or Finland are unlike Stalinist Russia.How many of the world's most successful entrepreneurs are in Scandinavia? Not many.I think the wealthiest man in the world is the Swede Ingvar Kamprad who started Ikea. (He now lives in Switzerland though.) There's also Nokia, Electrolux, Saab, Volvo, Carlsberg, Lego (and these are only the consumer brands that come to mind.) ABB started in Sweden, I think.---- I have never been to Sweden or Norway but I have been to Finland (and Estonia) several times and Denmark. And I've spent time with Norwegians and worked with Swedes in particular. In my mind, what strikes me about Scandanavians is their Lutheran heritage. They are plain people, not given to ostentation. The guy at the top is just like the guy at the bottom. I think that this approach to life helps cooperation in small, homogeneous societies. It's unworkable in the broader world. I guess what I am saying is that the Swedish model works in Sweden but won't work anywhere else. It would be like observing that in one happy family, everyone sits down at 6 pm and eats dinner together. So, you tell a dysfunctional family to eat dinner together under the belief that this will make them a happy family. Norway is ranked as having the third highest PPP and the world's strongest currency ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway#Economy )Norway, since the discovery of North Sea oil, is a special case. Norway's special claim is that, unlike Nigeria or Venezuela for example, it hasn't thrown away the resource in wasteful nonsense. Norwegians pay the same price for gasoline as other Europeans. Norway, however, does not use the euro and is not a member of the European Union. (Norway does not contribute to any European funds except on its terms.)Norwegians, and Scandinavians in general, are shrewd. Edited January 26, 2011 by August1991 Quote
Evening Star Posted January 26, 2011 Author Report Posted January 26, 2011 Surely you are also familiar with Propellerhead ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propellerhead_Software ) if you share my interest in digital recording! The list I posted earlier of Sweden's major companies is pretty impressive, actually. (Although it seems that Kamprad is now #11 in the world.) Quote
Evening Star Posted January 26, 2011 Author Report Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) Ha, actually, I had no idea that H&M is Swedish. Their chair, Stefan Persson, is the 13th richest person in the world. Edited January 26, 2011 by Evening Star Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 26, 2011 Report Posted January 26, 2011 Norway, since the discovery of North Sea oil, is a special case. Norway's special claim is that, unlike Nigeria or Venezuela for example, it hasn't thrown away the resource in wasteful nonsense. Norwegians pay the same price for gasoline as other Europeans. Norway, however, does not use the euro and is not a member of the European Union. (Norway does not contribute to any European funds except on its terms.) Special indeed....Norway was the highest per-capita recipient of US Marshall Plan dollars after WW2. Also, a bold proposal from Phillips Petroleum back in 1962 would set the stage for Statoil and offshore riches. "We have reason for believing that the geologic basin in which large reserves of natural gas have been discovered in Holland may be extended northward into the Norwegian portion of the North Sea. Therefore, Phillips Petroleum Company is interested in obtaining from the Norwegian government an oil and gas concession covering the lands lying beneath the territorial waters of Norway plus that portion of the continental shelf lying beneath the North Sea which may now or in the future belong to or be under the control of Norway." Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
dre Posted January 26, 2011 Report Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) More than would succeed without the assistance, but is it more than would succeed if taxes were substantially lower, which they necessarily would be in a less socialist society? It seems that way. Some of these European and Nordic countries are consistantly rated as the best places in the world for a business to operate. Low taxes is NOT a panacea in forming a business friendly environment. Theres a host of other factors as well such as education, healthcare, infrastructure, etc that are huge factors as well. And those things take tax revenue. Doing business in a country with universal healthcare can save hundreds of dollars per month for every single employee, and companies are also huge beneficiaries of strong public education systems. Edited January 26, 2011 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Pliny Posted January 26, 2011 Report Posted January 26, 2011 So Sweden's been voting socialist since 1932. It won't make it a hundred years. It's already in pretty bad shape. Generally dictatorships last, if anything, the duration of a little more than the life of the dictator and socialist governments as well don't go much past a generation and a half if that long. Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
dre Posted January 26, 2011 Report Posted January 26, 2011 So Sweden's been voting socialist since 1932. It won't make it a hundred years. It's already in pretty bad shape. Generally dictatorships last, if anything, the duration of a little more than the life of the dictator and socialist governments as well don't go much past a generation and a half if that long. Sweden isnt a socialist country though. It uses the Scandanavian economic model which is really just a mix of capitalism and welfare. Me thinks youre confusing socialism with social welfare again. Those are two distinctly diferent things. The modern social democracies that dominate the world right now (the west) are based on a capitalist economic model which taxes private people, businesses, and corporations to provide welfare, education, defense, police, etc. In a socialist country there are no private companies. All enterprises are either owned by the public or the workers in that enterprise. socialist governments as well don't go much past a generation and a half if that long Maybe but Sweden isnt a socialist country its a social democracy. And social democracies like Canada, the US, Australia, NewZealand, most of Europe and Scandinavia have lasted a few generations now. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
August1991 Posted January 26, 2011 Report Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) Ha, actually, I had no idea that H&M is Swedish. Their chair, Stefan Persson, is the 13th richest person in the world.Huh? Edited January 26, 2011 by August1991 Quote
Jack Weber Posted January 26, 2011 Report Posted January 26, 2011 Yes, Swedes are shrewd, or "practical" if you prefer that word. But let's be honest. They're Lutheran. Just like Presbyterians. Thanks! I'm the 2nd Denomination on that list!!! Martin Luther and John Calvin (Jean Cauvin) were right! Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
August1991 Posted January 26, 2011 Report Posted January 26, 2011 Special indeed....Norway was the highest per-capita recipient of US Marshall Plan dollars after WW2.Marshall Plan has nothing to do with this.Norway has oil. Nigeria has oil. Why do Norwegians live well, and Nigerians don't? And what of people in countries with no oil? Quote
Jack Weber Posted January 26, 2011 Report Posted January 26, 2011 Marshall Plan has nothing to do with this. Norway has oil. Nigeria has oil. Why do Norwegians live well, and Nigerians don't? And what of people in countries with no oil? That's fairly easy... Norway has been a country for a very long time with a long history of having respect for the law... A standard model for a representative democracy. Nigeria is one of the most corrupt countries in the world,with no respect for law...In fact,it's only been a country for a little more than 50 years... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.