Farmers' market colors

We haven't been "unfettered" for a couple of centuries.

Fetter with it and it suddenly morphs into corporatism and cronyism.

The Nordic model is intriguing

The Nordic model is intriguing, but has proven itself only for small countries. So, please explain how it would work, scaled-up, for the US.

(I know I've asked that before, so if you already replied to this in another post, I just haven't seen it yet...)

Notice I did not say socialism. I said “Nordic model”

You brought the s-word into this!

So what do you think? Do you believe them when they say they’re not socialist? Why or why not?

Let’s start easy then.

What is a “socialist policy”?

You used that phrase so I assume you can define it

When you raised this “scale up” question earlier, I said (condensed version):

1. We have all the expertise Denmark has and then some
2. If we can’t do Denmark’s policies for some mysterious reason, why not Canada

I don’t know why I bear the burden of proof on this one. We have a proven model in a country where it works. We can follow it and tweak as necessary

Thanks for the reply. I can't keep up with all the posts as much as I'd like.

I don't know that Denmark is the best example of how to implement the Nordic model, especially their healthcare system. I'd prefer Norway, if I had a vote, with of course all the caveats I've blathered about.

Not Canada, please. Another small country, population-wise.

There's no burden of proof, as far as I'm concerned. I really didn't expect any kind of a detailed reply. I actually expected no reply, or from others some insults. Although with you, I thought a reasonable reply was a distinct possibility.

What I suggest is NOT following it and tweaking as necessary, because I suspect it would go horribly off the rails pretty quickly. At that point, imo, tweaking would be like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Perhaps some sort of very, very, very gradual introduction... but of course you can imagine that the slippery slope argument would be rolled out if that were to happen.

Absolutely correct Elvis. The Nordic Model is definitely based on socialist principles. As they teetered on the brink of economic collapse they moved to a hybrid model and eased the burden on business somewhat in order to be more competitive in the EU, and that only relatively recently. They never went totally "control the means of production", but they did nationalize a lot of business. Norway for example nationalized the oil and gas industry (think of them when you see the price for Brent Crude), so oil and gas revenues have kept that government overspending afloat. As the North Sea has gotten more challenging to produce revenues started dropping and the union piled on with numerous strikes that threatened the national economic harmony.
Ireland slashed taxes, especially corporate taxes to the lowest levels in the world to become more competitive and their economy started screaming faster than they dreamed. Instead of ride the wave, they went right back to what they were doing before and killed their boom.
If our Congress were to take every other session and cut old programs like some states have, they wouldn't be peeling off $4 1/2 trillion from the free market economy every year and things would be a lot different. It's this little taint of socialism in our free trade capitalist system that creates the flaws.
The most simple test and explanation for why socialism has negative inertia can be summed up with the Pilgrims and the explanation by Gov. Bradford (hope I remember the name correctly) who said they nearly starved because the physically capable resented sharing all they grew with the "commune" so they didn't work that hard. When each person was responsible for their own piece of ground there was an immediate abundance that created trade. People who couldn't toil in the fields bartered for shoes, sewing and things they could specialize in. Prosperity flourished. Another more modern example (1834??) was in New Harmony, Indiana- started on pure socialist ideals and failed in the same ways as the Pilgrims. Human nature being what it is, capitalism is the best motivator to live up to human potential, socialism is so contrary to the best of human nature that it exaggerates the worst traits and always fails. Funny how socialist always howl about the greed of business owners but are blind to the greed of their socialist rulers.

Good question by the way and I may come off as harsh (just my default when talking politics) but I do think you offer great comments

Good grief, first VagabondSouffle take his foot off the accelerator, and now KF and I are treating each other civilly. The world has definitely taken a turn for the surreal. I can hack it though.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_Denmark

Or since you like primary sources so much: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/5jln041vm6tg-en.pdf?expires=1582687029&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=1F5F939193616F2F7574844EC6BEF20F

Average household income in the US is higher than the average income in Denmark, and our goods are cheaper as well. Then you add their income tax of ~40%.. and basically you're advocating for making less money, giving the government nearly half of that, then spending significantly more for basic goods. And you think this is better, why?