Huge Scandinavian governments

[Hedley]

Republican party is against "big government" where it can affect interests of big companies. However, they condone spying the business of civilians due irrational terrorism fears, they are against gay rights and proselytize religion.

In Scandinavian countries, governments are huge. They have sensitive information about each registered citizens and business. They are allowed to sell such information to corporations and business. Corporations are somehow (not totally) regulated by such governments. However, the capital growth of people is somehow limited and the inequities are very low. The government here is so large that crimes against it have higher penalties compared to crimes against people. For instance fraud against the state in Sweden has more time in prison compared to murder or rape. The liberty to religion, sexual lifestyles (being transsexuals, cross-dressing and gays) are issued here in Scandinavia.

My questions is how do Scandinavians feel about living beneath a huge government and how do you feel about Americans in their little one. And the same questions are for Americans!

 

[Prolescum]

No government that has authority over 300 million people can be accurately described as little.

 

[aeritano]

huge difference between Scandinavia and the US.. is that in Scandinavia.. the government fears the people.. like in most of Europe.
So, i think they have no issues with that.. considering that they force the big government to take care of them.

Contrast to US, where public demonstration against government is quashed and silenced. The people of the US fear the government....
and that is why big government works in Scandinavia..

the big government is in control by the unions and the people in Scandinavia... sharp contrast to the US

 

[Aught3]

I would question the assumption that the US has a small government. I think we need a few numbers in order to compare the different countries involved.

 

[Netheralian]

Because I am a little bored at the moment.

The Swedish government employed over 28% of the total labour force in 2005. The share of the total labour force employed by government is second highest among OECD countries and more than double the OECD average of 14%.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/35/40/43925756.pdf

The U.S. government employed 14% of the total labour force in 2005, just under the OECD average.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/6/1/44126697.pdf

Edit: Summary of OECD Nations Gov employment figures: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/36/3/43926778.pdf
See figure 3:

 

[televator]

I would question the assumption that the US has a small government. I think we need a few numbers in order to compare the different countries involved.

Its public programs are surely being diminished, but there's still the matter of a rather absurdly sizable defense sector. It accounts for 58% of discretionary spending. You wanna know how much things like science get? Science has to share with a couple of other programs, 6% of discretionary spending. Education, 4%. So that may be a good indication that despite the small or diminishing government intervention in other aspects, they are peanuts compare to defense. And I'd say that alone, might disqualify the US gov as a "small" government.

 

[Arcus]

huge difference between Scandinavia and the US.. is that in Scandinavia.. the government fears the people.. like in most of Europe.
So, i think they have no issues with that.. considering that they force the big government to take care of them.

Contrast to US, where public demonstration against government is quashed and silenced. The people of the US fear the government....
and that is why big government works in Scandinavia..

the big government is in control by the unions and the people in Scandinavia... sharp contrast to the US

As a Norwegian, this is very much an over simplification of reality. In fact, I have no fear of my government, I have trust in it. Even when my government fails - which it routinely does - I still trust that they did so with the best of intentions. Like in the US, there are a number of special interest groups placing pressure on my government , especially the oil and gas industry. However, I find such interrelationship of business and politics to be very helpful to the people as both businessmen and politicians are mostly honest people telling the truth.

As for forcing the Norwegian government to do anything - good luck. The Norwegian people are generally against the EEC when asked, but the politicians aren't going to put it up for a vote because the people failed to answer correctly about the EU in 1972 and 1994.

Finally, the trade union and politics link is misunderstood. There are major agency concerns, but due to the centralized trade union their demands will have an impact on the national economy, which temper union demands. The technical term is "the moderation line" employed by the Norwegian LO after it finally learned that Thatcher had a point. The US system of a high number of non-cooperating unions leads to the union leadership not considering the national economy in negotiations. The failure of the UAW to protect the American car industry from failure as evidence.

In conclusion, the Scandinavian governments are big because their people trust their governments, of which the LOs are ingrained into.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Any Republican who claims to want smaller government is lying to you. What they want is big government that only does the things they want, for the people who pay their bills. That's part of why Republicans are responsible for 90% of the current deficit.

 

[aeritano]

huge difference between Scandinavia and the US.. is that in Scandinavia.. the government fears the people.. like in most of Europe.
So, i think they have no issues with that.. considering that they force the big government to take care of them.

Contrast to US, where public demonstration against government is quashed and silenced. The people of the US fear the government....
and that is why big government works in Scandinavia..

the big government is in control by the unions and the people in Scandinavia... sharp contrast to the US

As a Norwegian, this is very much an over simplification of reality. In fact, I have no fear of my government, I have trust in it. Even when my government fails - which it routinely does - I still trust that they did so with the best of intentions. Like in the US, there are a number of special interest groups placing pressure on my government , especially the oil and gas industry. However, I find such interrelationship of business and politics to be very helpful to the people as both businessmen and politicians are mostly honest people telling the truth.

As for forcing the Norwegian government to do anything - good luck. The Norwegian people are generally against the EEC when asked, but the politicians aren't going to put it up for a vote because the people failed to answer correctly about the EU in 1972 and 1994.

Finally, the trade union and politics link is misunderstood. There are major agency concerns, but due to the centralized trade union their demands will have an impact on the national economy, which temper union demands. The technical term is "the moderation line" employed by the Norwegian LO after it finally learned that Thatcher had a point. The US system of a high number of non-cooperating unions leads to the union leadership not considering the national economy in negotiations. The failure of the UAW to protect the American car industry from failure as evidence.

In conclusion, the Scandinavian governments are big because their people trust their governments, of which the LOs are ingrained into.

i was oversimplifying
as i am not up on Scandinavian politics just yet

 

[Independent Vision]

Republican party is against "big government" where it can affect interests of big companies. However, they condone spying the business of civilians due irrational terrorism fears, they are against gay rights and proselytize religion.

In Scandinavian countries, governments are huge. They have sensitive information about each registered citizens and business. They are allowed to sell such information to corporations and business. Corporations are somehow (not totally) regulated by such governments. However, the capital growth of people is somehow limited and the inequities are very low. The government here is so large that crimes against it have higher penalties compared to crimes against people. For instance fraud against the state in Sweden has more time in prison compared to murder or rape. The liberty to religion, sexual lifestyles (being transsexuals, cross-dressing and gays) are issued here in Scandinavia.

My questions is how do Scandinavians feel about living beneath a huge government and how do you feel about Americans in their little one. And the same questions are for Americans!

You're a Swede?

Oh golly. I'll tell you what is wrong with the Swedish government. The voters is what is wrong with it. A bunch of idiots who can't understand the correlation between lowered taxes and drops in funding for school, health care and social services... or the drop in jobs in the public sector. Or the quality of the unemployment agencies and government insurance agencies.

I never feared the government. It's not a huge one. The government is made up by the people and made up by politicians people voted in. Unfortunately people are idiots. Yes, idiots. The idiocy reached Sweden and that's why we're dropping in the lists. People can't seem to realize that the extra money in their pockets isn't extra money. It's a redistribution of it. As you get more money in your pocket your unemployment fees goes up, and you have to pay the premiums on that unless you want a fine. The price of health care goes up, and you have to keep healthy if you want money, since the payments to you if you get sick is rising. Got cancer? You can still work, I know you can't wipe your own ass without assistance, but you can still type, can't you? Must be a job out there for you.
Unemployed because they took away your disability pension? Here, we'll put you in phase three jobs, which is basically a job where we pay you less than a social security check, and since the companies don't have to pay for your labor, they'll never hire you anyway. You'll be stuck there.

I fear people's stupidity. The people have the ultimate power, unless you live in a military controlled dictatorship, and even then the people have the ultimate power, as seen by recent events. People get lazy, and only see crown signs. Logic goes out the window and when things start going downhill the government blames the previous party in power or a recession that didn't even hit Sweden THAT hard.

The government is only as huge as it's population makes it. Hence why all you have to do is pay a membership fee to a party and you can start writing motions for your party to bring on to the riksdag and then, hopefully the regering. One person can make a difference in Sweden, it's just that people are too busy to spend their extra cash on greasy food and beer to understand that they are the ones with the power.

Yeah, I know it's a long rant for someone who doesn't even live in Sweden anymore... but that doesn't necessarily mean I am wrong. The government fears the people more than the people fear them, because sooner or later the people might stop counting their extra crowns and realize that the country is being run into the ground. *shrugs* Just my thoughts.

 

[Arcus]

Republican party is against "big government" where it can affect interests of big companies. However, they condone spying the business of civilians due irrational terrorism fears, they are against gay rights and proselytize religion.

In Scandinavian countries, governments are huge. They have sensitive information about each registered citizens and business. They are allowed to sell such information to corporations and business. Corporations are somehow (not totally) regulated by such governments. However, the capital growth of people is somehow limited and the inequities are very low. The government here is so large that crimes against it have higher penalties compared to crimes against people. For instance fraud against the state in Sweden has more time in prison compared to murder or rape. The liberty to religion, sexual lifestyles (being transsexuals, cross-dressing and gays) are issued here in Scandinavia.

My questions is how do Scandinavians feel about living beneath a huge government and how do you feel about Americans in their little one. And the same questions are for Americans!

I was initially going to answer this one.

Anyway, the politicians in Scandinavia usually belong to a bit of an elite club which have know each other since their late teens in many cases. (Current prime minister of Norway was leader in the youth organization.) They usually sit for a while too, and cross-party "fertilization" is common. They are mostly consensus driven governments and the political fighting is minimal.

The best depiction of the instrument of government itself would probably best be though of in the terms of "Yes, Minister!". The civil service is immensely strong and largely uncorrupted, which therefore lead people to hand more authority over more issues to them. (I had an econ teacher who once said "In Scandinavia the husband works for the private sector and the wife in the public." It would certainly explain why there is a big government if not paying taxed would mean short changing your own wife!)

Most of the information the government collects is for my own benefit and it is not abused. My income and taxes are public, I don't really see the major issue with that (apart from a few more breakins in rich people's homes.) My social is printed on my credit card in case I need to show ID to the police. Perhaps a few more stolen identities, but there's government help if that happens. I have migraines and need to register my prescriptions with them to get subsidized medicine. Twice they have sent me a letter asking me to schedule a new appointment with the doctor because there was "new important information" regarding my ailment. I've even asked he unarmed police if they could driven me home when I was a bit too drunk to walk and gotten a ride. I also like the public broadcasting which registers if you have a TV so they can "fine" you twice a year for it. Damned good news and entertainment is worth a few days salary per year.

Treatment of criminals is probably best viewed in relation to the low incidence of serious crime. Even if there is no correlation between treating prisoners humanely and lower crime rate, why wouldn't one want to treat criminals that way in the first place? Long penalties are usually afforded to those who break the rules of the state with intention. Crimes against one person is one thing, crimes against the system indirectly affects everyone. The cost to society for a fraudster is substantially higher than for a stabber.

As for our government working against us: The reoccurring theme in landslide left victories is poverty. In landslide Left victory in Norway in 2005, one it was to "eradicate homelessness". Of about 5m people there were something in the neighborhood of 500 people literally on the streets and 5500 categorized as the ambiguous "homeless" (defined as without fixed address). This was defined as a failure of the state which "shook it to it's foundations" was the current PMs line. These numbers have steadily increased and no one's heard anything about it since. Even when they obviously lie, its wasn't about a bad cause.

 

[BrainBlow]

My questions is how do Scandinavians feel about living beneath a huge government and how do you feel about Americans in their little one. And the same questions are for Americans!

Our government is a bureaucratic shitpile filled with LYING politicians who are slowly but surely trying to lock their fingers around us, especially now after the "data saving directive" was passed in the storting. THAT SHOULD'VE BEEN PUT UP FOR THE PEOPLE TO VOTE FOR!

So the Republicans aren't as paranoid as you may think.

 

[Arcus]

THAT SHOULD'VE BEEN PUT UP FOR THE PEOPLE TO VOTE FOR!

Why on Earth would Jens do something as stupid as that? The Norwegian people can't be trusted in the EU issue, there is too much nationalism. How does the directive have any influence on you personally anyway? The number of innocent victims of surveillance is pretty much zero, and I doubt the government take any special interest in your illegal activities.

 

[BrainBlow]

Why on Earth would Jens do something as stupid as that? The Norwegian people can't be trusted in the EU issue, there is too much nationalism. How does the directive have any influence on you personally anyway? The number of innocent victims of surveillance is pretty much zero, and I doubt the government take any special interest in your illegal activities.

Sorry for the name calling, but are you retarded?
The majority of the people does NOT WANT THESE FUCKING THINGS and the anti-EU population is RECORD HIGH, and you say that is a reason for him to, a public elect, to go AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE PEOPLE?? What inane freaking logic is that!? That is like if Obama suddenly had Iran invaded, and when confronted about it he'd just say "I don't need no approval for this. People won't support this, but I want it, so I do it".

And the directive is IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION!
Not only that, but criminals who want to avoid it? They'll avoid it, rendering ONLY the innocent population under government surveillance, and the directive is EXPENSIVE!
So they are throwing away a hug wad of money for NOTHING but tracking the civilian population against their wish!
This is also a matter of principle! They are chipping away at our freedoms and can, with this, slowly become more and more authoritarian!
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin

Most middle-eastern dictators would LOVE having this since it would allow them to track down ANY dissident who have been uttering their opinions online!
Those who will sacrifice a l

In short: It violates the constitution, is useless and expensive, and it is NOT democratic!

 

[Arcus]

Why on Earth would Jens do something as stupid as that? The Norwegian people can't be trusted in the EU issue, there is too much nationalism. How does the directive have any influence on you personally anyway? The number of innocent victims of surveillance is pretty much zero, and I doubt the government take any special interest in your illegal activities.

Sorry for the name calling, but are you retarded?
The majority of the people does NOT WANT THESE FUCKING THINGS and the anti-EU population is RECORD HIGH, and you say that is a reason for him to, a public elect, to go AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE PEOPLE?? What inane freaking logic is that!? That is like if Obama suddenly had Iran invaded, and when confronted about it he'd just say "I don't need no approval for this. People won't support this, but I want it, so I do it".

And the directive is IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION!
Not only that, but criminals who want to avoid it? They'll avoid it, rendering ONLY the innocent population under government surveillance, and the directive is EXPENSIVE!
So they are throwing away a hug wad of money for NOTHING but tracking the civilian population against their wish!
This is also a matter of principle! They are chipping away at our freedoms and can, with this, slowly become more and more authoritarian!
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin

Most middle-eastern dictators would LOVE having this since it would allow them to track down ANY dissident who have been uttering their opinions online!
Those who will sacrifice a l

In short: It violates the constitution, is useless and expensive, and it is NOT democratic!

And the price of justice is individual freedom. You should probably read Ben Franklin and not about Ben Franklin. And read the law you are objecting to as a legal reviewer and not the punditry thrown against it. I'd rather there be no need for such a law, but we do still live in a world there is online crime and criminals to deal with. In fact, without the law, a simple google search of your name could be considered an invasion of privacy. The law is like traffic cams - best would be if people learned how to drive, and it's really annoying to get a ticket, but the rules are there for a reason which is in fact to protect justice.

 

[BrainBlow]

And they are promptly useless.
There are crimes happening in people's homes too. Should the government set up surveillance cameras in people's homes too? oh, no worries, no one is going to check the tapes unless you are suspected of doing something bad of course. Does that sound good? No. It is insanely stupid.

Bad things happen? Sure. Does the directive help? No. They have another version of it in Germany. Didn't help. Actually, the rate of cases being solved went DOWN afterwards.
It doesn't work, it costs money, is unconstitutional, We don't want it, it is unreliable and can be manipulated, it is a violation of people's privacy!

Oh, and it isn't paranoid thought at all that the government will abuse it. As already demonstrated, they don't care for what the people think and will do things their way!

 

[Arcus]

And they are promptly useless.
There are crimes happening in people's homes too. Should the government set up surveillance cameras in people's homes too? oh, no worries, no one is going to check the tapes unless you are suspected of doing something bad of course. Does that sound good? No. It is insanely stupid.

Bad things happen? Sure. Does the directive help? No. They have another version of it in Germany. Didn't help. Actually, the rate of cases being solved went DOWN afterwards.
It doesn't work, it costs money, is unconstitutional, We don't want it, it is unreliable and can be manipulated, it is a violation of people's privacy!

Oh, and it isn't paranoid thought at all that the government will abuse it. As already demonstrated, they don't care for what the people think and will do things their way!

Strawmen, emotions, and veiled ad homs aside, what do you actually know about the impact of the law you are so strongly opposed to apart from it's time line as seen by you having read the tabloid headlines and not the whole story?

 

[BrainBlow]

Strawmen,

Never put up a strawman of your position.

emotions,

Of course emotions come in when you basically think it is a-ok for a public elect to intentionally go against the wish of the public. And then you basically say "oh well there are too many nationalists".

and veiled ad homs

Just personal attacks doesn't qualify as ad-homs.

what do you actually know about the impact of the law

It isn't a law. And the impact? It is in violation of the constitution, that is pretty significant. And it is our state, against our wishes, bending FURTHER over to the wishes of the EU. Our government is accepting more EU laws and directives than even other EU countries! Yet barely 30% of the population is actually EU-yes.

The only "story" here is that the government is going against the wishes of the people to start using something completely useless and wastes our money and resources. And said useless thing will be a great tool for a authoritarian state.

 

[Arcus]

Strawmen,

Never put up a strawman of your position.

emotions,

Of course emotions come in when you basically think it is a-ok for a public elect to intentionally go against the wish of the public. And then you basically say "oh well there are too many nationalists".

and veiled ad homs

Just personal attacks doesn't qualify as ad-homs.

what do you actually know about the impact of the law

It isn't a law. And the impact? It is in violation of the constitution, that is pretty significant. And it is our state, against our wishes, bending FURTHER over to the wishes of the EU. Our government is accepting more EU laws and directives than even other EU countries! Yet barely 30% of the population is actually EU-yes.

The only "story" here is that the government is going against the wishes of the people to start using something completely useless and wastes our money and resources. And said useless thing will be a great tool for a authoritarian state.

"Should the government set up surveillance cameras in people's homes too? oh, no worries"-->strawman
Use of bold is use of emotion, you used lots of it. I can read, no need to emphasize your thoughts.
"No. It is insanely stupid."-->And apparently I must be insanely stupid for not rejecting it. It needs to be explained in a sentence because the ad hom was veiled.

I would advise an couple introductory college classes in political sciences and the EU before having such strong opinions. I still recall the outrage over cig pack warnings and max curvature of cucumbers. However, both these "silly" and "against personal freedom" measures have helped save billions of euros in Norway alone after implementation.

 

[kenandkids]

...max curvature of cucumbers.

WTF??

Vegetable appearance is regulated? Are some tomatoes too round?

"Fear the government that fears your pickle!"