Lets Talk About Bernie Sanders beloved Denmark, Shall We?

[Rassium]

Denmark is also 90% Dane, 99% European. They are a small racially homogeneous country that a socialist model works in. Now long term I have no idea what their sustainability is, but we have already seen socialism start failing in Greece, Italy and Spain. Would Denmark be the same with 60% of the country having Dane dna? Let's wait 10 years after this Syrian refugee fiasco and see if it's all smiles.


Some might label my line of thinking racist and that's fine but not really the intention of it. If you have a different opinion on racial homogeneous society's in Europe id love to hear about it

Well, your post is pretty blatantly racist and ignores the fact that what happened in Greece was a lot more complicated than "lol socialism".

[Daelak]

Denmark is also 90% Dane, 99% European. They are a small racially homogeneous country that a socialist model works in. Now long term I have no idea what their sustainability is, but we have already seen socialism start failing in Greece, Italy and Spain. Would Denmark be the same with 60% of the country having Dane dna? Let's wait 10 years after this Syrian refugee fiasco and see if it's all smiles.


Some might label my line of thinking racist and that's fine but not really the intention of it. If you have a different opinion on racial homogeneous society's in Europe id love to hear about it

Greece has a tax evasion problem and a non-diversified workforce problem, not a "welfare state makes people lazy" problem

[Zogarth]

Denmark is also 90% Dane, 99% European. They are a small racially homogeneous country that a socialist model works in. Now long term I have no idea what their sustainability is, but we have already seen socialism start failing in Greece, Italy and Spain. Would Denmark be the same with 60% of the country having Dane dna? Let's wait 10 years after this Syrian refugee fiasco and see if it's all smiles.


Some might label my line of thinking racist and that's fine but not really the intention of it. If you have a different opinion on racial homogeneous society's in Europe id love to hear about it

This whole immigration thing is a mess from a economical standpoint. One one side we get a lot of young males, which is good in the sense that kids are expensive. But if the adult does not work, so are they. On top of that, most jobs in Denmark today require education as most of the jobs for the uneducated have been outsourced.

Also, can't compare any of those countries to Denmark. We got way more control and it is way harder do dodge taxes/use loopholes (read: not impossible).

Well, your post is pretty blatantly racist and ignores the fact that what happened in Greece was a lot more complicated than "lol socialism".

How is it racist? Statistically they are likely to be an economic burden. I personally thing we should limit immigration to a point where it is still sustainable. If it proves to be wrong, and it is good to have more immigrants/refugees let them come.

[Underverse]

lol I wish this were true in America.

Yeah it looks like their system is working. Not sure what the issue is.

Also, the car tax is reasonable if you've ever been to denmark.

[Rassium]

How is it racist? Statistically they are likely to be an economic burden. I personally thing we should limit immigration to a point where it is still sustainable. If it proves to be wrong, and it is good to have more immigrants/refugees let them come.

It's racist in the sense that he explicitly mentioned DNA (as if humans have a high level of genetic diversity - we don't) rather than other factors. He thinks Danes are better humans than those gosh dark brown people.

[Captainn]

Taxation in itself is ethically wrong, as it is stealing. If I some day steal 1/3 of your money and everyone elses in the neighborhood, then buy clothes with it and give them to the people, I bet you'd still be pissed. Taxation also hinders economic growth, as it is a punishment for success; higher tax rates will reduce the motivation of people to work hard. On the private sector, as there is competition, these services could be provided much more cheaply, efficiently, and with a better quality.

Oh he's one of those. Yes, it's completely unethical to tax. The government doesn't provide security from outside nations and regulations, or anything.

Listen here, Reagan, Melonomics didn't work in the 20's, didn't work that well in the 80's, sure as hell didn't work in the early millennium, and it will not work now. There's absolutely no support for the idea that less taxes means those who 'work hard' will put back into the economy. I don't understand how this idea continues to come up when it's shown to have no basis in reality. If you're more successful then you're expected to bear more of the weight. That's how it works. In your free economy, when someone gets promoted, they take on more of the businesses burdens, generally. The same thing is true for economics. If you do well, you help out more. End of discussion.

[xuros]

Spoken like someone that doesn't have a clue...

We have free healthcare, free education and we don't have to work ourselfs to death to make a living, that's more than many americans can say.

Who wants to work when you get taxed on everything that hard??? I'm sure you just sit home and let the state take care of you with those taxes.

[Sir Andy]

I say we let Bernie become President of Vermont and let him secede and create his own little socialist paradise.

[Underverse]

Denmark is also 90% Dane, 99% European. They are a small racially homogeneous country that a socialist model works in. Now long term I have no idea what their sustainability is, but we have already seen socialism start failing in Greece, Italy and Spain. Would Denmark be the same with 60% of the country having Dane dna? Let's wait 10 years after this Syrian refugee fiasco and see if it's all smiles.


Some might label my line of thinking racist and that's fine but not really the intention of it. If you have a different opinion on racial homogeneous society's in Europe id love to hear about it

I don't think racial homogeneity is the issue here. Greece, Italy, and Spain as socialist nations? What is your basis for that? If anything, Spain has gone down the more capitalist route. Greece's woes are due to a weak taxation system (in a addition to predatory bankers reaping cash from people who essentially have no other choice).

I think you're making things up.

[satimy]

Greece has a tax evasion problem and a non-diversified workforce problem, not a "welfare state makes people lazy" problem

Any welfare system has sustainablility problems. They are based on the logical fallacy of infinite sustained growth

[Zogarth]

It's racist in the sense that he explicitly mentioned DNA (as if humans have a high level of genetic diversity - we don't) rather than other factors. He thinks Danes are better humans than those gosh dark brown people.

Well yeah okay, that part was racist my mistake. But the other points still stand. Native Danes are statistically at the moment more favorable and sadly also culturally at the moment. But I honestly see no reason why DNA should play a point. Plenty of my peers at University are second generation immigrants so it is not like they can't do exactly what everyone else does.

Any welfare system has sustainablility problems. They are based on the logical fallacy of infinite sustained growth

Very true, but this can be counteracted by running a low inflation policy (which the ECB is). It is a roller-coaster of good and less good times, but overall it is sustainable. Honestly too much to explain on a forum, but John Maynard Keynes has some theories about this if people are interested.

Uh, no, it doesn't. If anything, capital markets do.

The current economy in the world is based on this, so not like it is unique to welfare states. Welfare states however do often have more problems due to it.

[Underverse]

Any welfare system has sustainablility problems. They are based on the logical fallacy of infinite sustained growth

Uh, no, it doesn't. If anything, capital markets do.

[satimy]

Oh he's one of those. Yes, it's completely unethical to tax. The government doesn't provide security from outside nations and regulations, or anything.

Listen here, Reagan, Melonomics didn't work in the 20's, didn't work that well in the 80's, sure as hell didn't work in the early millennium, and it will not work now. There's absolutely no support for the idea that less taxes means those who 'work hard' will put back into the economy. I don't understand how this idea continues to come up when it's shown to have no basis in reality. If you're more successful then you're expected to bear more of the weight. That's how it works. In your free economy, when someone gets promoted, they take on more of the businesses burdens, generally. The same thing is true for economics. If you do well, you help out more. End of discussion.

The 20s was one of th best economic periods in American history, it was followed by the Great Depression which was instigated and sustained by central banks and a socialist authoritarian president.

[willemh]

On the private sector, as there is competition, these services could be provided much more cheaply, efficiently, and with a better quality.

This is where you are fundamentally wrong. Stuff like healthcare doesn't necessarily become cheaper if it enters the private sector AT ALL. Guess why? Because a huge part of the money this private sector asks is used for this thing called 'profit'. 'Profit' is wasted money since it doesnt assist in the purpose of these companies at all 'to provide healthcare to people'. WTF is the purpose of 'profit' when your goal is 'to provide healthcare to people?' 'Profit' that ends up in the wallets of investors and owners? Its 100% wasted money for the purpose it was payed for.

It's what we've seen in many European countries that privatised many things in the last years. Services didnt became cheaper at all, they became more expensive and of lesser quality because the MAIN goal of those companies was no longer to provide the best possible service, the MAIN goal was to make as much profit as possible.

IF you have proper public systems (without corruption, with similar quality management as their private counterpart etc) they will ALWAYS be cheaper then their private counterparts, because guess what, they dont need to make this thing called 'profit'. Simple really.

[Zogarth]

The 20s was one of th best economic periods in American history, it was followed by the Great Depression which was instigated and sustained by central banks and a socialist authoritarian president.

Economic crisis will happen once in a while, that is unavoidable with the way the current economy works. Which is why it makes more sense currently to look at how we can get our of a crisis rather than looking at how to avoid it all together.

[Deleted]

Your understanding of Denmark as a socialistic state is simply wrong. That is just what is fed to you by the media.

If you take a look at the economic landscape that is Denmark, you will quickly find out that Denmark is more capitalistic/economical libertarian than the US.
If Denmark didn't redistribute as much as i does it would probably be the country in the world, by far, with the most economical freedom and this is the main reason why Denmark can even carry its current system.

http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

[Underverse]

This is where you are fundamentally wrong. Stuff like healthcare doesn't necessarily become cheaper if it enters the private sector AT ALL. Guess why? Because a huge part of the money this private sector asks is used for this thing called 'profit'. 'Profit' is wasted money since it doesnt assist in the purpose of these companies at all 'to provide healthcare to people'. WTF is the purpose of 'profit' when your goal is 'to provide healthcare to people?' 'Profit' that ends up in the wallets of investors and owners? Its 100% wasted money for the purpose it was payed for.

It's what we've seen in many European countries that privatised many things in the last years. Services didnt became cheaper at all, they became more expensive and of lesser quality because the MAIN goal of those companies was no longer to provide the best possible service, the MAIN goal was to make as much profit as possible.

IF you have proper public systems (without corruption, with similar quality management as their private counterpart etc) they will ALWAYS be cheaper then their private counterparts, because guess what, they dont need to make this thing called 'profit'. Simple really.

Not to mention that competition itself is a waste of resources unless it yields some sort of benefit. We don't need to compete over how we offer healthcare to people if we take the assumption that everyone deserves healthcare. Note that I'm only talking about the administration of healthcare,and not the quality of the care of health, which is reliant on the quality of doctors, which is fairly homogenous because of strict medical guidelines.

[saffi]

We get it. You don't want socialism.

Just keep on doing what you have been doing, and let's see how well it pans out

[Zogarth]

Your understanding of Denmark as a socialistic state is simply wrong. That is just what is fed to you by the media.

If you take a look at the economic landscape that is Denmark, you will quickly find out that Denmark is more capitalistic/economical libertarian than the US.
If Denmark didn't redistribute as much as i does it would probably be the country in the world, by far, with the most economical freedom and this is the main reason why Denmark can even carry its current system.

http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

Problem is that the redistribution and the freedom are intangible. The government for example does so organizations can easily fire/hire workers because job-security is less of a problem due to the strong security you get after getting fired (Between 80-100% of wage before fired in most cases). In states were such a system does not exist (like Germany) it is way harder to fire, as people losing their jobs = losing their house = homeless is a bad thing for society in so many ways.

[srathgar]

Taxation in itself is ethically wrong, as it is stealing. If I some day steal 1/3 of your money and everyone elses in the neighborhood, then buy clothes with it and give them to the people, I bet you'd still be pissed. Taxation also hinders economic growth, as it is a punishment for success; higher tax rates will reduce the motivation of people to work hard. On the private sector, as there is competition, these services could be provided much more cheaply, efficiently, and with a better quality.

okay okay okay. what the fuck did i just read? Taxation is ethically wrong? You, how do you even believe this? If you seriously believe that the private sector is the answer to every problem, then i seriously doubt you understand economics.

Let me take a grand example from denmark even. Private hospitals:

Theese dear privatised hospitals (which are needed for sure, no doubt) when they fuck ANYTHING up, they dump it onto the Government hospitals free of charge.

In other words, private companies, as much as you wish to believe so, do not have to act ethically. They are by their very nature greedy and will persue the path to most money (unless it is illegal, which again is only possible due to the state creating laws etc).

An example in america aswell! Remove all taxes as they are unethical. Cry when russia strolls down your streets without any resistance, because GUESS WHAT, you got no army as it is funded by the state, aka taxes. Taxation has, for centuries, been a means for the rulers to keep a country safe as the money they get from taxes allows them to maintain an armed force that can defend the nation.

Again, try to t hink about what you get from your taxes, and if they were gone, what you would now have to pay for yourself. And i would sure as hell not want a privatised military, that is just begging for trouble.