More Swedish Triumphalism!

by hilzoy

One might imagine, if one were into armchair speculation, that a contrast between the economies of Sweden and the United States might go something like this: Sweden has provided an extensive safety net to its citizens. They don't have to worry about how to pay for medical expenses, or whether they'll be able to afford to send their children to college. And that's a good thing. However, all this social spending has taken its toll on economic productivity and competitiveness. The United States has made the opposite choice: on the one hand a much smaller and more scattershot safety net; on the other, greater economic competitiveness. There's a tradeoff between these two good things, and the two countries have just chosen to make that tradeoff differently.

One might think that, but one would be wrong (via Kevin Drum):

"The US has lost its status as the world's most competitive economy, according to the World Economic Forum.

The US now ranks only sixth in the body's league table of global competitiveness, behind Switzerland, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Singapore.

Risks attached to the large US trade and fiscal deficits prompted its fall."

Mwahahahahahaha! Sweden RULEZ!!!

Comments

[spartikus]

I've been told for years that Sweden (and Norway and Denmark and France and Canada and......) are on the verge of collapse. People are quite certain on this point. Adamant, even.

I'm sure I will continue to be told this in the years ahead.

[JakeB]

I reckons that once that already scattershot safety net shrinks past, say, things like effective curbs on corporate corruption, effective tax auditing, and sufficient resources to combat general white-collar crime, perhaps honest economic competitiveness is a little harder to maintain. Who wants to compete when you can just bribe the ref?

Doesn't this darn armchair have a footrest??

[John Thullen]

I'm going to celebrate by having herring for lunch.

[Decided FenceSitter]

Honest question, anyone have enough of an economic background to know how one would determine the efficency bonus granted from a small system to a large system. Just looking at total populations pulled quickly, and rounded from wikipedia:

Switzerland: 7,250,000
Finland: 5,250,000
Sweden: 9,000,000
Denmark: 5,500,000
Singapore: 4,500,000
United States: 300,000,000

And that doesn't even begin to take into size of the nations, and thus transportation.

Anyone know how these figures of efficiency are reached? Is it similar to the WHO, where the best is defined as the best average care, versus the best absolute care?

[Anderson]

Of course, there's always ...

"Sweden: Where Torture Is STILL Illegal."

[ThirdGorchBro]

"Risks attached to the large US trade and fiscal deficits prompted its fall."

So what does this have to do with socialized health care? Seems to me that if it were not for the fiscal irresponsibility of the present administration and Congress, we'd still be the most competitive economy.

[Yukoner]

Note that the World Economic Forum points to the twin deficits (fiscal and trade) that the US has been and is running (with no end in sight) as the primary reason for its drop in the rankings.

If any of the other countries listed even approached those kind of deficits (as a percentage of GDP) chances are they would already be in complete fiscal and general economic meltdown. American exceptionalism (and having the ability to print the world's reserve currency) allows economic gravity to be defied, at least for now.

[bob mcmanus]

"Seems to me that if it were not for the fiscal irresponsibility" ...TGC

Because of vague statements like this and Bush's determination to look at Social Security in the midterms, I think we should be calling for large tax increases at every opportunity.

Or, if it be your political preference, withdrawal from Iraq and military drawdown.

[ThirdGorchBro]

I call for large tax increases on everybody who's not me.

Also, we need to withdraw from Iraq so we can deal with the Swedish threat.

[Anarch]

But that's just what the Belgians want!

[Jesurgislac]

No, it's what the Norwegians want! Though they may have used Belgians as a catspaw to transfer suspicion.

Tricky bastards, those Scandinavians. How can you trust a country where the cheese tastes like toffee?

[Andrew]

What does the toffee taste like?

[spartikus]

Fish

[bob mcmanus]

I would say I meant "lame duck" instead of "midterms" at 4:29, but who knows where that could take the thread?

[Jesurgislac]

Somewhere quackers.

[liberal japonicus]

mmme, duck...

[Anarch]

Yooooooou, duck?

[Jesurgislac]

Little ducky duddle
went wading in a puddle,
wading in a puddle quite small.
Said he "it doesn't matter
how much I splash and splatter
'cause I'm just a little ducky after all."

[JakeB]

Well, in four minutes I will be departing my office and walking to a fine Chinese restaurant for to consume Peking Duck.

cheers.

[Sebastian Holsclaw]

I think Decided Fencesitter has part of the answer, and I think much of it is also attributable to some free rider effects (which are easier to defend so long as small countries are the ones doing it). If the US took the Danish approach on military spending would sea trade be as safe as it is today? I doubt it. If the US killed off the profitable market for medical discoveries, would new medical discoveries continue at anything near the current pace? If the larger countries weren't willing to deal with Kosovo, would the roiling violence have damaged the markets in Sweden and Denmark?

[MCMC]

If the US took the Danish approach on military spending would sea trade be as safe as it is today?

What exactly is the Danish approach here? And yes, I think coordinated policing could keep the seas safe (and other random superpower duties) with relatively low levels of defense spending. And yes, there would still be medical discoveries, except there might be a few less orphan diseases and a few less erection pills (though probably still one good one), and other small countries (I'm thinking Aus & NZ in the Pacific) do good peacekeeping/nationbuilding in their neighborhoods.

Any more insipid fearmongering for us Seb?

[liberal japonicus]

I think the free rider problem is worthwhile to think about, but that free rider problem is exacerbated by a resistance to think of either international or regional bloc frameworks.

I also think that 'insipid fearmongering' is not the most helpful of collocations, FWIW.

[liberal japonicus]

I think the free rider problem is worthwhile to think about, but that free rider problem is exacerbated by a resistance to think of either international or regional bloc frameworks.

I also think that 'insipid fearmongering' is not the most helpful of collocations, FWIW.

[liberal japonicus]

In my defense, it has the same time stamp, so I'm sure it wasn't me doing it twice...

[MCMC]

No, I defend my use of insipid.

The rhetorical strategy SH is trying to employ goes like this:
1) the US does things that are good,
2) if the US didn't do those things, they wouldn't be done.

Statement 2 only necessarily follows Statement 1 in an imaginary hypothetical adjustment of the status quo in which every other condition is held constant, but of course, every other condition would not really be held constant.

This doesn't mean that Scandis don't benefit from free riding now, but barring some actual attempt to quantify this in conjunction with quantifying the externalities born by other countries as a product of US activities, and a refusal to admit that international institutions and state actors could rationally respond to fill vacant positive externalities the debate goes nowhere.

And yes, I fully consider language to the effect that 'without the US pharma market and corporations there would be no medical advances' to be insipid fearmongering.

[Jesurgislac]

MCMC: And yes, I fully consider language to the effect that 'without the US pharma market and corporations there would be no medical advances' to be insipid fearmongering.

Or capitalist nonsense, really. I was once challenged (not by Sebastian) to find a list of examples of significant medical advances accomplished by government funding, and it took me about ten minutes to find an impressive list, and I could probably do better now with Google Scholar at my fingertips. (But probably wouldn't, because as I might have thought, the challenger wasn't even a little bit interested in the list.)

[damon]

if one were into armchair speculation

I love that a philosophy professor wrote that.