The Instigator
billsands
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
omar2345
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The Nordic Model proves Social Democracy can work

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/27/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 639 times Debate No: 118720
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

billsands

Pro

Social Democracy is not quite Socialism, As many aspects of market capitalism remain in place, Yoet it tries to alleviate the harsh aspects of laisez faire capitalism, And is the ideal from of government and economy, The fact it works so well in Scandanavia proves it is possible elsewhere in the world. It would not be apllicable comopletely to larger nations like the United States but many aspects could be adopted, For example their extraordinary efforts to stop corruption and be tranparent, Even with high taxes businesses like to work there because they know they can trust an honest government.
omar2345

Con

Thank you for creating this debate. Hopefully my rebuts are more then sufficient in proving my case.

"The fact it works so well in Scandanavia proves it is possible elsewhere in the world"

If you mean being highly taxed then yes it works well. Why would you want to give the government so much power? No one should have that much power because it leaves too much to chance for authoritarianism to take place both the left and right. Hungary is one example of right authoritarianism. He used his power to ban gender studies. If you agree with free speech then it is a bad thing. We should not stop people making bad choices in life instead they should accept the consequences of their actions. If you restricts what people can do it can create an uprising. The other side Sweden. Use their authoritarianism to ensure equality for all citizens even if some of them do not deserve it. You might be familiar with No-go Zones (vulnerable areas more specifically). Instead of using their authority to enforce the law they do nothing. The two extremes but it proves that both sides are wrong.

"extraordinary efforts to stop corruption"

The burden of proof is on the person who is making the claim.

"high taxes businesses like to work there because they know they can trust an honest government. "

I am sure this is anecdotal or a survey which voices peoples feelings not facts. Burden of proof again.
Businesses want to make money. That is their goal. The UK makes 5 times more GDP then Sweden. Meaning of all goods and services it is valued more in the UK then Sweden. More Value = More money for businesses


Closing statements:
I believe the government is inefficient and wastes money. If you want a clear example see how much more money the NHS needs. For health care there are only 2 options that can be picked from 3. They are Universality, Affordability and quality. I would pick affordability and quality because they are the most important. The only one that can deliver on this would be a free market (with regulation of course). Since there is a demand for health care universality should not be a problem because there would be a lot demand covering the supply of it.


Sources:

http://www. Nationmaster. Com/country-info/compare/Sweden/United-Kingdom/Economy#2014
https://fullfact. Org/health/spending-english-nhs/







Debate Round No. 1
billsands

Pro

Social Democracy is not quite Socialism, As many aspects of market capitalism remain in place, Yet it tries to alleviate the harsh aspects of laisez faire capitalism, And is the ideal from of government and economy, The fact it works so well in Scandanavia proves it is possible elsewhere in the world. It would not be aplicable completely to larger nations like the United States but many aspects could be adopted, For example their extraordinary efforts to stop corruption and be tranparent, Even with high taxes businesses like to work there because they know they can trust an honest government.
omar2345

Con

You just said the same thing.

I have already rebutted this.
Debate Round No. 2
billsands

Pro

There seems to be a glitch i keep trying to post an argument and it won't let me, No system is pure socialist no system is pure capitalsist, I try to post links and this site gets all funny about it, The nordic model isnt socialism per say but if you went back in time most capitallist nations would seem very socialist by say 19th century standards before income taxes, Regulation, Or the welfare state. . . The nordic nations are very competive, Have high standards of living, And score high on both freedom indexes egalitarian indices. . According to a matt bruening who seems to know al ot about the subject they really are very close to socialist when you count government size the fact that one in three workers works for the state, Labour laws and the number of state industry in finland and norway. . And it works
omar2345

Con

"The Nordic nations are very competitive, Have high standards of living, And score high on both freedom indexes egalitarian indices"

My argument still stands that every government even the United States are inefficient. The reason why the freedom is good in those countries is because you are looking at the free market economy they have (with regulation) which provides the freedom. Not the socialism which provides less freedom. High taxes does not mean more freedom. The argument they enjoy a higher standard of living is not true. If you mean on average then yes I could possibly see that but the middle class and upper class have a higher standard of living in the United States. Citizens of the United States spend less on tax which is used to improve on their standard of living (holiday every so often, Buying the next IPhone and Macs, Renovation).


"matt bruenig"
I'll use his sources to prove my point. The social expenditure is higher in Scandinavian countries in the United States. How is this a good thing? The more power the government has the more it is about the collective then the individual. Communism and fascism put the collective in front of the individual. Look at what happened farmers being murdered for being too rich and Jews were killed because they looked differently. Yes it is the extreme but the Nordic model without the economically free model would just like them. If you want to see an example of why it is bad look at the EU. They are trying to ban memes. More specifically you have to pay for any intellectual property. This does not cover fair use. Who can vote on this? The European Union which was not elected by the citizens of the EU. They are held unaccountable and do whatever they want. Yes it is the extreme but it proves my point. Less freedom does not mean more freedom.

Percentage of workers employed by the government is higher in Scandinavian countries. How is this a good thing?

Percentage of workers with union contract is higher in Scandanavia countries. No competitors means no market for wages to increase without government intervention.

The state also owns more enterprises in Scandinavian countries. If you do not like how the government operates then you have a problem. With the United States so polarised think if the Democrats or the Republicans were in charge it would be difficult to ignore them if the Nordic model was in place in the United States because they would own most of the GDP since it is more about the collective then the individual.

"one in three workers works for the state"
How is this a good thing? Is their a competitor to the government that can make your salary more competitive? No. Without competitors there is no need for the government to increase there wages since there job is not to make the most money or increase employee retention it is make sure to stay in power for the next election. Businesses care more about their staff then the government. Which is why private businesses employ employees at a higher salary and want to retain staff that are beneficial to them. Governments do not care about the employee as much as private businesses.

It does work but at what cost? Less freedom and the collective over the individual. As you are an individual if you were valuable to your society you would prosper more in the United States then what you ever could in a Scandinavian country.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Crozius_Arcanum 3 years ago
Crozius_Arcanum
. . . Perhaps shore up your definition of 'works'. A more concise and finite concept would be declaring that it can be applied in disparate and larger foreign countries, Rather than using a broad and ambiguous term. If you could declare exactly what you are claiming, I would be glad to take up this discussion with you. At the moment, It seems to me that you are insinuating that it can 'work' here in the United States. Correct me if I am wrong.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.