First, a quick history lesson:
Actually, the Swedes were doing pretty good in the post-WWII era until the socialists took over in the 1970s. The 1970s were a decade of radical government intervention in society and in markets, during which Sweden doubled its overall tax burden, socialized a slew of industries, regulated its markets, expanded its public systems, and shuttered its borders. In 1970, Sweden had the world’s fourth highest GDP per capita. By 1990, it had fallen 13 positions. In those 20 years, real wages in Sweden increased by only one percentage point. …By the late 1980s, though, Sweden had started deregulating its markets once again, decreased its marginal tax rates, and opted for a sound money, low inflation policy. In the early 1990s, the pace quickened, and most markets except for labor and housing were liberalized. The state sold its shares in a number of companies, granted independence to its central bank, and introduced school vouchers that improved choice and competition in education. Stockholm slashed public pensions and introduced private retirement schemes, keeping the system demographically sustainable. These decisive economic liberalizations, and not socialism, are what laid the foundations for Sweden’s success over the last 20 years. …Today, the state’s total tax take comes to 45% of GDP, from 56% ten years ago. Meanwhile, unemployment benefits, sick leave and early retirement plans have all been streamlined to encourage work.
Excerpts from a Business Insider article:
For starters, the Swedish government maintains a strict budget surplus — at least 1 percent — over an economic cycle, and sets limits on what the government can spend in a given year. The model is flexible and allows for increased spending during a downturn, but the rules are stringent: The lost ground must be made up during the next upswing.
A better way of comparing efficiency is looking at how much each country spends on a specific, comparable basket of services, regardless of who pays for it. The OECD has done exactly this, and found that when it comes to a specific array of social services, including items such as health care, pensions, unemployment benefits, child care, or credits for families with children, the United States ends up spending almost exactly as much as Sweden does in relation to GDP.
Not only that, but Finland, Denmark, and Norway all spent less than the United States in relation to GDP for the same basket of services. This makes Nordic countries more efficient than the United States in producing these essential services — they pay less, but the quality and results of their services are in many ways just as good or even better than what Americans get.
Here's why Nordic governments are WAY ahead of the rest of the world
You know why we are so inefficient in providing services? It's because our gov't totally sucks, we're too busy arguing and pointing fingers at each other to do the tough job of doing what's best for the country rather than oursleves or our party. There is NOTHING wrong with our economic model that good and effective governance can't fix.
