Bernie Sanders is wrong about Swedish socialism

Johan Norberg says Bernie Sanders’ socialism is a pipe dream and shares lessons Sweden learned trying to implement it.

[keifer]

Taxing the rich more will mean they're no longer rich? The logic is astounding...

[JohnHoulgate]

You can pay for generous welfare plans through higher payroll taxes, which is what Sweden does, or you can raise taxes on the rich. Either way, the working class will end up paying for it. The rich own the companies that produce the goods and services people consume. The rich will simply raise prices to pay for these tax hikes.

[aalleezzzz]

The major difference between Swedish and US welfare system is that in the US, you only benefit if you are poor, in Sweden everyone benefits

[ElitePraetorianGuard]

This is one of my biggest sticking points when talking to Democrats and leftists in general. I would be willing to have a conversion about a public healthcare option or public housing options, but first we need to be honest about who will pay for these benefits. Politicians like AoC and Elizabeth Warren saying that the billionaires will pay for everyone is non-sense. Those people didn't get all the wealth they have by giving it away to the government. France tried a wealth tax and repealed it because it didn't work. Most other economies that have tried to punish the rich have quickly found themselves facing capital flight followed by an economic recession or depression.

Most Europeans that have a public option will tell you that they do pay a lot in taxes to have these public services. They believe the benefits outweigh the additional tax burden. We can try that in the US, maybe. First it starts with being honest about who will pay for it, and it won't be the rich, I promise you.

[roncarlin]

IKEA will move? I hope by flattening their assets and shipping them out in flat boxes, with incomprehensible instructions for re-assembly.

[kovy]

Bernie wrong? Who’s he…?

Oh right, right. I remember now. The same guy who owns 5 mansions all over the country.

[EricJohnson-tcbc]

Sweden, the socialist country that Bernie admires, HAS AT LEAST 20 BILLIONAIRES!

[joesnowcold]

We shouldn’t be giving them tax breaks though

[Mikal]

Bernie got kicked out of Myrtle Hill, a hippie commune for being lazy..

[marilynamos]

In the 70's it was calculated that if they taxed the rich 90%, every human would get and extra £1 a week.

[etoineschrdlu]

But it is paid for by the rich. If a nation incentivizes its rich (by not penuriously taxing them) they are incentivizing growth: more businesses, more jobs, more income that can be taxed non-penuriously. THAT can fund the social benefits of such a country. Any thing else and the nation will approach the asymptote that North Korea has moved toward.

[Tukeen]

All nordic states can afford a reasonable UBI.

[RichardPepperman-kkyb]

If I can't be rich then I'm moving to Yemen.

[WeWillAlwaysHaveVALIS]

Except there are ways around it, the Greek polis cities did for example.

[eddenoy]

There is a middle ground between socialism and oligarchy is there not ?

[lyrebird]

Oh so, IKEA are suddenly going to leave Sweden if their taxes go up a bit?
And the 585 billionaires in the US are all gonna leave if their taxes go up?
Where will they go? To a country with poor infrastructure and even more crime? Wealth inequality hurts the rich as well as the poor.
And what if they get taxed in the countries where they move to?

[PercivalFakeman]

This guy has it wrong. The rich didn’t pay for it all. They paid their fair share. Swedes didn’t learn this. Nice work saying the poor are to be your target market. Good going rich paid for guy.

[DarkMatterX]

But what if I don't want a welfare state at all?

[bobcornwell]

My favorite type of lie is the half-truth.

In this particular segment, it is used twice.

1.) First, it makes the supposition that Senator Sanders claims that all these new programs will be paid for by only the rich.

I have listened to Senator Sanders quite a bit. And I have heard him say, on numerous occasions, that, yes, everyone's taxes would go up, not just the wealthy.

2.) That this is only about taxes. Yes, taxes will have to pay for all of this. But what is left out is the fact that services that people rely on, such as health care and housing, would no longer be monopolized by the for-profit sector, which, by the way, appears to be getting less and less competitive and more and more greedy--especially when more and more of the providers of these services end up being equity funds.

[milestackettmusic]

OK so everybody in a progressive tax scale will be contributing a little bit more, but saving on an essential service. Health care