Proof That Obama Is A Mistake

[emptystep]

Bacon.

 

[rightwinger]

The rightwing embracing the Swedish model.....who'da thunk it

 

[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.

Ok lets raise the top tax rate to 57% since you say it works

So...you're down with these?

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


Great!

Good to see you grow!

 

[Joe Steel]

...

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%.

This is called "the American disease." It's characterized by adoption of the policy blunders of American conservatism. While it can be cured by a determined effort on the part of the citizenry, that often is not possible because of the power of the sophistry which forms the basis of conservatism. Conservatism thrives on the low-effort or no-effort thought which serves as political analysis for a large portion of many populations. Because of this, conservatism becomes a kind "mind candy;" it tastes good but has no nutritional value. This results in diseased societies which can be treated only be time. Eventually, they realize the folly of conservatism and seek healthy alternatives.

 

[Foxfyre]

It is true that America is not Sweden and any attempt to compare the two is about as useful as comparing apples and oranges. But even a comparison of apples and oranges will find some things each have in common.

The point PC is making is not a comparison of Sweden and America, but a look at measures Sweden has successfully implemented to improve things with an invitation to consider whether any or all of these would be wise policy for the USA.

So an intelligent approach would not be to conclude that we should look more like Sweden. The intelligent approach is to see what policy that has improved Sweden might improve us.

 

[L.K.Eder]

snip

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???

Worse vs Worst

 

[rightwinger]

I'm sure that if Republicans offered it up Obama would be willing to move more towards the Swedish model

How bout it Republicans?

 

[Foxfyre]

I didn't see anybody but leftwingers proposing that we move toward the Swedish model though.

I do see a list of things that Sweden has done to improve their economic situation. How about we focus on those to see if a similar policy might work here? And actually the Republicans have proposed some of those and so far Obama has not been interested.

 

[NoNukes]

YOU WANT AMERICA TO BE LIKE A SOCIALIST EUROPEAN COUNTRY? What is wrong with you? Are you a Libtard or something.

 

[Foxfyre]

Nope. I don't want America to be like a socialist European country. I don't like it one bit that it is fast becoming that.

Nor do I want America to be like the Nazis or the Communists or anybody other than what the Founders envisioned.

But even a clock that is stopped gets it right twice a day. Not wanting to be like something or somebody else is not the same thing as saying that something or somebody never gets anything right or has nothing at all to teach us.

The wise people of the world take what lessons are to be had from history and the experience of others, embrace what works, discard what doesn't.

That I in no way want to be like Sweden nor do I particularly admire Sweden or think Sweden gets most things right is NOT saying that Sweden doesn't have a thing or two they could teach us.

 

[NoNukes]

I didn't see anybody but leftwingers proposing that we move toward the Swedish model though.

I do see a list of things that Sweden has done to improve their economic situation. How about we focus on those to see if a similar policy might work here? And actually the Republicans have proposed some of those and so far Obama has not been interested.

Political Chic is turning Liberal on us. Daveman will be on suicide watch, Crusader Frank will be confused.

 

[PoliticalChic]

...

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%.

This is called "the American disease." It's characterized by adoption of the policy blunders of American conservatism. While it can be cured by a determined effort on the part of the citizenry, that often is not possible because of the power of the sophistry which forms the basis of conservatism. Conservatism thrives on the low-effort or no-effort thought which serves as political analysis for a large portion of many populations. Because of this, conservatism becomes a kind "mind candy;" it tastes good but has no nutritional value. This results in diseased societies which can be treated only be time. Eventually, they realize the folly of conservatism and seek healthy alternatives.

1. Care to explain you resistance to these conservative policies endorsed by Sweden?

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

a. Where is the 'sophistry' in the above....or don't you know what the word means?



2. Now, here is the give-away testifying to the fact that you are.....what's the word?...oh, yes: a fool.

"Conservatism thrives on the low-effort or no-effort thought which serves as political analysis for a large portion of many populations."

What???
You voted for the candidate and party that promises to tuck you in each night...protect you from the vicissitudes of life, from cradle to grave.....
...yet you charge the opposition with " low-effort or no-effort!"


What a dim-wit.

 

[PoliticalChic]

YOU WANT AMERICA TO BE LIKE A SOCIALIST EUROPEAN COUNTRY? What is wrong with you? Are you a Libtard or something.

Can you explain why the following would be inadvisable?

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


…work hard to free up the congealed gears of your mind…

Or admit that the you support the dolt in the White House because you recognize a similar lack of capacity in yourself.

 

[Joe Steel]

This is called "the American disease." It's characterized by adoption of the policy blunders of American conservatism. While it can be cured by a determined effort on the part of the citizenry, that often is not possible because of the power of the sophistry which forms the basis of conservatism. Conservatism thrives on the low-effort or no-effort thought which serves as political analysis for a large portion of many populations. Because of this, conservatism becomes a kind "mind candy;" it tastes good but has no nutritional value. This results in diseased societies which can be treated only be time. Eventually, they realize the folly of conservatism and seek healthy alternatives.

2. Now, here is the give-away testifying to the fact that you are.....what's the word?...oh, yes: a fool.

"Conservatism thrives on the low-effort or no-effort thought which serves as political analysis for a large portion of many populations."

What???
You voted for the candidate and party that promises to tuck you in each night...protect you from the vicissitudes of life, from cradle to grave.....
...yet you charge the opposition with " low-effort or no-effort!"


What a dim-wit.

Not me. I voted for Barack Obama.

Now, I have to admit I wouldn't have done it in a perfect world. In a perfect world, we'd have a socialist running against a socialist. The choice between the two, however, would reflect subtleties unfathomable to the common conservative so saying they would amount to rational public policy would be lost on someone who would see them as cradle to grave protection from vicissitudes.

 

[Joe Steel]

This is called "the American disease." It's characterized by adoption of the policy blunders of American conservatism. While it can be cured by a determined effort on the part of the citizenry, that often is not possible because of the power of the sophistry which forms the basis of conservatism. Conservatism thrives on the low-effort or no-effort thought which serves as political analysis for a large portion of many populations. Because of this, conservatism becomes a kind "mind candy;" it tastes good but has no nutritional value. This results in diseased societies which can be treated only be time. Eventually, they realize the folly of conservatism and seek healthy alternatives.

1. Care to explain you resistance to these conservative policies endorsed by Sweden?

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

a. Where is the 'sophistry' in the above....or don't you know what the word means?

Obviously.

I picked your posting from all those available.

 

[Joe Steel]

This is called "the American disease." It's characterized by adoption of the policy blunders of American conservatism. While it can be cured by a determined effort on the part of the citizenry, that often is not possible because of the power of the sophistry which forms the basis of conservatism. Conservatism thrives on the low-effort or no-effort thought which serves as political analysis for a large portion of many populations. Because of this, conservatism becomes a kind "mind candy;" it tastes good but has no nutritional value. This results in diseased societies which can be treated only be time. Eventually, they realize the folly of conservatism and seek healthy alternatives.

1. Care to explain you resistance to these conservative policies endorsed by Sweden?

I'm not a student of the Swedish political economy so I can't say the phenomena you reported were the result of rational policy choices or mere happenstance. Here are a few thoughts, though.

Reducing the deficit as a percentage of GDP, or as a percentage of anything else for that matter, may or may not be good thing. It all depends on the state of the economy. If the economy is booming, tax revenue is pouring into the Treasury so redeeming the debt is no big deal. If the economy is struggling, as is in the US, focusing on reducing the debt is a bad thing because the government has to spend to prevent economic devastation and it doesn't have the tax revenue to do it.

Reductions in marginal tax rates are not necessarily a good thing. It depends on degree of income inequality in the economy. If an inordinately high portion of income is going to the highest earning taxpayers, they should be paying high marginal tax rates to ensure the government can maintain spending to support the economy. If the income inequality is not great, maybe a cut in marginal tax rates is in order. That, however, is not the case in the US. We should be raising marginal tax rates.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is called "the American disease." It's characterized by adoption of the policy blunders of American conservatism. While it can be cured by a determined effort on the part of the citizenry, that often is not possible because of the power of the sophistry which forms the basis of conservatism. Conservatism thrives on the low-effort or no-effort thought which serves as political analysis for a large portion of many populations. Because of this, conservatism becomes a kind "mind candy;" it tastes good but has no nutritional value. This results in diseased societies which can be treated only be time. Eventually, they realize the folly of conservatism and seek healthy alternatives.

2. Now, here is the give-away testifying to the fact that you are.....what's the word?...oh, yes: a fool.

"Conservatism thrives on the low-effort or no-effort thought which serves as political analysis for a large portion of many populations."

What???
You voted for the candidate and party that promises to tuck you in each night...protect you from the vicissitudes of life, from cradle to grave.....
...yet you charge the opposition with " low-effort or no-effort!"


What a dim-wit.

Not me. I voted for Barack Obama.

Now, I have to admit I wouldn't have done it in a perfect world. In a perfect world, we'd have a socialist running against a socialist. The choice between the two, however, would reflect subtleties unfathomable to the common conservative so saying they would amount to rational public policy would be lost on someone who would see them as cradle to grave protection from vicissitudes.

"In a perfect world, we'd have a socialist running against a socialist."

Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?


Let's prove the import of my statement above:

1. “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.” From the OP.


2. Almost two thirds of the federal budget goes to entitlements. That'w why we have deficits as far as the eye can see.
Entitlement Spending = 62% of Federal Budget | EntitlementNews.com

And idiots like you is why we have Obama.


3. "The other major reason for the turn against the Left is economic. Western Europeans have long paid sky-high taxes for a social safety net that seems increasingly not worth the price. These taxes have slowed economic growth. Timbro’s Johnny Munkhammar noted in 2005 that Sweden, for instance, which in the first half of the twentieth century had the world’s second-highest growth rate, had since fallen to number 14, owing to enormous tax hikes. Government revenues in Western Europe go largely to support the unemployed, thus discouraging work.

Over the last decade or so, the overall unemployment rate in the EU 15—that is, Western Europe—has hovered at about 2.5 to 3 points higher than in the United States. In France and Germany, it has ascended into the double digits (and that was before the global financial crisis that began in 2008). Western Europe’s rate of long-term unemployment has consistently been several times higher than America’s,…"
Heirs to Fortuyn? by Bruce Bawer, City Journal Spring 2009


How stupid does one have to be not to see the hand-writing on the wall???
Raise your paw.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It's characterized by adoption of the policy blunders of American conservatism.

please tell us the biggest blunder and why it is a blunder or admit as a liberal you lack the IQ to do so.

 

[Joe Steel]

Not me. I voted for Barack Obama.

Now, I have to admit I wouldn't have done it in a perfect world. In a perfect world, we'd have a socialist running against a socialist. The choice between the two, however, would reflect subtleties unfathomable to the common conservative so saying they would amount to rational public policy would be lost on someone who would see them as cradle to grave protection from vicissitudes.

Let's prove the import of my statement above:

1. “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.” From the OP.

2. Almost two thirds of the federal budget goes to entitlements. That'w why we have deficits as far as the eye can see.

What does this prove? That you can copy and paste someone's errors?

Tell me why entitlements are the reason. Make an argument.

How stupid does one have to be not to see the hand-writing on the wall???

Ask a conservative. They believe cutting spending in a recession is the way to economic recovery. And, get this, they believe Social Security actually contributed to the deficit.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Ask a conservative. They believe cutting spending in a recession is the way to economic recovery.

dear if you cut government spending you increase private spending and that make the economy grow.

We grew from stone age to here as the private sector invented new stuff. Since government does not invent new stuff when it taxes and spends it shrinks the economy.


Still over your head????