Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

You Can't Have Denmark Without Danes

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 105 posts

Re: You Can't Have Denmark Without Danes

#11

Post by matt4077 »

joncrane wrote: post #2

I've been a fan of the Scandinavian model for government for a while, and I used to be one of those guys who would say something like "in NORWAY they blah blah blah" when discussing some social/governmental in a small group. But later on I realized more deeply that Norway is a tiny fraction of the population of the USA as well as a very culturally (and let's face it, racially) homogeneous population. Similar argument…

What do you mean by "let's face it, racially"? Are people incapable of trusting others of a different skin colour?

Re: You Can't Have Denmark Without Danes

#12

Post by lvh »

0xcde4c3db wrote: post #4
joncrane wrote: post #2

I've been a fan of the Scandinavian model for government for a while, and I used to be one of those guys who would say something like "in NORWAY they blah blah blah" when discussing some social/governmental in a small group. But later on I realized more deeply that Norway is a tiny fraction of the population of the USA as well as a very culturally (and let's face it, racially) homogeneous population. Similar argument…

What arguments are those, exactly? What's the significance of a smaller population or homogeneity? Has any such relation been rigorously studied, or is it just speculation?

Sure: here's a recent longitudinal study[0] that covers some of the previous work on correlation between diversity and social cohesion.

[0]: https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcv081

Re: You Can't Have Denmark Without Danes

#13

Post by jeromegv »

0xcde4c3db wrote: post #4
joncrane wrote: post #2

I've been a fan of the Scandinavian model for government for a while, and I used to be one of those guys who would say something like "in NORWAY they blah blah blah" when discussing some social/governmental in a small group. But later on I realized more deeply that Norway is a tiny fraction of the population of the USA as well as a very culturally (and let's face it, racially) homogeneous population. Similar argument…

What arguments are those, exactly? What's the significance of a smaller population or homogeneity? Has any such relation been rigorously studied, or is it just speculation?

Americans always tend to use homogeneity as an argument when they compare themselves with other countries, like it’s somehow a good argument not to be as good as other countries in some aspects. Like you, I doubt that this is actually relevant. Canada is nothing but diverse, in a very similar way to the US and somehow it’s never used an excuse.

Re: You Can't Have Denmark Without Danes

#14

Post by arghwhat »

timecube wrote: post #3
joncrane wrote: post #2

I've been a fan of the Scandinavian model for government for a while, and I used to be one of those guys who would say something like "in NORWAY they blah blah blah" when discussing some social/governmental in a small group. But later on I realized more deeply that Norway is a tiny fraction of the population of the USA as well as a very culturally (and let's face it, racially) homogeneous population. Similar argument…

Social democratic policies tend to become more efficient with increased scale, so why would it be negative that the US is larger than Norway?

A smaller country with low diversity results in more uniform opinions, I suppose?

But, comparing Norway to the U.S.A. would be odd. From over here, the U.S.A. can be compared to the E.U., in which case the comparison should be between American states and European countries.

Specifically for Norway, it would be like a state in the middle of the U.S.A. that never actually became part of the union, but with really good ties with everyone regardless.

Re: You Can't Have Denmark Without Danes

#15

Post by jacobr »

joncrane wrote: post #2

I've been a fan of the Scandinavian model for government for a while, and I used to be one of those guys who would say something like "in NORWAY they blah blah blah" when discussing some social/governmental in a small group. But later on I realized more deeply that Norway is a tiny fraction of the population of the USA as well as a very culturally (and let's face it, racially) homogeneous population. Similar argument…

It's not true that Scandinavian countries are homogeneous. 30% in Sweden are either born abroad or have at least 1 parent born abroad. Even more obviously have some non-Swedish cultural background or influence.

Re: You Can't Have Denmark Without Danes

#16

Post by matt4077 »

lvh wrote: post #6
joncrane wrote: post #2

I've been a fan of the Scandinavian model for government for a while, and I used to be one of those guys who would say something like "in NORWAY they blah blah blah" when discussing some social/governmental in a small group. But later on I realized more deeply that Norway is a tiny fraction of the population of the USA as well as a very culturally (and let's face it, racially) homogeneous population. Similar argument…

Norway also has two giant sovereign funds, which they use to fund pensions. The oil fund alone is worth almost 200k per Norwegian. That's not an argument you can make for Denmark, but yes: Norway is doing great. All you need is a small homogeneous population and a trillion dollars.

Norway's "Government Pension Fund" is NOT used to actually fund pensions. It is actually not funding anything right now, but absorbs the government's budget surplus resulting from the oil sector. As such, it's a net negative for most economic indicators currently, since Norway has chosen to defer the use of their wealth in fossil fuels.

Re: You Can't Have Denmark Without Danes

#17

Post by lvh »

jeromegv wrote: post #13
0xcde4c3db wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What arguments are those, exactly? What's the significance of a smaller population or homogeneity? Has any such relation been rigorously studied, or is it just speculation?

Americans always tend to use homogeneity as an argument when they compare themselves with other countries, like it’s somehow a good argument not to be as good as other countries in some aspects. Like you, I doubt that this is actually relevant. Canada is nothing but diverse, in a very similar way to the US and somehow it’s never used an excuse.

Are you suggesting that it's not mostly accepted, sociologically, that ethnic diversity is correlated negatively with social cohesion? That was not my understanding. Do you have a citation that suggests otherwise?

[0]: https://academic.oup.com/esr/article/32/1/54/2404332

Re: You Can't Have Denmark Without Danes

#18

Post by RobertoG »

PhilipA wrote: post #8

Being from Denmark, but living in the US now, I see the main problem with Denmark that a lot of people are complacent. While the system works now, I doubt it will be positive in the long run. We are not hungry enough, and for too many people right now it isn't worth it to work (Too little difference between working wage and welfare). Again, this is just a few negative statements, there are lot of positive areas (Free…

You say that the main problem with Denmark is that people is complacent, but you don't explain why being complacent is a problem.

Is it so bad that people have "complacent" lives when there is enough resources? Maybe, people should aspire to a life of heroic struggled nevermind the circumstances?

Re: You Can't Have Denmark Without Danes

#19

Post by arghwhat »

PhilipA wrote: post #8

Being from Denmark, but living in the US now, I see the main problem with Denmark that a lot of people are complacent. While the system works now, I doubt it will be positive in the long run. We are not hungry enough, and for too many people right now it isn't worth it to work (Too little difference between working wage and welfare). Again, this is just a few negative statements, there are lot of positive areas (Free…

At the same time, being from Denmark, I also think we have a strong tendency for never being satisfied.

I do have a negative mindset against I welfare system and its lack of work incentive, though. I feel like it should be handled differently, such as through not giving you money, but rather feeding you directly. A system that ensures health and survival, nothing more.

I still remember the voice of some people being interviewed when some welfare rates fell: "I have to sell my car now!", "Why does my living standard have to be reduced just because I don't have a job?", "I'm not going to accept a job at Netto, I'm too well educated for that"...

(For outsiders not understanding the "sell my car thing": Denmark is very bicycle oriented, and have very good public transportation. Cars are only a necessity if you live in the middle of nowhere.)

Re: You Can't Have Denmark Without Danes

#20

Post by matt4077 »

PhilipA wrote: post #8

Being from Denmark, but living in the US now, I see the main problem with Denmark that a lot of people are complacent. While the system works now, I doubt it will be positive in the long run. We are not hungry enough, and for too many people right now it isn't worth it to work (Too little difference between working wage and welfare). Again, this is just a few negative statements, there are lot of positive areas (Free…

This idea that you need the threat of abject poverty to motivate people to greatness is not supported by any empirical evidence.

Look no further than the US' most successful companies: Bill Gates, Sergey Brin & Larry Page, and all the other success stories start from positions of relative wealth, and almost absolute economic safety. Bill Gates came from rich parents, and all these founders attended elite universities before starting their companies (Harvard and Stanford, respectively). They had what can only be described as a robust safety net to fall back on if their endeavours failed.

Post reply on HN