Proof That Obama Is A Mistake

[PoliticalChic]

Read this, Obamunists…and prove you are capable of learning. Realize the insanity of re-electing this dunce. Here is what America should be doing:



1. THIRTY YEARS AGO Margaret Thatcher turned Britain into the world’s leading centre of “thinking the unthinkable”. Today that distinction has passed to Sweden….Sweden has reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP from 67% in 1993 to 49% today…. It has also cut the top marginal tax rate by 27 percentage points since 1983, to 57%, and scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance. This year it is cutting the corporate-tax rate from 26.3% to 22%.

2. Sweden has also donned the golden straitjacket of fiscal orthodoxy with its pledge to produce a fiscal surplus over the economic cycle. Its public debt fell from 70% of GDP in 1993 to 37% in 2010, and its budget moved from an 11% deficit to a surplus of 0.3% over the same period.
3. Most daringly, it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones. Private companies also vie with each other to provide state-funded health services and care for the elderly….Sweden is pioneering “a new conservative model”…





4. …Sweden’s quiet revolution has brought about a dramatic change in its economic performance. The two decades from 1970 were a period of decline: the country was demoted from being the world’s fourth-richest in 1970 to 14th-richest in 1993, …The two decades from 1990 were a period of recovery: GDP growth between 1993 and 2010 averaged 2.7% a year and productivity 2.1% a year, compared with 1.9% and 1% respectively for the main 15 EU countries.

5. For most of the 20th century Sweden prided itself on offering what Marquis Childs called, in his 1936 book of that title, a “Middle Way” between capitalism and socialism…As the decades rolled by, the middle way veered left. The government kept growing: public spending as a share of GDP nearly doubled from 1960 to 1980 and peaked at 67% in 1993.

a. Taxes kept rising. The Social Democrats (who ruled Sweden for 44 uninterrupted years from 1932 to 1976 and for 21 out of the 24 years from 1982 to 2006) kept squeezing business. “The era of neo-capitalism is drawing to an end,” said Olof Palme, the party’s leader, in 1974. “It is some kind of socialism that is the key to the future.”





6. The other Nordic countries have been moving in the same direction,… Denmark has one of the most liberal labour markets in Europe. It also allows parents to send children to private schools at public expense and make up the difference in cost with their own money. Finland is harnessing the skills of venture capitalists and angel investors to promote innovation and entrepreneurship.

7. But the new Nordic model begins with the individual rather than the state. It begins with fiscal responsibility rather than pump-priming: all four Nordic countries have AAA ratings and debt loads significantly below the euro-zone average. It begins with choice and competition rather than paternalism and planning.

a. The leftward lurch has been reversed: rather than extending the state into the market, the Nordics are extending the market into the state.





8. “The welfare state we have is excellent in most ways,” says Gunnar Viby Mogensen, a Danish historian. “We only have this little problem. We can’t afford it.”

9. ….they have reached the future first. They are grappling with problems that other countries too will have to deal with in due course, such as what to do when you reach the limits of big government and how to organise society when almost all women work.

10. … the new Nordic model is proving strikingly successful. The Nordics dominate indices of competitiveness as well as of well-being. Their high scores in both types of league table mark a big change since the 1980s when welfare took precedence over competitiveness.”
Northern lights | The Economist


How is it that Liberals, time and again, prove that no data, nor experience, nor logic has any bearing on their propensity to vote for the very worse of candidates??

Why have they done this to America???

 

[Freemason9]

Of course Sweden is a constitutional monarchy that is relatively sparsely populated when compared to the U.S. Something that works for Sweden does not necessarily work for the U.S., which has a much more diverse population.

Although you elevate Sweden as the model of modern economies, it is still very much a "socialist" model when compared to the U.S. In other words, the U.S. would have to become much more "socialist" if it were to approximate the Swedish model--let's begin, for example, with true national health care. It also avoids regional/global wars, and saves a HELL of a lot of money by not building an empirial military.

Sweden is one of the most equal nations in the world in terms of income. Did you know that? If the U.S. could emulate that, it would help our economy a lot. It also has one of the most highly developed welfare states in the world.

ALSO, about 80% of the Swedish workforce is unionized, and they also have the right to elect two representatives to the board in all Swedish companies with more than 25 employees--that's pretty socialist by modern standards. ALSO, Sweden has a relatively high amount of sick leave per worker--the average worker loses 24 days per year due to sickness.

SO, Sweden is a curious example for any right winger to hold up in terms of what "works" for economic success. I would have thought that you would avoid Sweden as a subject for discussion.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Of course Sweden is a constitutional monarchy that is relatively sparsely populated when compared to the U.S. Something that works for Sweden does not necessarily work for the U.S., which has a much more diverse population.

Although you elevate Sweden as the model of modern economies, it is still very much a "socialist" model when compared to the U.S. In other words, the U.S. would have to become much more "socialist" if it were to approximate the Swedish model--let's begin, for example, with true national health care. It also avoids regional/global wars, and saves a HELL of a lot of money by not building an empirial military.

Sweden is one of the most equal nations in the world in terms of income. Did you know that? If the U.S. could emulate that, it would help our economy a lot. It also has one of the most highly developed welfare states in the world.

ALSO, about 80% of the Swedish workforce is unionized, and they also have the right to elect two representatives to the board in all Swedish companies with more than 25 employees--that's pretty socialist by modern standards. ALSO, Sweden has a relatively high amount of sick leave per worker--the average worker loses 24 days per year due to sickness.

SO, Sweden is a curious example for any right winger to hold up in terms of what "works" for economic success. I would have thought that you would avoid Sweden as a subject for discussion.

I can see why you'd rather focus on the social dimensions....

...but, not I.

Here it is again, conservative tactics are proving successful:

.Sweden has reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP from 67% in 1993 to 49% today…. It has also cut the top marginal tax rate by 27 percentage points since 1983, to 57%, and scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance. This year it is cutting the corporate-tax rate from 26.3% to 22%.



Further....it is of more than passing interest that the Left-leaning 'Economist' has chosen to highlight both the improvements in the economic outlook for Sweden....

...and the conservative nature of the anodyne.


And, I really like this: it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones.

 

[emptystep]

So you picked assorted sentences from article that had nothing to do with a comparison with America, then you picked assorted words in those sentences, and then you gave that a title of "Proof that Obama is a mistake"? So when you read material your brain is just running crazy that it somehow shows Obama is a lousy President? You should learn to read for enjoyment and enlightenment not the dark vision of secret messages about Obama.

The only paragraph that has any comparison to America is:

Most daringly, it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones. Private companies also vie with each other to provide state-funded health services and care for the elderly. Anders Aslund, a Swedish economist who lives in America, hopes that Sweden is pioneering “a new conservative model”; Brian Palmer, an American anthropologist who lives in Sweden, worries that it is turning into “the United States of Swedeamerica”.

Which is exactly the opposite of your assertion.

 

[poet]

Of course Sweden is a constitutional monarchy that is relatively sparsely populated when compared to the U.S. Something that works for Sweden does not necessarily work for the U.S., which has a much more diverse population.

Although you elevate Sweden as the model of modern economies, it is still very much a "socialist" model when compared to the U.S. In other words, the U.S. would have to become much more "socialist" if it were to approximate the Swedish model--let's begin, for example, with true national health care. It also avoids regional/global wars, and saves a HELL of a lot of money by not building an empirial military.

Sweden is one of the most equal nations in the world in terms of income. Did you know that? If the U.S. could emulate that, it would help our economy a lot. It also has one of the most highly developed welfare states in the world.

ALSO, about 80% of the Swedish workforce is unionized, and they also have the right to elect two representatives to the board in all Swedish companies with more than 25 employees--that's pretty socialist by modern standards. ALSO, Sweden has a relatively high amount of sick leave per worker--the average worker loses 24 days per year due to sickness.

SO, Sweden is a curious example for any right winger to hold up in terms of what "works" for economic success. I would have thought that you would avoid Sweden as a subject for discussion.

I can see why you'd rather focus on the social dimensions....

...but, not I.

Here it is again, conservative tactics are proving successful:

.Sweden has reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP from 67% in 1993 to 49% today…. It has also cut the top marginal tax rate by 27 percentage points since 1983, to 57%, and scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance. This year it is cutting the corporate-tax rate from 26.3% to 22%.



Further....it is of more than passing interest that the Left-leaning 'Economist' has chosen to highlight both the improvements in the economic outlook for Sweden....

...and the conservative nature of the anodyne.


And, I really like this: it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones.

If you like Sweden so much, why don't you move there? We're not Sweden. Plain and simple.

 

[Mad Scientist]

SO, Sweden is a curious example for any right winger to hold up in terms of what "works" for economic success. I would have thought that you would avoid Sweden as a subject for discussion.

Sweden doesn't have a Private Central Bank that loans Trillions to Foreign Banks and prints money to debase it's currency like we do either.
The Riksbank | Sveriges Riksbank

They do keep most of their Gold off shore, which is a mistake:
Sweden's central bank keeps most of its gold abroad without audit | Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee

 

[emptystep]

Of course Sweden is a constitutional monarchy that is relatively sparsely populated when compared to the U.S. Something that works for Sweden does not necessarily work for the U.S., which has a much more diverse population.

Although you elevate Sweden as the model of modern economies, it is still very much a "socialist" model when compared to the U.S. In other words, the U.S. would have to become much more "socialist" if it were to approximate the Swedish model--let's begin, for example, with true national health care. It also avoids regional/global wars, and saves a HELL of a lot of money by not building an empirial military.

Sweden is one of the most equal nations in the world in terms of income. Did you know that? If the U.S. could emulate that, it would help our economy a lot. It also has one of the most highly developed welfare states in the world.

ALSO, about 80% of the Swedish workforce is unionized, and they also have the right to elect two representatives to the board in all Swedish companies with more than 25 employees--that's pretty socialist by modern standards. ALSO, Sweden has a relatively high amount of sick leave per worker--the average worker loses 24 days per year due to sickness.

SO, Sweden is a curious example for any right winger to hold up in terms of what "works" for economic success. I would have thought that you would avoid Sweden as a subject for discussion.

I can see why you'd rather focus on the social dimensions....

...but, not I.

Here it is again, conservative tactics are proving successful:

.Sweden has reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP from 67% in 1993 to 49% today…. It has also cut the top marginal tax rate by 27 percentage points since 1983, to 57%, and scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance. This year it is cutting the corporate-tax rate from 26.3% to 22%.



Further....it is of more than passing interest that the Left-leaning 'Economist' has chosen to highlight both the improvements in the economic outlook for Sweden....

...and the conservative nature of the anodyne.


And, I really like this: it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones.

If you like Sweden so much, why don't you move there? We're not Sweden. Plain and simple.

You kidding? PC lives in her white glove Brooklyn world. She ain't goin' nowhere.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So you picked assorted sentences from article that had nothing to do with a comparison with America, then you picked assorted words in those sentences, and then you gave that a title of "Proof that Obama is a mistake"? So when you read material your brain is just running crazy that it somehow shows Obama is a lousy President? You should learn to read for enjoyment and enlightenment not the dark vision of secret messages about Obama.

The only paragraph that has any comparison to America is:

Most daringly, it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones. Private companies also vie with each other to provide state-funded health services and care for the elderly. Anders Aslund, a Swedish economist who lives in America, hopes that Sweden is pioneering “a new conservative model”; Brian Palmer, an American anthropologist who lives in Sweden, worries that it is turning into “the United States of Swedeamerica”.

Which is exactly the opposite of your assertion.

1. Why must you go out of your way to prove what a dunce you are.....really, it's evident at the start.



2. "...you picked assorted sentences..."
What an interesting turn of phrase. Perfectly appropriate...if one is illiterate.

You’re probably the right one to ask this….do illiterate folks get the full effect of alphabet soup?




3. The paragraphs that I selected were purposely penned by the Left-leaning "Economist" to demonstrate both the necessity for and the amelioration of the effects of socialism.

That's right. They actually wrote an article about the benefits of capitalism. Have someone read the link that I've provided, and explain it to you.


4. And they identify same as a trend in most of the Scandinavian countries.





5. "Which is exactly the opposite of your assertion."
What a fool your are. Not shocking based on your attempt to polish up the dunce in the White House....

From the OP:

a. reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP
b. cut the top marginal tax rate
c. scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance.
d. cutting the corporate-tax rate
e. pledge to produce a fiscal surplus
f. public debt fell from 70% of GDP in 1993 to 37% in 2010
g. budget moved from an 11% deficit to a surplus of 0.3%
h. a universal system of school vouchers
i. invited private schools to compete with public ones.
j. Private companies also vie with each other to provide state-funded health services and care for the elderly

You'd have to be a certified moron to believe that those items are "exactly the opposite of your assertion."
Oh...but you are a certified moron, aren't you.


And the Economist actually says:
"Sweden is pioneering “a new conservative model”



So...to how many of those items does the other moron, the one at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, subscribe?
None.


You are so dumb you can only hitchhike in one direction.
Beginning to get the idea?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Of course Sweden is a constitutional monarchy that is relatively sparsely populated when compared to the U.S. Something that works for Sweden does not necessarily work for the U.S., which has a much more diverse population.

Although you elevate Sweden as the model of modern economies, it is still very much a "socialist" model when compared to the U.S. In other words, the U.S. would have to become much more "socialist" if it were to approximate the Swedish model--let's begin, for example, with true national health care. It also avoids regional/global wars, and saves a HELL of a lot of money by not building an empirial military.

Sweden is one of the most equal nations in the world in terms of income. Did you know that? If the U.S. could emulate that, it would help our economy a lot. It also has one of the most highly developed welfare states in the world.

ALSO, about 80% of the Swedish workforce is unionized, and they also have the right to elect two representatives to the board in all Swedish companies with more than 25 employees--that's pretty socialist by modern standards. ALSO, Sweden has a relatively high amount of sick leave per worker--the average worker loses 24 days per year due to sickness.

SO, Sweden is a curious example for any right winger to hold up in terms of what "works" for economic success. I would have thought that you would avoid Sweden as a subject for discussion.

I can see why you'd rather focus on the social dimensions....

...but, not I.

Here it is again, conservative tactics are proving successful:

.Sweden has reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP from 67% in 1993 to 49% today…. It has also cut the top marginal tax rate by 27 percentage points since 1983, to 57%, and scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance. This year it is cutting the corporate-tax rate from 26.3% to 22%.



Further....it is of more than passing interest that the Left-leaning 'Economist' has chosen to highlight both the improvements in the economic outlook for Sweden....

...and the conservative nature of the anodyne.


And, I really like this: it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones.

If you like Sweden so much, why don't you move there? We're not Sweden. Plain and simple.

What a brilliant post....

Yes....it's plain that you're simple.

...I’m busy now…can I ignore you some other time?

 

[emptystep]

So you picked assorted sentences from article that had nothing to do with a comparison with America, then you picked assorted words in those sentences, and then you gave that a title of "Proof that Obama is a mistake"? So when you read material your brain is just running crazy that it somehow shows Obama is a lousy President? You should learn to read for enjoyment and enlightenment not the dark vision of secret messages about Obama.

The only paragraph that has any comparison to America is:

Most daringly, it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones. Private companies also vie with each other to provide state-funded health services and care for the elderly. Anders Aslund, a Swedish economist who lives in America, hopes that Sweden is pioneering “a new conservative model”; Brian Palmer, an American anthropologist who lives in Sweden, worries that it is turning into “the United States of Swedeamerica”.

Which is exactly the opposite of your assertion.

1. Why must you go out of your way to prove what a dunce you are.....really, it's evident at the start.



2. "...you picked assorted sentences..."
What an interesting turn of phrase. Perfectly appropriate...if one is illiterate.

You’re probably the right one to ask this….do illiterate folks get the full effect of alphabet soup?




3. The paragraphs that I selected were purposely penned by the Left-leaning "Economist" to demonstrate both the necessity for and the amelioration of the effects of socialism.

That's right. They actually wrote an article about the benefits of capitalism. Have someone read the link that I've provided, and explain it to you.


4. And they identify same as a trend in most of the Scandinavian countries.





5. "Which is exactly the opposite of your assertion."
What a fool your are. Not shocking based on your attempt to polish up the dunce in the White House....

From the OP:

a. reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP
b. cut the top marginal tax rate
c. scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance.
d. cutting the corporate-tax rate
e. pledge to produce a fiscal surplus
f. public debt fell from 70% of GDP in 1993 to 37% in 2010
g. budget moved from an 11% deficit to a surplus of 0.3%
h. a universal system of school vouchers
i. invited private schools to compete with public ones.
j. Private companies also vie with each other to provide state-funded health services and care for the elderly

You'd have to be a certified moron to believe that those items are "exactly the opposite of your assertion."
Oh...but you are a certified moron, aren't you.


And the Economist actually says:
"Sweden is pioneering “a new conservative model”



So...to how many of those items does the other moron, the one at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, subscribe?
None.


You are so dumb you can only hitchhike in one direction.
Beginning to get the idea?

What the Hell are you babbling on about woman? You can't just take an article that has nothing to do with your assertion, use only its logic, and say you have proved an unrelated point.

I have proved the relation between violence and video games using nothing but the principles of thermal dynamics.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So you picked assorted sentences from article that had nothing to do with a comparison with America, then you picked assorted words in those sentences, and then you gave that a title of "Proof that Obama is a mistake"? So when you read material your brain is just running crazy that it somehow shows Obama is a lousy President? You should learn to read for enjoyment and enlightenment not the dark vision of secret messages about Obama.

The only paragraph that has any comparison to America is:


Which is exactly the opposite of your assertion.

1. Why must you go out of your way to prove what a dunce you are.....really, it's evident at the start.



2. "...you picked assorted sentences..."
What an interesting turn of phrase. Perfectly appropriate...if one is illiterate.

You’re probably the right one to ask this….do illiterate folks get the full effect of alphabet soup?




3. The paragraphs that I selected were purposely penned by the Left-leaning "Economist" to demonstrate both the necessity for and the amelioration of the effects of socialism.

That's right. They actually wrote an article about the benefits of capitalism. Have someone read the link that I've provided, and explain it to you.


4. And they identify same as a trend in most of the Scandinavian countries.





5. "Which is exactly the opposite of your assertion."
What a fool your are. Not shocking based on your attempt to polish up the dunce in the White House....

From the OP:

a. reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP
b. cut the top marginal tax rate
c. scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance.
d. cutting the corporate-tax rate
e. pledge to produce a fiscal surplus
f. public debt fell from 70% of GDP in 1993 to 37% in 2010
g. budget moved from an 11% deficit to a surplus of 0.3%
h. a universal system of school vouchers
i. invited private schools to compete with public ones.
j. Private companies also vie with each other to provide state-funded health services and care for the elderly

You'd have to be a certified moron to believe that those items are "exactly the opposite of your assertion."
Oh...but you are a certified moron, aren't you.


And the Economist actually says:
"Sweden is pioneering “a new conservative model”



So...to how many of those items does the other moron, the one at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, subscribe?
None.


You are so dumb you can only hitchhike in one direction.
Beginning to get the idea?

What the Hell are you babbling on about woman? You can't just take an article that has nothing to do with your assertion, use only its logic, and say you have proved an unrelated point.

I have proved the relation between violence and video games using nothing but the principles of thermal dynamics.

You are truly a compendium of fatuity….


The Economist praises Sweden's move toward a conservative model.

Obama endorses none of the steps which have proven efficacious in Sweden.

QED...Obama is a mistake in any position of power.



Now for you: your total misunderstanding of the OP, in your ineptitude, you wave like some sort of majestic frond!

It's not that you're proud of your stupidity.....you're merely unaware of its depth and breadth.
But...any who read your posts are keenly aware of same.


Although tempting, try not to blame me for your inadequacies.

 

[Zona]

Neener neener, you lost. Ha ha. get over it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Progressive redistribution economics comes with a 100% Guaranteed Fail Rate.

Dems will lose big in the midterm and be totally destroyed next Presidential election, we will look back on our misadventure, failed experiment with Progressive economics and say "What the fuck were we thinking????!!!!"

 

[emptystep]

1. Why must you go out of your way to prove what a dunce you are.....really, it's evident at the start.



2. "...you picked assorted sentences..."
What an interesting turn of phrase. Perfectly appropriate...if one is illiterate.

You’re probably the right one to ask this….do illiterate folks get the full effect of alphabet soup?




3. The paragraphs that I selected were purposely penned by the Left-leaning "Economist" to demonstrate both the necessity for and the amelioration of the effects of socialism.

That's right. They actually wrote an article about the benefits of capitalism. Have someone read the link that I've provided, and explain it to you.


4. And they identify same as a trend in most of the Scandinavian countries.





5. "Which is exactly the opposite of your assertion."
What a fool your are. Not shocking based on your attempt to polish up the dunce in the White House....

From the OP:

a. reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP
b. cut the top marginal tax rate
c. scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance.
d. cutting the corporate-tax rate
e. pledge to produce a fiscal surplus
f. public debt fell from 70% of GDP in 1993 to 37% in 2010
g. budget moved from an 11% deficit to a surplus of 0.3%
h. a universal system of school vouchers
i. invited private schools to compete with public ones.
j. Private companies also vie with each other to provide state-funded health services and care for the elderly

You'd have to be a certified moron to believe that those items are "exactly the opposite of your assertion."
Oh...but you are a certified moron, aren't you.


And the Economist actually says:
"Sweden is pioneering “a new conservative model”



So...to how many of those items does the other moron, the one at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, subscribe?
None.


You are so dumb you can only hitchhike in one direction.
Beginning to get the idea?

What the Hell are you babbling on about woman? You can't just take an article that has nothing to do with your assertion, use only its logic, and say you have proved an unrelated point.

I have proved the relation between violence and video games using nothing but the principles of thermal dynamics.

You are truly a compendium of fatuity….


The Economist praises Sweden's move toward a conservative model.

Obama endorses none of the steps which have proven efficacious in Sweden.

QED...Obama is a mistake in any position of power.



Now for you: your total misunderstanding of the OP, in your ineptitude, you wave like some sort of majestic frond!

It's not that you're proud of your stupidity.....you're merely unaware of its depth and breadth.
But...any who read your posts are keenly aware of same.


Although tempting, try not to blame me for your inadequacies.

QED? Please reread my comment about thermal dynamics.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Neener neener, you lost. Ha ha. get over it.

No.....thanks to folks like you, we all lost.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What the Hell are you babbling on about woman? You can't just take an article that has nothing to do with your assertion, use only its logic, and say you have proved an unrelated point.

I have proved the relation between violence and video games using nothing but the principles of thermal dynamics.

You are truly a compendium of fatuity….


The Economist praises Sweden's move toward a conservative model.

Obama endorses none of the steps which have proven efficacious in Sweden.

QED...Obama is a mistake in any position of power.



Now for you: your total misunderstanding of the OP, in your ineptitude, you wave like some sort of majestic frond!

It's not that you're proud of your stupidity.....you're merely unaware of its depth and breadth.
But...any who read your posts are keenly aware of same.


Although tempting, try not to blame me for your inadequacies.

QED? Please reread my comment about thermal dynamics.

I read and understood your attempt at being clever the first time.
Friendly advice.....clever will never be associated with your name.


Work on 'educated' first.
Work hard.

 

[emptystep]

You are truly a compendium of fatuity….


The Economist praises Sweden's move toward a conservative model.

Obama endorses none of the steps which have proven efficacious in Sweden.

QED...Obama is a mistake in any position of power.



Now for you: your total misunderstanding of the OP, in your ineptitude, you wave like some sort of majestic frond!

It's not that you're proud of your stupidity.....you're merely unaware of its depth and breadth.
But...any who read your posts are keenly aware of same.


Although tempting, try not to blame me for your inadequacies.

QED? Please reread my comment about thermal dynamics.

I read and understood your attempt at being clever the first time.
Friendly advice.....clever will never be associated with your name.


Work on 'educated' first.
Work hard.

I really enjoy it when you and I get together like this. The other threads are so taxing. Working with you we keep it simple.

Your OP was seriously flawed. Since then you have done nothing but restate your original logic and bash me. Let's do lunch some time.

 

[Sallow]

Of course Sweden is a constitutional monarchy that is relatively sparsely populated when compared to the U.S. Something that works for Sweden does not necessarily work for the U.S., which has a much more diverse population.

Although you elevate Sweden as the model of modern economies, it is still very much a "socialist" model when compared to the U.S. In other words, the U.S. would have to become much more "socialist" if it were to approximate the Swedish model--let's begin, for example, with true national health care. It also avoids regional/global wars, and saves a HELL of a lot of money by not building an empirial military.

Sweden is one of the most equal nations in the world in terms of income. Did you know that? If the U.S. could emulate that, it would help our economy a lot. It also has one of the most highly developed welfare states in the world.

ALSO, about 80% of the Swedish workforce is unionized, and they also have the right to elect two representatives to the board in all Swedish companies with more than 25 employees--that's pretty socialist by modern standards. ALSO, Sweden has a relatively high amount of sick leave per worker--the average worker loses 24 days per year due to sickness.

SO, Sweden is a curious example for any right winger to hold up in terms of what "works" for economic success. I would have thought that you would avoid Sweden as a subject for discussion.

I can see why you'd rather focus on the social dimensions....

...but, not I.

Here it is again, conservative tactics are proving successful:

.Sweden has reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP from 67% in 1993 to 49% today…. It has also cut the top marginal tax rate by 27 percentage points since 1983, to 57%, and scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance. This year it is cutting the corporate-tax rate from 26.3% to 22%.



Further....it is of more than passing interest that the Left-leaning 'Economist' has chosen to highlight both the improvements in the economic outlook for Sweden....

...and the conservative nature of the anodyne.


And, I really like this: it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones.

This is the problem with you folks.

You cherry pick the things you like..and toss out the rest.

That's kinda like taking the cigarette lighter out of the car.

And then trying to drive the cigarette lighter.

 

[emptystep]

Of course Sweden is a constitutional monarchy that is relatively sparsely populated when compared to the U.S. Something that works for Sweden does not necessarily work for the U.S., which has a much more diverse population.

Although you elevate Sweden as the model of modern economies, it is still very much a "socialist" model when compared to the U.S. In other words, the U.S. would have to become much more "socialist" if it were to approximate the Swedish model--let's begin, for example, with true national health care. It also avoids regional/global wars, and saves a HELL of a lot of money by not building an empirial military.

Sweden is one of the most equal nations in the world in terms of income. Did you know that? If the U.S. could emulate that, it would help our economy a lot. It also has one of the most highly developed welfare states in the world.

ALSO, about 80% of the Swedish workforce is unionized, and they also have the right to elect two representatives to the board in all Swedish companies with more than 25 employees--that's pretty socialist by modern standards. ALSO, Sweden has a relatively high amount of sick leave per worker--the average worker loses 24 days per year due to sickness.

SO, Sweden is a curious example for any right winger to hold up in terms of what "works" for economic success. I would have thought that you would avoid Sweden as a subject for discussion.

I can see why you'd rather focus on the social dimensions....

...but, not I.

Here it is again, conservative tactics are proving successful:

.Sweden has reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP from 67% in 1993 to 49% today…. It has also cut the top marginal tax rate by 27 percentage points since 1983, to 57%, and scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance. This year it is cutting the corporate-tax rate from 26.3% to 22%.



Further....it is of more than passing interest that the Left-leaning 'Economist' has chosen to highlight both the improvements in the economic outlook for Sweden....

...and the conservative nature of the anodyne.


And, I really like this: it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones.

This is the problem with you folks.

You cherry pick the things you like..and toss out the rest.

That's kinda like taking the cigarette lighter out of the car.

And then trying to drive the cigarette lighter.

I once tried to light a joint on the exhaust manifold. Does that count?

 

[PoliticalChic]

QED? Please reread my comment about thermal dynamics.

I read and understood your attempt at being clever the first time.
Friendly advice.....clever will never be associated with your name.


Work on 'educated' first.
Work hard.

I really enjoy it when you and I get together like this. The other threads are so taxing. Working with you we keep it simple.

Your OP was seriously flawed. Since then you have done nothing but restate your original logic and bash me. Let's do lunch some time.

You misunderstand: I’m not insulting you, I’m describing you.

The only flaw is in your ability to comprehend.

I don’t dislike you personally…it’s just that I’m a member of the Partnership For An Idiot Free America, so you’re on my list.