Why Canada & Finland are on the right track

[mirror]

In Finland's Footsteps

It's a dilemma that American parents don't have a chance to confront. And it's a vivid example of the difference between what the Finns call a social democracyand our society. Finland is a leading example of the northern European view that a successful, competitive society should provide basic social services to all its citizens at affordable prices or at no cost at all. This isn't controversial in Finland; it is taken for granted. For a patriotic American like me, the Finns present a difficult challenge: If we Americans are so rich and so smart, why can't we treat our citizens as well as the Finns do?

Finns have one of the world's most generous systems of state-funded educational, medical and welfare services, from pregnancy to the end of life. They pay nothing for education at any level, including medical school or law school. Their medical care, which contributes to an infant mortality rate that is half of ours and a life expectancy greater than ours, costs relatively little. (Finns devote 7 percent of gross domestic product to health care; we spend 15 percent.) Finnish senior citizens are well cared for. Unemployment benefits are good and last, in one form or another, indefinitely.

-----------------------

In Finland, Himanen said, opportunity does not depend on "an accident of birth." All Finns have an equal shot at life, liberty and happiness. Yes, this is supposed to be an American thing, but many well-traveled younger Finns, who all seem to speak English, have a Finnish take on American realities. Miapetra Kumpula, a 32-year-old member of Parliament, volunteered this on the American dream: "Sure, anyone can get rich -- but most won't."

---------------------------

Aho and his colleagues thought schooling should be "comprehensive," keeping all kids together in the same schools for nine years without tracking them by ability. Only for "upper secondary," or high school, would academic students be separated from those with vocational interests. The schools would be administered by municipal governments, but at the outset, the substance of the reform would be controlled by the National Board of Education and the government in Helsinki.

The key to reform, Aho and others believed, was teacher training. Teaching had always been a high-status profession in Finland, but now it would become even more prestigious. (Today there are 10 applicants for every place in the universities that train teachers.) Teachers would be required to complete master's degrees, six years of preparation that combined education courses with substantive work in subject areas. "Of course I faced much criticism," Aho recalled. "Upper secondary school teachers were very skeptical. Many parents were critical. The cultural elite said this would mean catastrophe for Finnish schools. The right thought the comprehensive schools smacked of socialism."

We are so programmed in North America to believe that the US competitive approach, survival of the fittest, winner take all approach is the way to go. The only reason we believe this is that the powerful elites in North America control the media and to a large extend brainwash us into thinking we have the best system in the world. Sure it works for the rich, but not for the middle or poor classes. Actually when you compare the US system to Finland, the US system leaves a lot to be desired. It is time Canadians put their thinking caps on and learn about other societies on our planet that are way ahead of anything the US has to offer. The sooner we cut loose from the US value system the better.

[August1991]

I may eventually make this about competition and cooperation, but for the moment, it's really about why Finland and Canada are not the same. Well, I just spent several weeks in Canada but several years ago, I was in Finland. I see no major difference - bugs, lakes, tents - except maybe Finland has longer days in summer. In Canada, we have two languages on boxes whereas Finns are a minority in Sweden.

We are so programmed in North America to believe that the US competitive approach, survival of the fittest, winner take all approach is the way to go.

Ah yes, the "peaceful, civilized" Europeans.

Ignorant, fat Americans are uncivilized, violent. Wal-Mart, McDonalds.

Huh?

What did the Swedes, Norwegians do to protect Belgians fifty years ago? How many Poles died then? Where is Beaumont-Hamel? Ancient history? Well, what did the French, Italians do to help Bosnians - ten years ago?

What is a Quisling? Where does the term come from? What would Albertans, Colorodans, Ontarians do if New Mexicans were threatened by Manitobans? What did Haligonians and Newfoundlanders in September 2001 do?

Forget Finland. I love North America.

Europe is Mars, America is Venus. History is on my side. Check it out.

[Riverwind]

Actually when you compare the US system  to Finland, the US system leaves a lot to be desired. It is time Canadians put their thinking caps on and learn about other societies on our planet that are way ahead of anything the US has to offer. The sooner we cut loose from the US value system the better.

This report is absolutely facinating:

http://www02.imd.ch/documents/wcc/content/pr.pdf

The first observation is that competitiveness reacts differently to the various types of taxes that are levied. A direct impact is more easily established between corporate taxation and competitiveness than with personal, social or indirect taxes. As a consequence, Northern European nations heavily tax personal income and consumption but spare corporate profits.

Any bets on whether Layton would a support higher GST and and lower corporate taxes to be more like Finland?

Unlike the Nordic countries where language, culture and geography will keep top talent from emigrating - Canada is particularly susceptible to brain drain which means we cannot increase income tax levels on high income earners like Finland. The same issue is true for corporate taxes.

What we need to focus on is providing social services in the most cost effective way which sometimes means letting the gov't be the provider (i.e. basic health and auto insurance). This is really where Canada has and advantage over the US where people tend to assume gov't is always evil.

[Yaro]

I may eventually make this about competition and cooperation, but for the moment, it's really about why Finland and Canada are not the same. Well, I just spent several weeks in Canada but several years ago, I was in Finland. I see no major difference - bugs, lakes, tents - except maybe Finland has longer days in summer. In Canada, we have two languages on boxes whereas Finns are a minority in Sweden.

Finland and Sweden are separate countries, I think you know that but that’s not how you made it sound.

What did the Swedes, Norwegians do to protect Belgians fifty years ago? How many Poles died then? Where is Beaumont-Hamel? Ancient history? Well, what did the French, Italians do to help Bosnians - ten years ago?

Sweden is a country of 8.5 million people, Finland is a country of 5.5 million, and Norway is a country of 5 million. That’s a total of 19 million. Your statement as to what these tiny nations should have done in the face of German aggression is as stupid as asking why we didn't stop the US from going into Vietnam.

What is a Quisling? Where does the term come from? What would Albertans, Colorodans, Ontarians do if New Mexicans were threatened by Manitobans? What did Haligonians and Newfoundlanders in September 2001 do?

What does the fact that Norway had a fascist party and its leader was executed have to do with absolutely anything? What does the fact that two provinces of two different countries not being able to make war on each other without dragging in both nations have to do with the relationships between individual countries in Europe? And again how the hell is our reaction to the 911 even remotely relevant on this topic?

Forget Finland. I love North America.

Europe is Mars, America is Venus. History is on my side. Check it out.

Not that I am particularly advocating either system, but your post could be used in a textbook as the definition of literal tripe.

Any bets on whether Layton would a support higher GST and and lower corporate taxes to be more like Finland?

Unlike the Nordic countries where language, culture and geography will keep top talent from emigrating - Canada is particularly susceptible to brain drain which means we cannot increase income tax levels on high income earners like Finland. The same issue is true for corporate taxes.

I agree, however I think the solution is in simply not funding education without some guarantee of return from the student.

[August1991]

Yaro, my post was in response to mirror's use of the old stereotype about the US:

We are so programmed in North America to believe that the US competitive approach, survival of the fittest, winner take all approach is the way to go.

---

Finland and Sweden are separate countries, I think you know that but that’s not how you made it sound.

Indeed they are, but they weren't before. There is a sizeable minority of Finns in Sweden, and minority Swedes in Finland. You might want to read up on why these minorities exist and how they are treated in both countries.

Sweden is a country of 8.5 million people, Finland is a country of 5.5 million, and Norway is a country of 5 million. That’s a total of 19 million. Your statement as to what these tiny nations should have done in the face of German aggression is as stupid as asking why we didn't stop the US from going into Vietnam.

Well, the Finns certainly tried to stop Soviet aggression. The Swedish attitude was to collaborate with Nazis. As a result, Stockholm was left intact whereas Warsaw, for example, was not. I don't think there is any doubt that had more small European governments stood up to Hitler, many lives would have been saved.

Your comparison of the US "invasion" of Vietnam and the Nazi occupation of Scandinavia is absurd.

What does the fact that Norway had a fascist party and its leader was executed have to do with absolutely anything? What does the fact that two provinces of two different countries not being able to make war on each other without dragging in both nations have to do with the relationships between individual countries in Europe? And again how the hell is our reaction to the 911 even remotely relevant on this topic?

Given the thread's topic, I was objecting to the stereotypical presentation of the US as being "survival of the fittest" whereas Europe is "civilized and fair". Historical evidence suggests otherwise.

I chose this tack in arguing against mirror's post on Finland rather than get into the details, as Argus did. So let me do as Argus now and mention one fact: university enrollment per capita is about 50% higher in Canada than in Finland. (6% of the adult population in Canada is in university versus 4% in Finland.) Some web site

What does this mean? Well, tuition fees in Finland may be close to zero but that doesn't mean students can freely go to university. Now then, who chooses who gets to be a university student in Finland?

[mirror]

Well, the Finns certainly tried to stop Soviet aggression. The Swedish attitude was to collaborate with Nazis. As a result, Stockholm was left intact whereas Warsaw, for example, was not. I don't think there is any doubt that had more small European governments stood up to Hitler, many lives would have been saved.

Maybe if the US had entered the second world war with the rest of us more lives would probably have been saved, but they were too busy making money off the war effort.

[Guest eureka]

Do you have stats on other areas of post secondary education and training, August? University enrollment is not necessarily a figure reflecting the level of a society. Technical training, Apprenticeship and some others are, in my view, more useful.

Universities have been steadily cheapened for several decades and the average university graduate now would have merely made it into an apprenticeship program a generation ago.

When I was young, only 1% of the population went to university. But the technical levels were far superior to those of today. Only 4% went to high school, too but many of those who did not had superb apprenticeship training.

[Yaro]

Indeed they are, but they weren't before. There is a sizeable minority of Finns in Sweden, and minority Swedes in Finland. You might want to read up on why these minorities exist and how they are treated in both countries.

I have been to both countries, I am aware of the cultural issues. There relationship is not unlike the one we have with the US.

Well, the Finns certainly tried to stop Soviet aggression. The Swedish attitude was to collaborate with Nazis. As a result, Stockholm was left intact whereas Warsaw, for example, was not. I don't think there is any doubt that had more small European governments stood up to Hitler, many lives would have been saved.

The Finns fought against a direct aggressor, they were no aggressive against Nazi Germany then the Swedes were. The fact of the matter is that Germany at the time was in pretty fair proportion to the US, a power on a different scale then Sweden or all of the Nordic countries combined.

Your comparison of the US "invasion" of Vietnam and the Nazi occupation of Scandinavia is absurd.

Not at all, it was an invasion that the Canadian government was very much against, it was an extremely aggressive empire building exercise. But if you prefer I would point to the US occupation of the Philippines as another example. The fact of the matter is that Canada could take no practical position to defend either Vietnam or the Philippines regardless of political will.

Given the thread's topic, I was objecting to the stereotypical presentation of the US as being "survival of the fittest" whereas Europe is "civilized and fair". Historical evidence suggests otherwise.

The US is about survival of the fittest, it’s practically there national motto. Your problem is that you take that as some sort of insult. Survival of the fittest is the society that most Americans choose for themselves, there’s nothing innately wrong about that. I would also point out that Europe has higher social mobility then the US which is fairly stunning when you consider the age of there respective societies.

I chose this tack in arguing against mirror's post on Finland rather than get into the details, as Argus did. So let me do as Argus now and mention one fact: university enrollment per capita is about 50% higher in Canada than in Finland. (6% of the adult population in Canada is in university versus 4% in Finland.) Some web site

Education is handled very differently in Europe then it is here, what we would call trades education is taken fairly seriously there. It would not count as a university education but it would certainly result in a more practically educated society. It should also be noted that by your own source Finland and Norway rank 6th and 7th in the world, that’s hardly a sign of poor performance. Then taking into account our heavily biased immigration policy (biased towards the educated) and the number of international students we have (one of the highest ratios in the world) combined with a traditionally heavy emphasis on education and it’s hardly surprising that we have the numbers fairly heavily weighted in our favor.

What does this mean? Well, tuition fees in Finland may be close to zero but that doesn't mean students can freely go to university. Now then, who chooses who gets to be a university student in Finland?

Anyone who qualifies to standards lower then the ones required of me (the cutoff for my course was a 93% high school average) can get into university in Finland. Not all students choose to go to university because much like us they require more trades people and less university educated people.

Just as note here to finish up, I am not arguing for Mirrors position, there is nothing innately right or wrong about the US system or the Finish system so long as it enjoys the support of a well-informed electorate.