What Americans don't understand about Nordic countries

[arch stanton]

Attempting to measure happiness is kinda lame

[Angelsjunky]

Why? Isn't that important? In fact, shouldn't we be putting more emphasis on the well-being of citizens rather than their wealth or success?

 

Bhutan has a Gross National Happiness Index (GNH). The idea is that the happiness of the people is more important than material wealth (as measured by GNP).

[GrittyVeterans]

Gross National Happiness Index!!! I have now seen it all

 

LMAO

[Blarg]

Suicide rates in Finland, Belgium and Iceland are extremely high, they lead Western Europe.

So happy.

[mtangelsfan]

[Adam]

I don't think anyone is happier than me. Therefore, you should live like me.

Trade your IPAs for a good cab, listen to the Steve Byk show and put off healthy eating another day.

[Jay]

Somehow, despite all that tax-raping, the Danish are pretty happy:

 

https://disinfo.com/2016/03/world-happiness-report-who-is-the-happiest-of-them-all/

 

 

Guess who's not even in the top 10:

 

1. Denmark
2. Switzerland
3. Iceland
4. Norway
5. Finland
6. Canada
7. Netherlands
8. New Zealand
9. Australia
10. Sweden

Look at all those commie countries, all happy and shit.

 

They're happy because they haven't been overrun by illegal immigrants

 

yet

[Adam]

[Tank]

for crying outloud, i am not watching yet another video about leichtenstein!!

[ten ocho recon scout]

FWIW AJ, i spent a night getting drinks w some danes paris. They all pretty much hated the taxes. One said "its hard to become rich in scandanavia". I reminded him its also hard to become poor.

Anyway, that was just one group of people, doesnt mean they speak for the masses. But maybe not everyone over there likes the setup.

Not sure what your situation is AJ, kids or whatever, but have you ever thought of moving abroad? I dont mean that to be a dick, ive looked at property overseas to retire to myself. Maybe youd be happier in one of these countries that has a social system more along the lines you identify with.

[Grigori]

AJ, they put all the OECD countries on a splatter graph, the X axis GDP growth and Y, the percent of GDP that is government spending. The more spending, the less economic growth. It was a 40-year study done during the Clinton administration. I've seen updates, and that still holds true today. There has been more studies done that show the same thing. It is simply a matter of economic FACT that the larger government is, the slow the economic growth is.

 

Yes, Sweden is an outlier.  Norway sometimes is, but not always. Denmark has high taxes and high government spending and very slow economic growth. Denmark fits the overall pattern of how a high spending government wrecks their chances of achieving significant economic growth.

 

In Norway's case, they have tons of oil and gas, get all their electricity from dams on fiords, so don't need the oil and gas. They make huge profits on their oil and gas. That is why they are sometimes an exception to the general rule.

 

So, I don't know what you are talking about. You are clueless, and have no real data to back you up. Big government means slow growth.

 

As far as these billionaires go, countries that make a lot of money have a lot of billionaires. So what?  The poor do better, too. Zimbabwe has few billionaires. Do you want to be like them? We have a lot of billionaires. Our poor are better off than the middle class in most of Europe.

 

 

​

[ten ocho recon scout]

Lots of good info grigori, but strongly disagree with the ending. The poor in this country are better off than the poor in the 3rd world, but to say theyre better off than the middle class in europe? Maybe the balkans in the war i guess...maybe after world war 2.

But ive travelled all through europe, a few seperate times. I havent seen near the amount of homeless i have here, the ones insaw were mostly immigrants. People who work service industry jobs, like waiters and tour guides, can afford apartments in the large cities and travel abroad every other year. Just about all are college educated.

To say someone from appalachia, skid row, louisiana, some shithole mining town is better off than the guy waiting tables in any major city, or driving a taxi in some middle of nowhere village in the czech republic is way off.

[nate]

AJ, you agree that we need to almost completely shut down immigration and we have been doing immigration wrong for the last 100 years, right?

[Angelsjunky]

AJ, they put all the OECD countries on a splatter graph, the X axis GDP growth and Y, the percent of GDP that is government spending. The more spending, the less economic growth. It was a 40-year study done during the Clinton administration. I've seen updates, and that still holds true today. There has been more studies done that show the same thing. It is simply a matter of economic FACT that the larger government is, the slow the economic growth is.

 

Yes, Sweden is an outlier.  Norway sometimes is, but not always. Denmark has high taxes and high government spending and very slow economic growth. Denmark fits the overall pattern of how a high spending government wrecks their chances of achieving significant economic growth.

 

In Norway's case, they have tons of oil and gas, get all their electricity from dams on fiords, so don't need the oil and gas. They make huge profits on their oil and gas. That is why they are sometimes an exception to the general rule.

 

So, I don't know what you are talking about. You are clueless, and have no real data to back you up. Big government means slow growth.

 

As far as these billionaires go, countries that make a lot of money have a lot of billionaires. So what?  The poor do better, too. Zimbabwe has few billionaires. Do you want to be like them? We have a lot of billionaires. Our poor are better off than the middle class in most of Europe.

 

 

​

 

Thanks for the response. Your whole post is based upon "economic growth." Sure, that's important, but is it more important than other things, like quality of life? What about cost of living? What about affordable social services? Etc.

 

The bottom line is that these Nordic countries take better care of their citizens, that there are things we can learn from them, and adapt to our country. I don't see why that's "clueless." There's no real data that says it isn't possible.

 

The point about the billionaires is that, as Bernie has been saying, most new wealth is going to the top. It isn't trickling down, it isn't spreading out--mainly very wealthy people are getting wealthier. It isn't Denmark where something is rotten...

[Angelsjunky]

AJ, you agree that we need to almost completely shut down immigration and we have been doing immigration wrong for the last 100 years, right?

 

I don't have a firm opinion other than that I don't think they should be deported and I think there should be a path to citizenship. But I think I heard somewhere that immigration has slowed?

[nate]

You realize that Scandinavian countries are almost impossible to immigrate to and they have very few minorities.  You post them as an example but the demographics of the US and any of the northern European countries are so different there is no point to compare.

 

We are much closer to Greece or Spain... who are more Socialist than the US and are also in a much worse position economically than the US.

[Angelsjunky]

nate, I have said repeatedly--which maybe you just ignore--that we can't (or even shouldn't) try to be exactly like Scandinavia. But we can learn from what they do and adapt it to our culture.

 

A much larger and more diverse country, the UK, has universal health care. Actually, if you're on vacation there and you break your leg the British system will take care of it - no cost to you. Other large countries in Europe - France and Germany - have much stronger social programs than we have.

 

As for Spain and Greece, it is way too simplistic to say that they're struggling because of socialism. Their problems go back decades

[nate]

When Spain and Greece had the opportunity to save their economies by cutting spending, they didn't.

 

Our problems go back decades too and we haven't cut.

 

Maybe you don't get it because you are too thick but we can't take examples and learn from the Scandinavian countries because there is no basis for comparison.

[Angelsjunky]

Spain and Greece is a red herring. It has nothing to do with applying Scandinavian-like approaches to the US.

 

And yes, I agree that we need to cut spending in some areas.

 

As for Scandinavian, I've already explained my view and you other don't understand what I'm saying or disagree. Cool beans.

[nate]

Got it, Spain, Greece, Argentina, and anything else that proves you wrong is a red herring but the Scandinavian countries can fix us!

[Adam]

Progress

[Angelsjunky]

Got it, Spain, Greece, Argentina, and anything else that proves you wrong is a red herring but the Scandinavian countries can fix us!

 

This is just dumb and beneath even you, nate. How do those prove me wrong? And what are they proving wrong?

 

You're just being argumentative and not actually discussing anything substantive.

[red321]

When Spain and Greece had the opportunity to save their economies by cutting spending, they didn't.

 

Our problems go back decades too and we haven't cut.

 

Maybe you don't get it because you are too thick but we can't take examples and learn from the Scandinavian countries because there is no basis for comparison.

 

Spain and Greece don't have their own currencies and are part of a regional economic model...so trying to compare those to the US economy is comparing apples to radiators.

[Angelsjunky]

This discussion is pointless if you guys aren't discussing Happiness Indexes.

 

True.

[Tank]

Progress

 

you need to give it the Jeb! treatment by adding an exclamation point. it'll be so much more dramatic!

 

 

(see what i just did there?)