61–70 of 122 posts
Interesting, the global competitiveness report of the WEF lists South Korea as rank 20 for innovation. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GCR2016-2017/05FullReport/TheGl... [PDF] page 50
The good thing about rankings is that you have many to choose from.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Marginal tax rates mean nothing unless you know what the actual income brackets are. The US's hughest tax brackets kick in at almost $400K. If Sweden's kicks in at $100K, the tax burden is MuCH higher.
Looks like top tax bracket in Sweden is $90k -- at $90k, CA marginal is 42%. So a delta of 14% -- still probably worth it, especially at lower incomes where student loans and health care a higher percentage of earnings.
> Fresh ideas tend to pay off big in Sweden, even as the current government is less business-friendly and has imposed labor taxes that could crimp business investment Maybe it is that high taxes and citizen friendly social system the responsible for the success of the country. I moved to Sweden to work in the tech sector because I like how socially advanced is the country. Taxes are used to invest in society, and tha…
Assuming that they're implicitly comparing Sweden to the US, I would like clarification on how Sweden is less business-friendly. From my quick search, it seems like their corporate tax is around 17% lower than that of the US. Perhaps they have other taxes that make up for the difference?
Virtually a tie. 82.45 vs 82.13 using the distance to Frontier measure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Sweden is perhaps one of the most individualistic country in the world: we value the individual over the family or community, and we believe that everyone should have the same opportunities regardless of the circumstances of their birth. This is the reason we have the social safety net we have: it is a substitute for family and community and other more traditional support systems. I think this has its costs; humans…
"Example: Your grandmother will meet 100 different caregivers for home care in a year" French here. My grand pa is old and has caregivers (paid by his public health care + the local county) coming to his home every day, they're always the same 4-5 people. It's not hard giving people a steady job instead of using disposable contractors.
In more vibrant economies these jobs are seen as largely unattractive and often as a stepping stone to becoming a nurse's aid, nurse, doctor, etc.
One of the major imported jobs in even closed societies like Japan is senior caregivers. Its hard and ugly work, and often thankless (how can a senior with dementia appreciate you?). Migrating to different jobs or eventual burn out is a real issue in this industry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Health services in Sweden is going down hill fast, I've heard. Money issues. They are trying to save money wherever they can. The recent sudden influx of foreigners didn't help. They say Sweden couldn't really afford taking in any foreigners but did it anyway. Sweden shooting itself in the foot. It sounds like. Perhaps someone can give a recent update on this?
I suspect that is scaremongering from the suits that wants to let in American style for profit medical services. Same shits been going on in Norway for decades.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, yes, I totally agree! There's a very steep cost to this model of "Swedish-style individualism", and it's exactly the one you describe. Swedes have much weaker bonds to their extended family, their community, their religious institutions (etc.) and it's clearly not a good thing. Humans are social animals. I'm not necessarily arguing that Sweden is a model society and all other countries should adopt our ways. What…
"Swedes have much weaker bonds ... to their religious institutions" Most nordic people would call this progress.
Perhaps its a little arrogant to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I think its clear that reality is far from explained and selling people on the idea of a nihilistic existence that is meaningless may not be good for humanity, nor actually be accurate. Are we certain science has solved all major mysteries and our cosmology is pretty much close to perfect? How do we know we're not Newton, unable to see Einstein coming, for example? Maybe we can't ever know.
I'm not exactly sure where religion or spirituality fits in with the modern lifestyle, but I suspect it has a place still. As much as I like visiting nordic regions, the lack of smiles and cold attitudes really reflects something I consider wrong and off-putting especially as the son of European immigrants from a 'family' centered society and a liberal US citizen who certainly sees value in the collective, even if the electorate does not. I don't think evolution made us to be asocial, anti-family, anti-spiritual, anti-collective, etc and expect us to be satisfied with the end result (everyone in therapy and on pills for mood issues and complaining about lonliness and lack of meaning constantly).
From a personal perspective, adding a touch of meditation and some lightweight Buddhism and Eastern thought has really upped the quality of my life. Perhaps I'm engaging in an evangelical folly here but the facts do remain that the more atheistic a society the more you see depression and suicide appear, once we correct for depression caused by economic issues or warfare or political instability. Maybe this is an issue that'll solve itself somehow, but I do wonder if we ran too hard towards atheism/materialism, when we should have jogged more towards more liberal and 'lighter' religion, personal spiritual practice, or just plain-jane agnosticism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looks like top tax bracket in Sweden is $90k -- at $90k, CA marginal is 42%. So a delta of 14% -- still probably worth it, especially at lower incomes where student loans and health care a higher percentage of earnings.
The question for me is if our government doesn't provide any of those services why aren't we paying half that number?
Medicare, Medicaid, etc: 25%
Social Security: 24%
Military: 16%
Safety Net Programs: 10%
Federal / Veteran Benefits: 8%
At the state level, California: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/California_state_spendin...
Health Care 35%
Pensions 18%
Education 16%
Welfare 9%
Protection (?) 7%
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But I think Sweden, and the rest of Scandinavia (I'm Norwegian) has a less adversarial political system. We're used to coalitions, so most political parties are careful not to burn bridges totally. We also often have broad negotiated compromises where the US is more likely to have bitterly fought battles leading to a small majority where the losers ends up trying hard to reverse the decision afterwards (witness the A…
Insightful. I also think the 2-party system in the us tends to polarize all discussion. Everything has to fit on the same left/right scale, and there is no middle ground.
And even with current heavy polarization, it's not completely binary. I can easily see, say, four party possibilities out of our current two.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, yes, I totally agree! There's a very steep cost to this model of "Swedish-style individualism", and it's exactly the one you describe. Swedes have much weaker bonds to their extended family, their community, their religious institutions (etc.) and it's clearly not a good thing. Humans are social animals. I'm not necessarily arguing that Sweden is a model society and all other countries should adopt our ways. What…
Read somewhere that the chance of having higher intelligence is reflected in how self-sufficient you are. People with higher intelligence tend to manage just fine with a small social group with weak connections. The more social you are the more likely that you have lower intelligence. Sort of suggests that following the collective, being an ant in a colony may have negative effects on intelligence over a few generati…
A couple of immediate objections come to mind. First, "intelligence" is difficult to define or measure. Things like standardized IQ tests tend to come with an implicit agenda. Second, thinking instead about "innovation", history surely shows that most innovation happens when humans group together (in farming communities, cities etc).
It's true though that in recent history, cities are more associated with social atomization. Overall it seems like a very fuzzy and complicated issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Insightful. I also think the 2-party system in the us tends to polarize all discussion. Everything has to fit on the same left/right scale, and there is no middle ground.
It hasn't always been the case, though. During a period from roughly 1930 to late 1970s, political polarization in this country was rather modest. ( http://www.voteview.com/pdf/The_Polarization_of_Modern_US_Po... ) Only recently has political polarization approached the levels last seen in the late 19th century. And even with current heavy polarization, it's not completely binary. I can easily see, say, four party po…
That's because the country was undergoing a partisan realignment (well, at least two that overlapped, one economic tied to the new deal coalition and one racial and tied to civil rights), where the emerging new axes of political differentiation did not align well with the divide between the major parties (but where the two were progressively moving into alignment.)