It is known that an economic model based on low wages and exploitation of the masses is competitive in extracting labour from people at competitive prices, that is why Marx was clear from the beginning socialism would have to be an international movement, and it would have to happen in the more advanced economies first
This seems to be a highly selective portrayal of how the government and economy in Sweden work intended to push an agenda of higher taxes, privatization, and lower government spending. One thing they fail to portray is how Sweden's welfare state supports economic growth, stability, and prosperity for everyone.
Housing is an issue in Canada right? Well in Sweden between 1965 and 1974 a million homes were built… while the population in 1965 was reported only 7.75 million people. Imagine Canada doing that now? It would be impossible but its needed.
@5:53 You literally null your point by showing how a country can have a huge government footprint and still do well not just economically, but in "freedom" terms... And though you talk about the crisis in the 90s (a WORLD crisis, not a Swedish one), you just reiterated how they kept the government spending high and taxes too, and still did and are doing better than most developed/OECD nations. Please, if you try to attack "evil socialism/marxism", don't go after Scandinavian countries, who blended it perfectly with market economics, proving the best system is both capitalist and marxist in inspiration. For as in all good systems, you take the best of both sides and don't be a mindless ideological fundamentalist :) And finally, @9:06 represents one of the most braindead, misleading and not well fundamented conclusions of an "essay" I have ever heard. Saying a democratic country that chose to be ruled by social-democrats from 1932 to 1976, and where they are still the largest party, is more market oriented than the US is a betrayal to all shades of unbiased thought. It is pure demagogy... How the heck is "Sweden's government pays you to have your child in a private school" more neoliberal and less socialist than having to pay full tuition in any private institution from kindergarten (which overwhelmingly works on a free model in Sweden) to college (also free for Swedes and EU citizens), like in the US??? Please keep at least a frinch of dignity and academic rigor and do not try to brainwash us with half-facts and statistical manipulations. I am not a supporter of the Swedish model for all countries and societies for many reasons, but it not being socialist and actually very capitalist is definetily not one of them, as I prefer not to base my opinions on self-indulging biased fantasies.
Should we all guess where Joao is from? I’d take bets it isn’t Sweden and he may have a disposition that is very favourable to tyrannical governments & lacks any common sense.
I am born and raised in sweden, I am over 30 years old and I have NEVER heard "the 100 years of prosperity" EVER before.
Välfärdsstatens propaganda går på högvarv nu i dess slutfas.
It is known that an economic model based on low wages and exploitation of the masses is competitive in extracting labour from people at competitive prices, that is why Marx was clear from the beginning socialism would have to be an international movement, and it would have to happen in the more advanced economies first
This seems to be a highly selective portrayal of how the government and economy in Sweden work intended to push an agenda of higher taxes, privatization, and lower government spending. One thing they fail to portray is how Sweden's welfare state supports economic growth, stability, and prosperity for everyone.
Housing is an issue in Canada right? Well in Sweden between 1965 and 1974 a million homes were built… while the population in 1965 was reported only 7.75 million people.
Imagine Canada doing that now? It would be impossible but its needed.
Houses would be plentiful if it weren't for government interference. All Canada would have to do to spur home development is deregulation
0:25 from this moment I knew this "documentary" was going to be biased
Thank you.
"Promosm" 🌈
@5:53 You literally null your point by showing how a country can have a huge government footprint and still do well not just economically, but in "freedom" terms... And though you talk about the crisis in the 90s (a WORLD crisis, not a Swedish one), you just reiterated how they kept the government spending high and taxes too, and still did and are doing better than most developed/OECD nations. Please, if you try to attack "evil socialism/marxism", don't go after Scandinavian countries, who blended it perfectly with market economics, proving the best system is both capitalist and marxist in inspiration. For as in all good systems, you take the best of both sides and don't be a mindless ideological fundamentalist :)
And finally, @9:06 represents one of the most braindead, misleading and not well fundamented conclusions of an "essay" I have ever heard. Saying a democratic country that chose to be ruled by social-democrats from 1932 to 1976, and where they are still the largest party, is more market oriented than the US is a betrayal to all shades of unbiased thought. It is pure demagogy... How the heck is "Sweden's government pays you to have your child in a private school" more neoliberal and less socialist than having to pay full tuition in any private institution from kindergarten (which overwhelmingly works on a free model in Sweden) to college (also free for Swedes and EU citizens), like in the US???
Please keep at least a frinch of dignity and academic rigor and do not try to brainwash us with half-facts and statistical manipulations. I am not a supporter of the Swedish model for all countries and societies for many reasons, but it not being socialist and actually very capitalist is definetily not one of them, as I prefer not to base my opinions on self-indulging biased fantasies.
Should we all guess where Joao is from? I’d take bets it isn’t Sweden and he may have a disposition that is very favourable to tyrannical governments & lacks any common sense.