Do Countries Like Denmark Show That Socialism Works ?

[brinny]

If you want to see high rape rates, just go to any American University. The only reason people don't know about the astronomically high incidents of rape on campus and "date rape" is because many women are discouraged from making reports and also shamed for "putting themselves in that situation." "You know how men are." "You will destroy this boy's entire future for a misunderstanding, he'll never be able to get a job." Even with physical evidence from a doctor it's "your word against his." If they have higher rates, it's likely that it gets reported and prosecuted more often,not that it happens more often but of course I could be wrong.

The Nordic countries do have a free market economy but they have a few differences that we could learn from. One a national healthcare system. Two, crude oil and energy in wither owned outright or mostly owned by the government so there isno price gouging for energy and everything is up to the highest standards of green emissions and waste management. Next, they have high standards in education and pay their teachers a professional wage, not as little as they can get away with. They have free or reduced priced college so more people graduate and the economy operates with higher level higher paying jobs in engineering,medical, and science fields. There are a few other things but this is starting to get long and I want people to read it. They have free markets but they take care of their citizens as well. They also aren't burdened with the institutional racism and second class citizen system we have here. They do have it in the way of foreign and citizen though. Much more difficult to become a citizen.

Your opinion is noted.

Thank you for sharing it.

 

[Ygrene Imref]

Myth — Countries Like Denmark Show That Socialism Works
The success of Nordic countries is based on the fact that historically they have relied on free-markets and protection of private property. The only exception is a short period in Sweden (see myth #2) wherein socialist policies crippled growth and job creation. Nordic nations do have high taxes and generous welfare, but in many other regards they have unusually free markets.

You don’t have to take this from me, just listen to Danish prime minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen. After seeing his country held up as an example in the American presidential debate, he felt obliged to tell student in a 2015 speech at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, “I know that some people in the U.S. associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.”

A quick glance at the latest country ranking in the Index of Economic Freedom confirms that Rasmussen is right, and that the American left are wrong in viewing Denmark as their prime example of socialism. Denmark has only a marginally lower economic freedom score than the US — in last year’s ranking, Denmark was marginally ahead of the US. That’s because Denmark, like the other Nordic countries, compensates for a large public sectors by having market-oriented policies in other fields.

When it comes to areas such as business regulations, trade policy, investment freedom, vouchers in the provision of education, elderly care and health care, and partial privatization of retirement savings, Nordic countries are among the most free-market in the world. In fact, in these areas, the US has a lot to learn from Denmark and the other Nordic countries.

(By Nima Sanandaji - 5 Myths About Nordic Socialism Peddled By the Left)

Socialism is the ideal government, but you have to have a perfect leadership. With humans, it will never work even if it seems to work. Under the benign surface it is a cluster of mess.

Capitalism is the perfect economy if your leadership is categorically corrupt. Socialism cares only about community needs (and, tends to ignore needs on individual basis.) Capitalism is only concerned with gaining more capital.

 

[brinny]

Socialism is the ideal government, but you have to have a perfect leadership. With humans, it will never work even if it seems to work. Under the benign surface it is a cluster of mess.

Capitalism is the perfect economy if your leadership is categorically corrupt. Socialism cares only about community needs (and, tends to ignore needs on individual basis.) Capitalism is only concerned with gaining more capital.

Who does socialism benefit?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The Nordic countries do have a free market economy but they have a few differences that we could learn from. One a national healthcare system. Two, crude oil and energy in wither owned outright or mostly owned by the government so there isno price gouging for energy and everything is up to the highest standards of green emissions and waste management. Next, they have high standards in education and pay their teachers a professional wage, not as little as they can get away with. They have free or reduced priced college so more people graduate and the economy operates with higher level higher paying jobs in engineering,medical, and science fields. There are a few other things but this is starting to get long and I want people to read it. They have free markets but they take care of their citizens as well. They also aren't burdened with the institutional racism and second class citizen system we have here. They do have it in the way of foreign and citizen though. Much more difficult to become a citizen.

Many largely homogenous cultures have these advantages and benefits, especially ones with large trade surpluses.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Socialism is the ideal government, but you have to have a perfect leadership. With humans, it will never work even if it seems to work. Under the benign surface it is a cluster of mess.

Capitalism is the perfect economy if your leadership is categorically corrupt. Socialism cares only about community needs (and, tends to ignore needs on individual basis.) Capitalism is only concerned with gaining more capital.

In a country rich in human and natural resources someone is going to get rich. Most Americans aren't interested in getting rich......so most aren't.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Who does socialism benefit?

Those who hold the levers of power. This is true of any economic system.

 

[Ygrene Imref]

Who does socialism benefit?

The community.

The community is in control of the flow and trade of goods.

It also benefits society at large, considering capitalism has no loyalty or purpose to "consumers," as it were - as long as they continue to consume. Socialism is the paradigm shift that leads to the perfection of communism (for Marx, at least.)

However, you need a perfect leader for socialism or communism to work. Anyone less than perfect will degenerate the economy and government into capitalism.

You want the most corrupt person possible to be the leader of a capitalist society. This is because you need to be corrupt to focus only on making deals or money - without regard for the future in how it relates to others. Capitalist societies cannot function with scrupulous leaders because you have to unscrupulous and complicit to keep such a government afloat. As soon as someone with a conscious tries to change "laws and times," s/he is removed (unless it is part of a controlled opposition, then they stay to run a Kansas City Shuffle.)

Many nations skip both extremes, and just adhere to some form of monarchy or dictatorship.

 

[brinny]

They don't get reported because of academic pressure, social pressure, and because campuses like to solve thi


The community.

The community is in control of the flow and trade of goods.

It also benefits society at large, considering capitalism has no loyalty or purpose to "consumers," as it were - as long as they continue to consume. Socialism is the paradigm shift that leads to the perfection of communism (for Marx, at least.)

However, you need a perfect leader for socialism or communism to work. Anyone less than perfect will degenerate the economy and government into capitalism.

You want the most corrupt person possible to be the leader of a capitalist society. This is because you need to be corrupt to focus only on making deals or money - without regard for the future in how it relates to others. Capitalist societies cannot function with scrupulous leaders because you have to unscrupulous and complicit to keep such a government afloat. As soon as someone with a conscious tries to change "laws and times," s/he is removed (unless it is part of a controlled opposition, then they stay to run a Kansas City Shuffle.)

Many nations skip both extremes, and just adhere to some form of monarchy or dictatorship. Commun

Which socialist countries have benefited?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

They don't get reported because of academic pressure, social pressure, and because campuses like to solve thi


The community.

The community is in control of the flow and trade of goods.

It also benefits society at large, considering capitalism has no loyalty or purpose to "consumers," as it were - as long as they continue to consume. Socialism is the paradigm shift that leads to the perfection of communism (for Marx, at least.)

However, you need a perfect leader for socialism or communism to work. Anyone less than perfect will degenerate the economy and government into capitalism.

You want the most corrupt person possible to be the leader of a capitalist society. This is because you need to be corrupt to focus only on making deals or money - without regard for the future in how it relates to others. Capitalist societies cannot function with scrupulous leaders because you have to unscrupulous and complicit to keep such a government afloat. As soon as someone with a conscious tries to change "laws and times," s/he is removed (unless it is part of a controlled opposition, then they stay to run a Kansas City Shuffle.)

Many nations skip both extremes, and just adhere to some form of monarchy or dictatorship. Commun

Most in 'leadership' positions aren't real leaders, but opportunists.

 

[brinny]

Most in 'leadership' positions aren't real leaders, but opportunists.

That's a real bad problem combined with "power", isn't it?

 

[Ygrene Imref]

Which socialist countries have benefited?

None.

However, you need a perfect leader for socialism or communism to work. Anyone less than perfect will degenerate the economy and government into capitalism.​

The point is that socialism is the absolute perfect transition into the most perfect (as it were) government system: communism.

However, in order for an idealized system to work (especially a true 'for the people, by the people' democracy,) there must be a perfect leader.

The only government that works famously is Capitalism because it feeds the id and deludes the ego into grandiosity whilst keeping the superego "unconscious."

 

[Ygrene Imref]

Those who hold the levers of power. This is true of any economic system.

That is why you have to be Perfect in order to run the most perfect, idealized government system.

The leader would have to be genuinely humble, gracious, patient, just, loving, caring, etc. in order to make sure the State was running justly and optimally, as well as stay so humble as to not "scrape some off the top," as it were.

 

[brinny]

None.

However, you need a perfect leader for socialism or communism to work. Anyone less than perfect will degenerate the economy and government into capitalism.​

The point is that socialism is the absolute perfect transition into the most perfect (as it were) government system: communism.

However, in order for an idealized system to work (especially a true 'for the people, by the people' democracy,) there must be a perfect leader.

The only government that works famously is Capitalism because it feeds the id and deludes the ego into grandiosity whilst keeping the superego "unconscious."

Isn't that Cuba's status, that it is transitioning from socialism into communism?

 

[Ygrene Imref]

In a country rich in human and natural resources someone is going to get rich. Most Americans aren't interested in getting rich......so most aren't.

I would respectfully, but vehemently disagree - unless I misunderstand you.

The goal of Columbian and Western capitalistic success is being rich (read: being well off enough to not have to work.) That is because no one wants to be a slave - which is what anyone who has to work to gain resources is; no one wants to work for a living unless they like what they do (which, then is not psychological/literal slavery.) Capitalism gets people to agree to willingly become slaves to mammon again - as capitalism is about gaining more capital. In exchange, you are afforded services and securities in case anything should happen to prevent you from contributing your work to create capital.

This grotesque, draconian logic is a distortion guidelines God gave the Hebrews on how to treat slaves. No American or Western "consumer," for example, is released from debt after 7 years, or 50 years.

Therefore, people work to try to get out of debt, and have just enough resources to survive without being a slave (ebed). The sorcery is that after consumers were convinced to have currency overseen by a private entity, the right to determine the worth of currency fell out of the hands of the people and went into the hands of a few.

 

[brinny]

Isn't Venezuela a socialist country?

 

[Ygrene Imref]

Isn't that Cuba's status, that it is transitioning from socialism into communism?

Well, no country on this planet - whether or not it is happening - can maintain socialism or communism because there is only one human alive that is actually perfect.

You notice in history socialism or communism regimes have the backing of the people, but usually always fall from scandal - and eventually adopt some form of capitalism. It is inevitable; capitalism is the most perfect system for corruption to flow. It feeds all of our egos on an fundamental level - especially by using a physical vector (capital) to allegedly measure one's worth.

 

[brinny]

Well, no country on this planet - whether or not it is happening - can maintain socialism or communism because there is only one human alive that is actually perfect.

You notice in history socialism or communism regimes have the backing of the people, but usually always fall from scandal - and eventually adopt some form of capitalism. It is inevitable; capitalism is the most perfect system for corruption to flow. It feeds all of our egos on an fundamental level - especially by using a physical vector (capital) to allegedly measure one's worth.

Cuba is not corrupt?

 

[Ygrene Imref]

Isn't Venezuela a socialist country?

No socialist or communist nation will ever be successful if the leader(ship) is imperfect even a bit - that is, that the leader(ship) is even marginally susceptible to corruption.

There is only one human alive who is Perfect - to make the idealism/utopia of socialism and communism a reality. But, I am sure there will be others that are incorruptible such that a utopia can exist. But, not now.

 

[Ygrene Imref]

Cuba is not corrupt?

I am not sure you are understanding me.


There is no nation on this planet - past or present - that is incorruptible. That is because humans, as it were, are corruptible.

Socialism and Communism are idealized government systems in which the majority of power is categorically in the hands of the people. It requires a perfect leader to attain its ideal benefit to the community. If a socialist or communist society has a marginally less than perfect leader(ship), then it will fail.

There is only one human alive that is incorruptible.

 

[brinny]

I am not sure you are understanding me.


There is no nation on this planet - past or present - that is incorruptible. That is because humans, as it were, are corruptible.

Socialism and Communism are idealized government systems in which the majority of power is categorically in the hands of the people. It requires a perfect leader to attain its ideal benefit to the community. If a socialist or communist society has a marginally less than perfect leader(ship), then it will fail.

There is only one human alive that is incorruptible.

Has there been any socialist country where the power has been in the hands of the people?