Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditOn Monday night in Burlington, Vermont, Senator Bernie Sanders will host a town meeting with Finland's Ambassador to the US, Pekka Lintu.
Why? Well, how about because Finland has managed to virtually eradicate childhood poverty. Or because of the "academic prowess" of Finland's students--as recently noted by the Wall Street Journal --who receive a free education through college. Or maybe it's the free comprehensive health care, quality childcare at almost no cost, or pro-environment, pro-labor policies that support a very competitive economy.
Yes, there are significant differences between the US and Finland, as Senator Sanders noted in a conversation I had with him last week (see below). But at this moment when we face an economic tsunami, roughly 50 million Americans uninsured, nearly 20 percent of American children living in poverty, and a growing gap between the very wealthy and everyone else--it's time to take a look abroad at some alternative ways of doing things. Senator Sanders gets that. His openness to learning and engaging is an example America sorely needs right now, as we attempt to regain some humility and re-engage with the world post-Bush.
TheNation.com's Greg Kauffman will be at the meeting Monday night--to hear what the Ambassador has to say and to listen to the questions being asked by Vermonters in attendance. Here is the conversation the Senator and I had about the event.
How did the initial connection with the Finnish Ambassador happen?
A number of months ago we brought him into the office in DC--just wanted to chat with him and see what kind of relationship Vermont could develop with Finland. And I've met with him once or twice since.
I told him very frankly that I think that in the United States in general people do not have a clue--a clue--about some of the really significant social progress that's been made in various Scandinavian countries, not just Finland. And I think it's not an accident. I think that corporate media really wants to keep Americans in the dark about some of the real achievements out there in terms of healthcare, education, childcare, because they don't want us to look at alternative ways of doing things. You know, my colleagues get on the floor and they say, ‘Oh, the United States is the greatest country in the world…' Well, you look at social index after social index – look at health care and longevity and infant mortality, education and vacations. One of the things that blows me away about Finland is at a time when our people are working the longest hours of any people in the world, in Finland they get 30 days paid vacation and 14 national holidays. What do you think about that?
Have you talked to your colleagues about this particular effort?
Sure. And, you know, Kennedy raises this issue on the floor now and then. But I will make a concerted effort not only in Vermont but on the floor of the Senate to say, ‘Let us learn.' Look, Finland is a very different country than America, it's 5 million people, we're 300 million. They're a homogenous people, we are a diverse people. But what they are showing is you can virtually abolish childhood poverty. What does that mean for the society? That means that you don't end up putting people away in jail if they get off to a good start in life. It means that if you watch your kids, put money and resources in education, you can have a productive workforce. They have what is generally regarded as the best educational system in the world – highest achievers, free college education. All of these things impact the quality of life of society, and it speaks to national priorities, and it's something that we have got to learn something from. We can't emulate everything, but we oughtta know what's going on and what we can learn.
Understanding there are differences, are there any particular things that you zero in on in Finland that you think we can translate to the US?
One of the great disgraces in this country which gets very little discussion is the fact that we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of any country in the industrialized world. Now not only is that from a moral perspective, a disgrace, it is just totally stupid. Because if kids are dropping out of school, the kids are getting into destructive activities, you end up with the reality that we have the highest number of people behind bars of any country on earth. There's a direct correlation. Highest childhood poverty rate, more people in jail. We spend $50,000 a year to keep people in jail. Makes more sense to invest in early childhood education--doing things like they do in Scandinavia. If you have a baby in Scandinavia or Finland, you get--I don't know how many months, 7 or 8 months off at three-quarters pay--then a mother can stay home, a father can stay home, nurture this child, develop the bond. That's just smart, it's cost-effective.
Better to put money into early childhood activities than to put people behind bars. That's a major lesson that I think we can learn.
Second of all, when we talk about family values and we talk about quality of life--again, this is not talked about--our people are getting exhausted. What was it, 100 years ago when the union movement fought for a 40-hour work week. Well you know what? 100 years have come and gone and we're not there yet, we're losing ground. You know, the idea that they can have a productive economy, and they have people who are well-rested, they have time for their friends, they have time for recreation--let's learn something from that. What should we be doing about vacation time in America? Well you're not gonna go to 30 days paid vacation, for sure. But right now we have no law--you got many workers who are going to work--they're lucky if they get a week. People are exhausted! What does this say about our quality of life and the impact on the productivity of our economy.
How are you feeling about your effort to shift priorities in Congress--which this is clearly a part of?
I understand what the nature of the opposition is. I know what Big Money is about. I know what the Republican party is about. I know what the corporate media is about. We keep fighting for what we believe in. So I'm not frustrated. I think we stand a chance in the near future for some transformative politics in America. This may be the period when the American people say, ‘Excuse me, we are moving in the wrong direction big time, in every single area.' Maybe – maybe – we can learn something from other countries around the world and start radically changing our national priorities. So, that's what I do. We keep doing it, and we keep fighting, and I think we're gaining support all over the country. Obviously, coming up with a type of economic system like Finland is not gonna happen tomorrow. But I think for a start it's important to at least let people know… you know, we hear so much from the media and the politicians about how terrible government is--well, they don't think that way in Finland. And we maybe want to learn something about that.
How do you get the mainstream media to shift so that these new ideas and alternative ideas receive more attention?
That's a good question. In my view, the corporate media is just so--I mean, they're playing the role that they're supposed to be playing, I suppose. They're owned by large corporations whose goal is to see taxes low for the rich, whose goal is to make money out of the insurance industry, out of the drug companies, and every other area of life. So they don't want the American people to learn what some of the positive things are that are going on around the rest of the world. So I think we just have to use every forum that we possibly can. And that's precisely why I'm bringing the Ambassador here. I just want--people may agree, they may disagree--but I want them to know that there is a country on earth which has virtually wiped out childhood poverty, provides healthcare to all, educational opportunity to all, college education, vacation time. And if they can do that in Finland, what can we learn from that? That's the debate that I want to see happen.
Share this article
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Thoughts on politics, current affairs, riffs and reflections on what’s in the news and what’s not--but should be.
RSS
As an American who lived in Sweden & Denmark for a total of 19 years, I can vouch for the far higher quality of life enjoyed by all in the Nordic countries as compared to the large majority in the US. And it has been this way for some decades.
Small point: Finland is not Scandinavia, but it is Nordic. Scandinavian, a related languages grouping = Denmark, Sweden, Norway. Many also include Iceland, but most Icelanders prefer not to be thought of as Scandinavians, simply as Icelanders.
Posted by sloper at 03/31/2008 @ 11:56am
TERRIFIC POST KATRINA Our President is always talking about "defending our way of life". This rhetoric rests on the premise that "our way of life" is optimal, the best, better than the rest. The American people like to hear this premise supported by their leaders. Bernie Sanders is showing the American people that there is another way of life. I live in Vermont. There are a lot of big Pick Up trucks here owned by Vermonters. In the summertime, they sit in the grocery store parking lots idling, wasting gasoline, to run the air conditioning while a family member runs into the grocery store. On this metaphorical pick up truck's bumper is a bumper sticker that reads: "WHAT IS OUR OIL DOING UNDERNEATH THEIR SAND?" No wonder they hate us. This is our way of life and in many ways we must CHANGE. As Hillary Clinton says, CHANGE IS HARD. But, Change we must. True Leaders lead us to that Change. There are only 3 TRUE LEADERS in our country that come to mind right now: Bernie Sanders, Al Gore and Barack Obama.
Posted by ajdjr73 at 03/31/2008 @ 12:09pm
I'm eager to hear from the plutocrats who would like to convince us that, contrary to all appearances, Finland is actually some kind of socialist Hell, and that we should be grateful that we, unlike the Finns, enjoy the incalculable (though largely invisible) blessings of so many multi-billionaires, as well as the freedom not to buy health insurance if we "prefer" not to. Well...?
The Finns will no doubt be happy that we are noticing them at last - as southern and western Europeans have been noticing them for some time now. (That PISA study is already several years old!) The Finns may sigh a little that we still consider them "Scandinavian," since their language is in no way related to the North Germanic languages that you hear in Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. But at least they are finally getting some attention from US-Americans, and for good reasons!
Something also has to be said about the alleged "diversity problem" that we have in these United States. Diversity is not a problem; racism and xenophobia are. Switzerland has four official languages (not counting English), but you never hear about what a terrible "challenge" this linguistic diversity is for the Swiss. Even in a "homogeneous" society like Finland, there are ethnic minorities, and EVERYBODY learns English in addition to Finnish. So... Why can't we do that?
Posted by JakobFabian at 03/31/2008 @ 12:10pm
Here is a letter I just emailed to the EPA which will be completely ignored:
It is imperative for states to be able to enact their own strict emissions standards, especially more populous ones, in order to lessen the inevitable effects of climate change and global warming. I think the federal govt. has a role, and if it chooses to not act on scientific data indicating our country needs to change immediately, it needs to fully support the states who are willing to change.
The Federal government subsidizes coal, oil, nuclear, and natural gas industries much more than any renewable sources of energy. Ethanol is not renewable since it is not sustainable, and is currently causing alarming environmental damage which the EPA should be addressing.
The energy industry has always been subsidized as a matter of ensuring that the country has adequate and reliable supplies of energy.
A Study for the National Commission on Energy Policy estimated federal energy subsidies for 2003 was $37 billion to $64 billion. Of this amount, $220 million was estimated to go to wind energy -- well under 1 percent of the total energy subsidy.
Ongoing monumental errors in judgment from the Bush administration continue to be based on faulty logic, and ignored by your agency. This needs to be reversed immediately in order to prevent global catastrophe and maintain our modern economy and standing in the world.
Posted by jrs112 at 03/31/2008 @ 12:10pm
(Bernie gets it.)
Posted by drhammer at 03/31/2008 @ 12:11pm
Ms vanden Heuvel....this sound familiar?
"Fortunately, legislators' votes always reveal their true loyalties."-----Posted by Katrina vanden Heuvel at 03/28/2008 @ 5:59pm
And btw, Finland is a parliamentary system with a unicameral legislature, who spent most of the Cold War as de facto Western apologists for the Soviets.
So, all in all, not likely to see the "Finlandization" of the US anytime soon.
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 12:15pm
In my rural county in central NY State, we have several towns with ideal conditions for wind energy. The alternative is a giant power line through our county called NYRI, since Bush just made up a "national energy corridor" designation in order to support even more coal. Still, a few NIMBYs have succeeded to block wind in our county, since it would pose an aesthetic risk, i.e. block their pristine mountaintop views. They do not care about the alternative or long-term consequences of their selfish behavior, since the huge power lines and subsequent coal plants north of here are not their problem. Even the environmental impact statement for the proposed wind farm is skewed to address these second home-owners' concerns, and does not even mention the positive benefits from wind. It is very backwards, and I wish we could single these individuals out so they can pay for all the rest of our gas bills and property taxes while younger, more progressive, common-sense minded individuals continue to leave this region, leaving us with stubborn individuals who do not care about our their county's future.
I am very impressed with wind in other countries. I would like to move. Are there any jobs for environmental planners to actually help the environment????
Posted by jrs112 at 03/31/2008 @ 12:17pm
Interesting article in a recent issue of The American Conservative pointed out that Norway, Iceland (both social democratic), Switzerland (largely free market and low tax, if memory serves) and Belarus (a state-directed free market was roughly how its President described it, I think) were all doing better than their comparable neighbors economically.
Since the economic systems weren't the common factor, what was? According to the author, the fact that none of them had joined the European Union. In other words, they'd retained national sovereignty over their economies (an issue Ralph Nader has raised in his presidential campaigns).
The author also noted that Sweeden, which had previously been very competitive and enjoyed a very high standard of living, had lost ground since joining the EU on a typically narrow popular vote. One that I'm sure the mass media went in overdrive to promote while denigrating the opposition.
I wonder if Finland belongs to the EU. Ms. vanden Heuvel?
Posted by cka2nd at 03/31/2008 @ 12:23pm
"Here is a letter I just emailed to the EPA which will be completely ignored:"
Posted by JRS112 03/31/2008 @ 12:10pm
Don't feel bad.
Steven Johnson even ignores the Supreme Court.
Posted by drhammer at 03/31/2008 @ 12:23pm
Seriously.
Watch EPA director Johnson at any of his recent congressional testimonies.
His performance would make Mother Teresa want to drive to DC and fuck him up.
Posted by drhammer at 03/31/2008 @ 12:28pm
KVH...
"...as we attempt to regain some humility and re-engage with the world post-Bush."
Now that the cat is outta the bag, we'll see
How far we've descended; revealing integrity
Posted by ttr at 03/31/2008 @ 12:35pm
Mask, not every country is so lucky as to be surrounded by two oceans and two much weaker neighbors. You try leading a country like Finland or Austria during a Cold War, especially having lost the border territories that once formed your natural defenses.
For that matter, try sharing a border with Germany, too.
God, Americans get born on third base, strategically speaking, and think we've hit a triple!
Posted by cka2nd at 03/31/2008 @ 12:36pm
Posted by CKA2ND 03/31/2008 @ 12:23pm
I assume the question was rhetorical (Finland IS in the EU).
Though this points up an interesting element of the post-20th Century Left....a REJECTION of internationalism. From the WTO to the EU, rejection of world-wide organizations and demand for national sovereignty is now an issue that is not solely on the Right.
I find that...interesting.
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 12:39pm
Yes, Finland belongs to the EU.
Sweden's economy hasn't shrunk since entering the EU, neither has Denmark's; both enjoy a standard of living higher than the US. Unlike Finland, which has surrendered its own currency & adopted the euro, Denmark & Sweden retain their own currencies.
Switzerland very narrowly voted down EU affiliation; although a majority of Swiss voters were for it, the minority of cantons opposing (all rural, all German-speaking)were enough to prevent this for a time. Switzerland is, however, part of the same economic zone now, and as such there is mainly free movement of labor with its EU neighbors.
Posted by sloper at 03/31/2008 @ 12:41pm
Like Imperial Rome, the USA no longer exports products but lives on the profits of slave labor in 'provinces' like China, Vietnam, El Salvador etc.; the divide between the American rich and poor is that between the rentier class and their lackeys in the 'service sector'.
The Finns, compelled to compete in the export market, invest their social capital in universal education and health care, since a nation of producers, unlike a nation of dividend collectors and their servants, can't afford a system of separate and unequal public services that provides the bare minimum, if that, to the workers who produce the goods, services and profits that sustain a productive society.
Posted by samcrossett at 03/31/2008 @ 12:43pm
Posted by CKA2ND 03/31/2008 @ 12:36pm
Few made the case that Finland acted as apologists for the Soviets because they felt threatened, that I remember. I remember a leftist organizer at my university who had a Finnish speaker come and bemoan Reagan and his hard-line stance against the USSR. Nobody said he did it "under duress" because Helsinki worried about a repeat of 1941.
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 12:43pm
Posted by SAMCROSSETT 03/31/2008 @ 12:43pm
Exactly right.
Posted by sloper at 03/31/2008 @ 12:46pm
Posted by MASK 03/31/2008 @ 12:43pm
Soooo because of the fact that they didn't like Reagan and the liked the USSR instead we are supposed to disregard any of their accomplishments? Because they "liked those damn reds", the fact that they have a much higher quality of living than us means nothing. Anyone who associated with the USSR doesn't matter. Only countries loyal to America are countries that should be learned from.
Is that what you're saying?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 03/31/2008 @ 1:03pm
Posted by MASK 03/31/2008 @ 12:43pm
Soooo because of the fact that they didn't like Reagan and the liked the USSR instead we are supposed to disregard any of their accomplishments? Because they "liked those damn reds", the fact that they have a much higher quality of living than us means nothing. Anyone who associated with the USSR doesn't matter. Only countries loyal to America are countries that should be learned from.
Is that what you're saying?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 03/31/2008 @ 1:03pm
Posted by CCCOMFO1 03/31/2008 @ 1:03pm
Noooooo....but it's part of their politics (You'll note, I ALSO said they were a parliamentary system with a unicameral legislature.).
Which means, even LESS SO than the Scandanavian countries (we've been told are "so advanced and we should emulate them")....there is little chance that the United States is going to imitate Finland in their "social democracy".
Frankly, I can't figure out where Ms vanden Heuvel is going with this stuff (ref: previous post "Watershed Moment") of some "progressive revolution" just over the horizon....when neither Hillary nor Obama is considered "liberal enough" for the Edwards' folks, the Kucinich folks, or the Nader folks (who most closely desire to move towards "Finlandization"). Neither candidate is even TALKING "single payer", much less free daycare and a host of other "Finnish" programs.
And Bernie Sanders?!?!??! True, the man's a Senator, but he was a self-described socialist Congressman, in a Party that is led by Harry Reid (a pro-life Nevadan) in the Senate!
And then she (Ms. vH) turns around on "Campaign Blog" and writes about how the DEMOCRATIC Congress is ignoring the Middle Class?!?!??
Is this bipolar disorder or something?!?!?
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 1:18pm
Posted by FREIHEIT 03/31/2008 @ 1:31pm
How many people attempt to immigrate to Finland each year? Maybe thats the reason they have such a low population of foreign born people.
On top of that what does the fact that most people aren't foreign born mean to the fact of learning from the prosperity of them. A lack of foreign born people doesn't make their prosperity any less legitimate.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 03/31/2008 @ 1:35pm
THIS IS A CONSPIRACY OF THE EUROCRAZIES, THE COMMIES AND THE BERNIESANDERSALGORIANS TO TAKE AWAY OUR GOD GIVEN RIGHTS TO IGNORE PROBLEMS AND TO BORROW MONEY IN ORDER TO BUY GUNS.
THE FOUNDERING FATHERS KNEW THIS WOULD HAPPEN WHEN THEY COPIED THE CONSTITUTION FROM THE BIBLE.
THAT IS WHY THEY WROTE THAT "BANKS SHALL BE UNREGULATED AND POOR PEOPLE SHALL WORK THREE JOBS IN ORDER TO PAY FOR MADEINCHINA CRAPPY VERSIONS OF STUFF THEY USED TO GET PAID TO MAKE".
BUILD MORE PRISONS! KEEP AMERICA STRONG!
Posted by WHAT TIME'S THE GAME ON? 03/31/2008 @ 1:43pm | ignore this person
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/31/2008 @ 1:45pm
And btw, Finland is a parliamentary system with a unicameral legislature, who spent most of the Cold War as de facto Western apologists for the Soviets.
So, all in all, not likely to see the "Finlandization" of the US anytime soon.
Posted by MASK 03/31/2008 @ 12:15pm
I suggest you go to Finland, Mask, and ask the Finns how they feel about the Russians - and the Soviets before them. The Finns hate the Russians, and always have. Apologists? I don't think so. If, during the Cold War, the Finns were less blunt with the Soviets than other Western countries were, it was only because they were on the Soviets' doorstep. Finland was invaded by the Russians in both World War I and World War II. Can you blame them for not wanting to rock the boat? They always felt threatened by the Soviet Union. Funnily enough, the Finns were actually accused of being Nazi sympathizers during and after World War II, because of their hostility towards the Soviet Union. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and all that.
Finland is a fantastic, stunningly beautiful country with a highly educated and highly civilized population. It is indeed one of the best places in the world to live, and if I ever leave The Netherlands, chances are I'll go to Finland. But the cultural divide between Finland and the US is enormous, so I have to agree with you in the end, Mask: not likely to see the "Finlandization" of the US anytime soon.
Posted by Amsterdam69 at 03/31/2008 @ 1:48pm
Posted by FREIHEIT 03/31/2008 @ 1:49pm
Are your observations on Finland's immigration rates anecdotal, or have you been studying Finnish immigration policy lately?
Because your correlation is pretty simplistic.
Posted by drhammer at 03/31/2008 @ 2:05pm
Some insight into the subject of emigration to Finland [tinyurl.com].
Posted by drhammer at 03/31/2008 @ 2:14pm
They just hide it behind the claims of Finnlands great quality of life that, um, no one seems to want to immigrate to. ;-)
Posted by FREIHEIT 03/31/2008 @ 1:49pm
maybe 13 months of winter has something to do with it.
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/31/2008 @ 2:18pm
You know, my colleagues get on the floor and they say, ‘Oh, the United States is the greatest country in the world…' Well, you look at social index after social index – look at health care and longevity and infant mortality, education and vacations. One of the things that blows me away about Finland is at a time when our people are working the longest hours of any people in the world, in Finland they get 30 days paid vacation and 14 national holidays. What do you think about that?
Now, we are getting somewhere, KVH!
This is the KEY issue. When is America going to LEARN from some of the other examples around the world on how to formulate public policy so it benefits the "greatest number" of Americans?
And when are we going to stop pretending that America is the best in the world when we know we are not in a number of areas, including the Happiness Index that currently shows the Danish as the happiest people on the planet?
Posted by Metteyya at 03/31/2008 @ 2:21pm
I assume the question was rhetorical (Finland IS in the EU).
Though this points up an interesting element of the post-20th Century Left....a REJECTION of internationalism. From the WTO to the EU, rejection of world-wide organizations and demand for national sovereignty is now an issue that is not solely on the Right.
I find that...interesting.
Posted by MASK 03/31/2008 @ 12:39pm | ignore this person
No, it wasn't rhetorical.
There has always been a tension between nationalism and internationalism on the left, and it amuses me when non-leftists assume the left has some kind of uniformly anti-nationalist past. It was the international left that supported, and often led, the post-World War II wave of anti-colonial, national liberation struggles that broke up the British, French, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese and Belgian empires, and the left that organized along national lines to overthrow U.S. client regimes in Central America. To make some distinctions, Maoism tends towards a more nationalistic approach than Trotskyism, but we don't put our faith in bourgeois international organizations like the UN, the EU and NATO, either.
Posted by cka2nd at 03/31/2008 @ 2:32pm
"so I have to agree with you in the end, Mask: not likely to see the "Finlandization" of the US anytime soon."----Posted by AMSTERDAM69 03/31/2008 @ 1:48pm
Well, that's the main thing...heheh.
As for the "threat" against Finland, the Finnish government DID maintain a relationship with the Soviets to "keep the peace" (and their independence), but that was VERY early after the War (when they were considered part of the "Soviet sphere of influence".
But by the 70s and 80s, any invasion of Finland would have hurt Soviet prestige AND economic interests...and NATO would have considered it a major provocative act, and likely build-up to war (and inevitable escalation to WW-3).
Finnish apologia for Sovietism went as far as downplaying Soviet power grabs (Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan) to banning Finnish language versions of Solzhenitsyn. During the 80s, they were often used as "neutral party honest broker" elements for various anti-nuke rallies and speeches by either naive or duplicitious European/American proponents...while of course they were not.
Regardless in this post-Cold War world....they are essentially (if not more so) pointless to cite as some "example for the US to follow" since their leftist politics (again, as exampled by Mr.s Kucinich or Nader) have been rejected by the mainstream of the American electorate and not likely to emerge even under Obama or Hillary ...or in the near future as well.
So again, why is Ms vanden Heuvel bringing up Bernie Sanders and Finland as some indicator of any potential American policy shift?!??!?!?
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 2:35pm
but we don't put our faith in bourgeois international organizations like the UN, the EU and NATO, either.---Posted by CKA2ND 03/31/2008 @ 2:32pm |
Well, of course the semantics come into play, CKA. For instance, you as a socialist would consider "the Left" yourself and those who think like you.
But I think it's fair to say the "mainstream Left" of the US (and Europe) have always desired a more powerful, perhaps even dominating role for the United Nations in national policy. Which of course is humorous given, that given its "let's let in everybody" set-up...it became dominated by countries that were dictatorships for many years.
And of course there is an additional hypocrisy from our neo-con friends on the Right, that they want to use "Saddam violated 17 UN resolutions...we HAD to invade" as part of their rationale for invading....yet hardly a one of them wouldn't love to see the United Nations dismantled at the same time!
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 2:39pm
So again, why is Ms vanden Heuvel bringing up Bernie Sanders and Finland as some indicator of any potential American policy shift?!??!?!?
Posted by MASK 03/31/2008 @ 2:35pm
maybe she's trying to point out that a lot of things suck, and that it's o.k. to humble oneself and look for guidance elsewhere.
you don't want 30 days of paid vacations and clean(ish) air?
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/31/2008 @ 2:41pm
Mask:
It's an interesting question concerning KVH's periodic flotation of ???. The problem is, I see she takes an issue, tells us how awful some element of American existence is, and then tells us that we need to change the awful thing. Has she ever articulated a specific set of policies or actions she wants to see, other than electing progressives?
Posted by sntauri at 03/31/2008 @ 2:46pm
"When is America going to LEARN from some of the other examples around the world on how to formulate public policy so it benefits the "greatest number" of Americans? And when are we going to stop pretending that America is the best in the world when we know we are not in a number of areas, including the Happiness Index that currently shows the Danish as the happiest people on the planet?" Posted by METTEYYA 03/31/2008
When?? Probably never. It's too late. Sorry 'bout that.
Posted by sloper at 03/31/2008 @ 3:08pm
you don't want 30 days of paid vacations and clean(ish) air?----Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 03/31/2008 @ 2:41pm
"TANSTAAFL"----Robert A. Heinlein
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 3:10pm
Has she ever articulated a specific set of policies or actions she wants to see, other than electing progressives?----Posted by SNTAURI 03/31/2008 @ 2:46pm
Of course. She often promotes a "New New Deal"...that's not her problem.
The problem is her rapturous "Look, look! Bernie Sanders is proposing free day-care"....Or "Is this a Watershed Moment" "We're winning!" naivete one moment...
and not a day later, her, dare I say, "MASK"-like cynicism of a "WHAT'S CONGRESS DOING FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS?"...Posted by Katrina vanden Heuvel at 03/28/2008 @ 5:59pm
?!?!!?!?
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 3:14pm
"TANSTAAFL"----Robert A. Heinlein
Posted by MASK 03/31/2008 @ 3:10pm
o.k.
wouldn't you like a society that could pay for such things?
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/31/2008 @ 3:16pm
MASK You are grossly misinformed when you state:
"So, all in all, not likely to see the "Finlandization" of the US anytime soon."
THIS PROCESS IS ALREADY OCCURRING, YOU ARE JUST TOO OBTUSE TO SEE IT APPARENTLY.
Posted by ajdjr73 at 03/31/2008 @ 3:42pm
wouldn't you like a society that could pay for such things?----Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 03/31/2008 @ 3:16pm
I don't know, FZ. I tend to favor the old "If it sounds too good...it probably is" adage to "month-long vacations" and what it would REALLY do to a large country like ours as far as the economy goes.
BTW, how much vacation is mandated by Ottawa?
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 3:44pm
Posted by AJDJR73 03/31/2008 @ 3:42pm
Lte me guess...you're one of the "Article One, Section 8 of the Constitution FORBIDS Social Security and Medicare" types?
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 3:45pm
Really, "Mask"... Why should it surprise you that KvdH's portrayal of what IS should contrast with her portrayal of what OUGHT to be?
That this IS and this OUGHT diverge, indeed rather dramatically, is the first tenet in every true progressive's code.
When will Bernie Sanders prevail in Congress? When enough of the US-American people realize that he SHOULD ... that's when.
There are two kinds of truth: That which remains eternally the same no matter what we do - like physics - and that which changes according to what we resolve to do - like politics. These two types of truths are interdependent. For example, what we do about global warming must be informed by physics, but what happens will depend upon how we resolve to cope with it.
Progress, in other words, requires that we recognize both the sub-optimal condition of the present and how it can be improved. KvdH's "What's Congress doing for the Middle Class?" serves the first purpose. Her interview with Bernie Sanders serves the second.
P.S. Greetings, "Frosty"!
Posted by JakobFabian at 03/31/2008 @ 3:48pm
BTW, how much vacation is mandated by Ottawa?
Posted by MASK 03/31/2008 @ 3:44pm
THE PRESENT SITUATION
Minimum Duration of Annual Vacations
In all jurisdictions, eligible employees are entitled to at least two weeks of annual vacation with pay after each completed year of employment. The exception is Saskatchewan, where employers must provide no less than three weeks of vacation with pay to employees who have completed one year of service.
In 11 jurisdictions, employees are entitled to an additional week of vacation with pay after a specified period of service. In Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba and Quebec, employees are entitled to three weeks of annual vacation with pay after five consecutive years of employment with the same employer. The same applies in the federal jurisdiction after six consecutive years of employment; in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut after six years of employment accumulated over the previous ten years; in New Brunswick and in Nova Scotia after eight years of employment; and lastly, in Newfoundland and Labrador after 15 years of continuous employment. After ten years of employment, employees in Saskatchewan must be granted four weeks of annual vacation with pay. It should be noted that employees in Quebec who have at least one year of uninterrupted service, but who do not yet qualify for three weeks of annual leave with pay, can take an additional week of annual leave, without pay, if they so request. This additional leave must be taken in one unbroken period, although it is not necessary to take it immediately before or after an annual leave with pay.
Minimum Amount of Vacation Pay
In most Canadian jurisdictions, vacation pay is set at 4% of an employees annual wages, except where the employee is entitled to three weeks of vacation, in which case the amount of vacation pay must be equal to at least 6% of annual wages.
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/31/2008 @ 3:57pm
PAID TIME OFF WITH 10 YEARS' TENURE
Country/Region •• Minimum Paid Vacation Days •• Paid public holidays •• Total
Australia 20 11 (avg.) 31
Austria 25 13 38
Belgium 20 10 30
Bulgaria 20 12 32
Canada 10 10 (avg.) 20
Cyprus 21 15 36
Czech Rep. 20 11 31
Denmark 25 10 35
Egypt 21 16 37
Estonia 28 10 38
Finland 30 14 44
France 30 10 40
Germany 24 10 34
Greece 25 12 37
Hong Kong 14 12 26
Hungary 23 (if over thirty-one yrs old) 10 33
India 12 19 31
Indonesia 12 13 25
Ireland 20 9 29
Israel 24 16 (avg.) 40
Italy 20 11 31
Japan 20 15 35
Latvia 20 11 31
Lebanon 15 18 33
Lithuania 28 12 40
Luxembourg 25 10 35
Malaysia 16 12 + state holidays 28 + state holidays
Malta 24 14 38
Morocco 21 19 40
Netherlands 20 8 28
New Zealand 20 11 31
Pakistan 14 14 28
Philippines 5 14 19
Poland 26 10 36
Portugal 22 12 34
Romania 21 7 28
Singapore 14 12 26
Slovakia 20 15 35
Slovenia 20 16 36
South Africa 21 12 33
South Korea 19 11 30
Spain 22 14 36
Sweden 25 11 36
Taiwan 14 11 25
Thailand 6 13 19
United Arab Emirates 30 9 39
United Kingdom 20 8 28
United States 15* 10* 25*
Vietnam 14 8 22
*These numbers reflect typical practice among large U.S. firms. There is no federal law requiring employers to give a minimum number of vacation days and holidays off, paid or unpaid.
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/31/2008 @ 3:59pm
hi jako
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/31/2008 @ 4:00pm
I made a web site covering this same issue comaparing USA vs Finland. I included costs for health care, education, long term care, taxes, etc. Bernie Sanders is right on target. Congrats. At last somebody in Congress is awake. There is more info forthcoming. Site under construction. You can access it at: http://www.universalhealthcareinfousa.com
Posted by John Saarikko at 03/31/2008 @ 4:41pm
how can you consider finland's economy a "punishing tax structure" if all citizens are lifted up to not only a level where they can survive (health care, education, pension, etc) but also to a level where they can excel (speak multiple languages, play an instrument, cook, etc)? finnish people are extraordinarily adaptive, and they routinely set the record in world spa championships. last year, a woman got up to 253 F.
Posted by darladoon at 03/31/2008 @ 4:57pm
Germany and France being a bit higher
if by "a bit" you mean 5-10 times, sure......
france and germany are 50 million each.
Posted by darladoon at 03/31/2008 @ 4:58pm
can we also not characterize an attempt by congress to raise taxes (even slightly) as "finlandization"?
Posted by darladoon at 03/31/2008 @ 5:01pm
do we actually need to become like finland, or can we simply get ideas from it?
if anyone actually thinks that politicians (except for bush, he doesn't even know where finland is) don't pay attention to what other countries do, think again....
Posted by darladoon at 03/31/2008 @ 5:12pm
Posted by SLOPER 03/31/2008 @ 11:56am | ignore this person
Bravo.
Posted by emile duBois at 03/31/2008 @ 6:22pm
hmm, nothing from the Blutocrats yet?
How many military bases does Finland have around the world? That is how one should measure success.
Posted by crabwalk at 03/31/2008 @ 6:26pm
As we can see, public education will lead to the downfall of modern society.
Posted by crabwalk at 03/31/2008 @ 6:28pm
From DR's link...
In contrast to other EU countries, asylum applications to Finland are still on the rise. Finland currently receives 1,000 to 3,000 asylum seekers annually. In 2004, Finland has received more asylum applications than Denmark, which has a much longer and more significant history of receiving immigrants. There are three main causes for this trend: the increased knowledge about Finland as a stable and socially developed country with few incidents of racial violence, a lack of a well-established and hostile far right, and further asylum entry restrictions in other Western countries.
Since 1990, Finland has received 3,000 Somalis fleeing civil war, thousands of Kurds from the Middle East, and thousands of refugees fleeing the Balkan conflicts. Because of the large living-standard gap across the Fenno-Russian border and the ongoing human rights situation in the Caucasus, Finland received over 3,400 asylum applications from the former Soviet Union and Russia between 1990 and September 2004.
In a tiny country, compared to the US, Finland has accepted more Somali refugees than the US has accepted Iraqi refugees.
Posted by crabwalk at 03/31/2008 @ 6:31pm
Who cares what Europe, Scandanavia, and Finnish, Russians, Latvians, et al have for government controls, benefits, etc.
so, you don't care to learn from others?
Posted by crabwalk at 03/31/2008 @ 6:32pm
"Who cares what kind of government the US has!!"- Mugtada al-Sadr.
Posted by crabwalk at 03/31/2008 @ 6:33pm
Here's some interesting facts about that old homogenous country called Finland.
Posted by ACook at 03/31/2008 @ 7:47pm
Oops the link didn't work. Oh well, here it is...
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/fi.html
Posted by ACook at 03/31/2008 @ 7:48pm
Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 03/31/2008 @ 3:59pm
So you guys are 10/10/20...
and we're 15/10/25?
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 8:08pm
so, you don't care to learn from others?----Posted by CRABWALK 03/31/2008 @ 6:32pm
It's not especially relevant.-----Posted by LVLIBERTY1 03/31/2008 @ 7:56pm
You don't think it's "especially relevant" to learn things from other cultures...like the Mid-Eastern cultures?
Posted by Mask at 03/31/2008 @ 8:10pm
Who cares what Europe, Scandanavia, and Finnish, Russians, Latvians, et al have for government controls, benefits, etc.
i do, as do many people here. i continually marvel at the ingenuity of a lot of people from that part of the world. always tinkering, thinking, designing, engineering, creating, etc, etc....we could def learn a lot from them.
people have joked about my interest in scandinavian spas. but where is the basis for their criticism? that spas are insignificant? well, then, why scandinavians not fear nudity or sex or the human body or farts or burps or anything "impure" that we americans fear and loathe.
And for all you good socialists, how does the government have any right in this country to set minimum standards for vacations and paid holidays?
because corporations, without any accountability or enforcement of "minimum standards", will do as they please. you know this.
Posted by darladoon at 03/31/2008 @ 8:23pm
The US constitutional republic doesn't need any middle eastern culture to set it's policies, including Israel
speaking of head's spinning. the above statement simply floored me. math, philosophy, logic.....we have had middle eastern culture setting our "policies" forever.
Posted by darladoon at 03/31/2008 @ 8:26pm
Every country should reflect in their government, the cultural and religious values of it's citizenry, the geography, and the natural resources
is this the definition of xenophobia?
if not, is it at least pretty close?
Posted by darladoon at 03/31/2008 @ 8:27pm
seems like textbook xenophobia to me:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia
goverment's job is not to represent a type of person, or group of people. its job is to pass laws, and to hold the other two branches of government in check.
it is, in fact, culture blind.
Posted by darladoon at 03/31/2008 @ 9:13pm
doesn't the constitution state that goverment shall not respect one religion (and by extension, no religions?) that seems pretty culture blind to me.
Posted by darladoon at 03/31/2008 @ 9:14pm
huh, what's this?
Fed eyes nationalization of banks (thanks Scandinavia!)
http://digg.com/business_finance/Fed_eyes_Nordic_style_nationalisation_o f_US_banks
Posted by darladoon at 03/31/2008 @ 9:31pm
So you guys are 10/10/20...
and we're 15/10/25?
Posted by MASK 03/31/2008 @ 8:08pm
**These numbers reflect typical practice among large U.S. firms. There is no federal law requiring employers to give a minimum number of vacation days and holidays off, paid or unpaid.
while your government's "policy" is worse, ours is almost as bad.
both sure could be a lot better....
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/31/2008 @ 10:56pm
Posted by shadow master at 04/01/2008 @ 03:10am
Whoops, accidentally hit the submit button there. At any rate, I found it relatively stunning that Egypt has a better official policy on vacation time then the US, seriously, Egypt. Were officially behind 3rd world dictatorships now in how much free time we give our citizens. I guess I shouldn't be suprised though, as LVLiberty stated, the sun never sets on the American empire. That's what we should be proud of. I mean, why spend all our money on useless things like improving our quality of life, when you can ring the planet in military bases, and have an nuclear arsenal big enough to end all life on the planet? I mean, so what if Congress were paying for congress to have the best healthcare plan in the country, that's their money, not ours. And god forbid we skim a bit off the top of Exxons and Walmarts 9 digit profit margins to pay for some health care for the rest of us.
Posted by shadow master at 04/01/2008 @ 03:20am
Look at it this way, right now LUVSLIBERTY is paying for healthcare for thousands of MALWART employees. He just does not see it. That is so the Waltons can be ranked in the top of the top of the wealthy. If they had to give up some taxes, the whole empire would collapse! As long as it's called a "fee" or "charge" (ie from a corporation) it is good. Once the term "tax" is used...whoah Nelly! Watch out!
why would we want to try to be better? It is well documented that there is no better place on Earth. God himself drew the lines on the globe to see that it happened that way.
Posted by crabwalk at 04/01/2008 @ 07:38am
Whereas the free market of Iraq is doing fine, the surge is working. How can we tell? Deaths are up.
Tue Apr 1, 2:35 AM ET
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Violent civilian deaths in Iraq climbed to their highest level since mid-2007, Iraqi government figures showed on Tuesday, due to a spike in violence between Iraq security forces and Mehdi Army militia fighters.
A total of 923 civilians died violently in March, up 31 percent from February and the deadliest month since August 2007, according to figures released by Iraq's interior, defense and health ministries.
Posted by crabwalk at 04/01/2008 @ 07:44am
Dear "Marybretbrad,"
The difference between fear and hate is only reason. If fear has no reason, then we call it a "phobia." Irrational fear can also be called "hate."
Consider arachnophobia, the irrational fear of spiders. What does an arachnophobe do to a spider? He either runs away or kills it. The former behavior is called "fear," but the latter would more accurately be called "hate." The word "phobia" applies equally to both behaviors.
Homophobes react more or less the same way to gays as arachnophobes react to spiders. You can call this a "phobia" or hate, but there is really no difference. You could call it simple "fear" only if it were rational, which homophobia most definitely is not.
I also take issue with the notion that every people is born with "freedom and sovereignty" and may either keep these things or "relinquish" them for "safety." This seems at odds with the general path of world history. Perhaps our hunter-gatherer ancestors had a certain primeval freedom - the freedom to starve if you couldn't find enough food. Then agriculture was developed, and with it the possibility to share the bounty - or, to do what was actually done, which was to concentrate the agricultural surplus in the hands of a privileged group of people, leaving the majority of farmers poor. This type of economy, which Jared Diamond calls "kleptocracy," has remained in place all over the world - more or less - ever since the agricultural surplus first emerged.
I say "more or less," because in some places, the democratic struggle has reduced the unfairness of kleptocracy. Finland lies at the forefront of this development. We are presently bringing up the rear - not because we have no surplus, but because we distribute it so unfairly. And as a result of our unfairness - and our xenophobia - it seems that our surplus, too, is now diminishing. We are squandering it in order to maintain our kleptocracy, which conceals itself behind such convenient phrases as "the free market."
Posted by JakobFabian at 04/01/2008 @ 08:41am
And another message, especially for "Marybretbrad":
As I have said in an earlier posting, diversity is not a problem. Racism is.
The interesting thing about your demographic data is that they seem to confirm the existence of racism. The Reverend Jeremiah Wright couldn't have done it better.
At the same time, I agree with Barack Obama that these United States of America are not as racist today as they once were. Racism is a curable condition.
But if we do cure our racism, then diversity will cease to be a problem - and one more pillar of kleptocracy, the time-tested "divide-and-conquer" strategy, which plutocrats have always used to keep us distracted from them - will come crashing down.
Posted by JakobFabian at 04/01/2008 @ 08:50am
A few questions for KATRINA here if I may:
How much money was Finland able to contribute to the Tsunami victims in Indonesia, either its gov or its people?
How much food were they able to supply to war torn Europe in 1918, after those enlightened souls spent four years destroying themselves?
How much food and supplies goes out from Finland every year to support the worlds starving?
How many people in Finland could single handly bail their country out of an economic recession if neccesary?
How much did Finland spend after WWII keeping the Russians from overrunning Europe?
Of course, I'm not knocking Finland at all with my questions. Nobody really expects Finland to do all those things, but the world DOES expect us to, and to do it we need a system that creates unbridles wealth and maintains a good standard of living, although not necessarily the best. You can't do that if you can only sustain yourself, which is the trade off Finland accepts for its quality of life.
Imagine a world in which the US could only sustain itself. It is good that Finland has a high quality of life, although Finland's economic and political influence on the world scene is fairly insignificant. Again, no insult.
When two parents scrimp and save to provide a high quality of life for their child, that make the childs world much better. How long could you expect that to last if the parents suddenly started acting like the child?
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/01/2008 @ 09:07am
And as a result of our unfairness - and our xenophobia posted by JAKOBFABIAN 04/01/2008 @ 08:41am
Wait....so you're saying that WE"RE the xenophobes and racists, yet glorious Finland that's 99% white European is NOT?
Posted by Sliver at 04/01/2008 @ 09:21am
Posted by CHIP THORNTON 04/01/2008 @ 09:07am
It would be a little embarrassing to find out that we send more to fight AIDS in Africa every year than the entire GDP of Finland who only buys healthcare and runs naked spas for their white people.
Posted by Sliver at 04/01/2008 @ 09:26am
--who receive a free education through college. Or maybe it's the free comprehensive health care, quality childcare at almost no cost, or pro-environment, pro-labor policies that support a very competitive economy.
-From Wiki While income levels are among the world's highest, disposable income and purchasing power are considerably smaller. Median worker pays nearly 60 percent tax wedge[57] and marginal tax rates are high. Value-added tax is 22 percent for most items. Capital gains tax and corporate tax are both 26 percent, about European average. For instance, consumers have to pay around 1600 euro for a 400 euro service, discouraging service supply and demand.[59] All post-depression governments have cut taxes, but they are still around 43 percent of GDP or 30,000 euro per household.[60] Taxpayers pay around 124,000 state employees and 430,000 municipal employees, twice as much as in Japan and almost as much as in Sweden. E-readiness is rated 10th, reflecting lower information technology utilization than the United States and higher than France. In 2001 Finland was behind Sweden in outsourcing percentage, but ranked well in Europe. Outsourcing had saved costs and increased customer satisfaction.[57] Assigned municipal health clinic used to be the only choice for residents without private health insurance, but after recent reforms residents are increasingly allowed to use private health care and there is popular support for making them equal in the marketplace.[61]
Doesn't sound very "free" to me. And actually the trend is towards privatization. Look at their energy industry. Savings rates are in negative territory. Unemployment is 6.8% despite a massive public sector and conscripted military. Agriculture is heavily subsidized and not self-sustaining without imports. Sparse "rural" population, and the music sucks.
Like Samuel L. Jackson said in Jurassic Park..."We have all the problems of a major theme park AND a major zoo."
Posted by Sliver at 04/01/2008 @ 10:09am
Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/01/2008 @ 08:32am |
ooh,
i bet you wanna live there in allwhiteyland.
enjoy your reindeer milk....
Posted by frosty zoom at 04/01/2008 @ 11:39am
Another facet of all this has to do with our nature vs that of other nations. To boldly (heh heh) use myself as an example,I don't want my government involved in every aspect of my life, or even some aspects. If they are constantly supporting me then my own ability to progress is undermined. It also gives them a measure of control that I find unacceptable. My economic and political freedoms, which are inseparable, are more important to me than their help in almost every case.
Not all people in the world think like that,however. I have in the past had arguments with one Professor from New York, (who shall remain nameless and German) over socialized health care, an arguement that will never be resolved because he thinks about it like a European, that its a right people are entitled to. I don't.
So for Finland to be perfectly satisfied with its system is not surprising. If it works for them, fine. What Katrina suggests, that we emulate them, demonstrates both a lack of understanding of our nature and our position in the world.
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/01/2008 @ 11:44am
Hey Frosty, glad you're still around.
If you think reindeer milk's bad, try fermented mare's milk. Sourist drink on the planet, but with a little kick too. :)
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/01/2008 @ 11:47am
I don't think LV is afraid of other cultures, he, like I, think they are inferior in many ways, especially their willingness to relinquish freedom and soveriegnty for safety
uh, does anyone else see the hilarity in this statement? sounds a lot like the united states.
If the United states were one-sixtieth of is size and didn't have any blacks or hispanic people or catholics or Jews, we'd be socialist too
so, the reason why we don't have center-left tax policies, instead of center-right, is because we have minorities? this is just ludicrous on its face, and reinforces my post about xenophobia.
Camille Paglia once commentted that Sweeden makes a good socialist country becasue it is basically a big extended family. The instant there was ethnic strife (muslims refusing to assimilate) there were calls to pare back
so, if ms. paglia says so, then it's true? paglia has said a lot of things, but only appears relevant when talking about the marquis de sade or boy sex.
Posted by darladoon at 04/01/2008 @ 11:52am
Posted by LVLIBERTY1 03/31/2008 @ 8:16pm
I can see you're trying to stay one step ahead of the trap, LVLIB.....but as you leap over the bear trap (that of the fact your entire belief-system is based on a Mid-Eastern culture), there's a pit behind that. And that is...
So (given what you said...that we're not a "Christian country")...then our foreign policy should NOT be based on fundamentalist (Or evangelical if you like) Christianity...
to wit....abject support of Israel to "retain God's favor"?
Posted by Mask at 04/01/2008 @ 12:27pm
BTW, back on-topic....again, this is a sillly article from Ms vanden Heuvel.
If not on merit, on political reality, which is neither Finland NOR Senator Bernie Sanders has much influence over American domestic policy...nor is likely to.
Heard Obama or Hillary talking up "Finland" much lately?
Posted by Mask at 04/01/2008 @ 12:30pm
nor is likely to
mask, you are pretty sad, aren't you? i just linked to an article yesterday, from the telegraph, which reports that the Fed is considering nationalizing its banks much like the Scandinavian countries did during their crisis in the mid-90s.
in fact, it was THE major discussion on George Stephanopolous on Sunday.
Posted by darladoon at 04/01/2008 @ 12:33pm
and whether obama or hillary are talking about finland has NOTHING to do with this. absolutely nothing whatsoever.
if, as many researchers have pointed out, scandinavian countries DO have a higher quality of life than us, and have much higher taxes, can we at least figure out how this would work here?
clearly (!) our current fiscal policies are not working for large majorities of americans. so, we should just sit back, not worry about, just keep cutting taxes and bailing out large financial firms?
mask, you are the epitome of reactionary politics.....
Posted by darladoon at 04/01/2008 @ 12:37pm
and our position in the world.
Posted by CHIP THORNTON 04/01/2008 @ 11:44am
¿borrowers?
Posted by frosty zoom at 04/01/2008 @ 1:02pm
Frosty, finance is not my forte, so I concede that point, although you know thats not what I'm getting at right?
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/01/2008 @ 1:09pm
I, think they are inferior in many ways, especially their willingness to relinquish freedom and soveriegnty for safety.
Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/01/2008 @ 08:22am
Too rich. The irony runneth over.
Disposable income is dropping in this country too. Healthcare and energy costs are the two largest contributors to this drop, IMO. A reasonable approach to healthcare would start by an analysis of other countries systems, what works, what doesn't? But, even the thought of looking at Findland gets the neo-cosn all twisted up in the shorts.
A real energy policy could do wonders for energy prices. No plan= failure over time. When we reach the point of $6-7 gas, will we be ready? Not as I see it now.
Posted by crabwalk at 04/01/2008 @ 1:35pm
I find it interesting how the majority of commenters here measure "Quality of Life" by how many comforts they can get someone else to pay for. Is "free" health care, "free" college, and government mandated wage limits and vacation time really your only requirement for a good life?
America has more land, more resources, more opportunity and more freedom than any of these countries that everyone seems so anxious to emulate. Maybe we should measure quality of life by how many cars or TV's or computers our impoverished have. Or measure quality of life by the number of people who have now become millionaires. If you measure by Socialist goals then Socialist countries will come out on top.
Who are you going to steal your health care from in order for it to be free? Personally I don't want someone else to pay for my necessities.
Socialism seems to be the preferred system for lazy people.
Posted by fatboy02 at 04/01/2008 @ 1:42pm
ALL the Nordic countries have for some decades given a greater share of GDP than has the US. The rightwing nonsense peddled in some of these posts here is extremely uninformed.
Posted by sloper at 04/01/2008 @ 1:42pm
Greater share of GDP in untied foreign aid to developing countries, that is.
Posted by sloper at 04/01/2008 @ 1:45pm
mask, you are the epitome of reactionary politics.....---Posted by DARLADOON 04/01/2008 @ 12:37pm
Why is it "reactionary" to live in...the REAL WORLD?
And not engage in fantasies of "95% tax rates", "massive, beyond-anything-ever-considered domestic programs", as well as "everybody stop driving" and "living in the cities and turning the suburbs into parks and farms"?!?!?
And it's important what Hillary or Obama are saying because, including John McCain, ONE of them will be the President of the United States in 2009 and will be trying to enact a domestic agenda...and to say it is AT BEST 1/100ths of what you keep prattling on about (or 1/10th what Bernie Sanders and Ms vanden Heuvel want)...is the reality of the situation.
Not the political fantasies of a woman who, and ya know I love ya, is living in the insular echo-chamber of Castro, where never is heard a discouraging word from anything right of ANSWER and EarthFirst!
Posted by Mask at 04/01/2008 @ 2:17pm
A real energy policy could do wonders for energy prices. No plan= failure over time. When we reach the point of $6-7 gas, will we be ready? Not as I see it now.
Posted by CRABWALK 04/01/2008 @ 1:35pm
don't forget about food.
the inflation that we've been hiding on the backs of the chinese is finally showing up in the supermarket.
how about $12 wheaties?
Posted by frosty zoom at 04/01/2008 @ 2:39pm
Who are you going to steal your health care from in order for it to be free? Personally I don't want someone else to pay for my necessities.
Posted by FATBOY02 04/01/2008 @ 1:42pm
so, you build your own roads?
Posted by frosty zoom at 04/01/2008 @ 2:40pm
mask, you always (!) revert back to an extreme, diametrically opposed argument which does not engage the REALISTIC arguments which we are making. for instance, if a particular, higher tax rate covers the cost of health care for SICK CHILDREN, is there not some merit to engaging this argument? or what about (yes), people reducing their reliance on cars? is there something inherently unrealistic about the need to reduce congestion, pollution, etc? is there something inherently realistic about preserving open space, national parks, endangered species, farmland, etc? do scandinavians have any good ideas worth considering? in your worldview, no. and that is, quite frankly, very sad, even pathetic. in your world (oh so realistic), there are no options, because each option has both a cost and a benefit. it's total inertia. it's ridiculously unrealistic, in fact.
i'm not even going to engage your comments about the pres campaign. irrelevant. totally irrelevant whether 3 people are talking about finland.
as for the person who said this:
Is "free" health care, "free" college, and government mandated wage limits and vacation time really your only requirement for a good life?
does this person understand that getting cancer in the united states is often the equivalent to bankruptcy? does this person understand that many insurance companies charge exorbitant rates for people who are predisposed to certain diseases? is this fair? is this humane?
can any right winger answer those last two questions in a fair and balanced way?
a country with a great deal of millionaires is a good thing? how so? how is this a good thing?
Posted by darladoon at 04/01/2008 @ 2:41pm
Personally I don't want someone else to pay for my necessities
cancer can set one person back upwards of $100,000. do you have that much money?
if not, then someone else will have to pay for your necessities (unless, of course, you don't think surviving prostate cancer is a necessity). whether it's an insurance company, or the government, does it really matter?
Posted by darladoon at 04/01/2008 @ 2:54pm
the insurance company is looking for profit above all else.
so, perhaps they won't help you if you get prostate cancer.
Posted by darladoon at 04/01/2008 @ 2:54pm
so, you build your own roads?
Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 04/01/2008 @ 2:40pm
No I do not. Neither does the government, however. Private firms build my roads through contracts organized by state and local officials.
I would liken health care to a more personal choice, such as a car. Government does not build my car or decide which car I should drive.
Likewise, government also helps organize the public facilities necessary to use my health care such as hospitals, as they do roads.
Posted by fatboy02 at 04/01/2008 @ 3:48pm
as for the person who said this:
Is "free" health care, "free" college, and government mandated wage limits and vacation time really your only requirement for a good life?
does this person understand that getting cancer in the united states is often the equivalent to bankruptcy? does this person understand that many insurance companies charge exorbitant rates for people who are predisposed to certain diseases? is this fair? is this humane?
can any right winger answer those last two questions in a fair and balanced way?
a country with a great deal of millionaires is a good thing? how so? how is this a good thing?
Posted by DARLADOON 04/01/2008 @ 2:41pm
I guess a socialist will always have trouble understanding risk.
Getting cancer is a risk we all take, health insurance is a hedge against that risk. Some people engage in behavior that increases those risks. Some unfortunately do end up with cancer regardless. I understand this completely, I have lost many family members to the disease. Having bad luck or unlucky family history, does not entitle you to someone else's labor (i.e. doctors, nurses, insurance companies).
Yes you may well go bankrupt if you get cancer. You may also go bankrupt if you lose your job, or if you are in an auto accident, or decide to play xBox all day instead of going to work. Some are choices others are risks.
As far as the rate insurance companies charge, they do so according to the risks that they are taking monetarily. Fair and Humane have nothing to do with it! (Sounds so callous doesn't it?)
Do you really think that if, in your Utopian government fantasy, all insurance companies were required to cover every single person regardless of risk that the price would be lower? Or better yet, that the cost to individuals would be lower if government provided the service?
If the amount insurance companies charge is too high, the market will correct it. There will be an opportunity for another company to make money and gain market share by trading risk for profit and offering the service at a lower price.
By allowing market forces to operate, we enjoy the best, most innovative, and most widely used health care system in the world.
Hope that's fair and balanced enough for ya.
And yes the more millionaires the better. I would like everyone to be a millionaire. From every poor impoverished inner city youth, to every wall street trader. Every one being productive and fulfilling their dreams, I can't imagine a better world.
Posted by fatboy02 at 04/01/2008 @ 4:13pm
Posted by DARLADOON 04/01/2008 @ 2:41pm
No, DARLA...you don't get to pretend all of a sudden that YOU are the "reasonable one" and that you're only offering up "raising taxes a bit to cover health care for kids"...or "reducing car useage"...or "preserving wilderness"....
those weren't your original suggestions.
Your original suggestions were "higher taxes for everybody"..."everybody stop driving"...and "gettting people into the cities and out of the suburbs and turning them back into parks and farms".
And if you'd like, I'll run down the REASONABLE and REALISTIC reasons that your "solutions" won't work....starting with the one I told you a year or so ago..."How do we FORCE all those folks out of the suburbs...and WHERE do they live in the inner city? And how do you alter 100 years of agriculture and food distribution and return it to a model not seen since the late 1800s?"
Or explain what tax rate you'd apply to "everybody"...since a lot of folks don't pay much income tax (but pay a payroll tax) and are barely making it now. Remember you didn't say "the top 1%" or "the evil rich"...you said "everybody"!!!
or how about the fact that "everybody stops driving" means....no interstate commerce...which means no truckers, no convenience stores, no motels, no refiners, no tanker truck drivers, no TIRE shops, no oil/lube places, no car dealers, etc., etc., etc., etc.
Which means (conservativesly) you just put AT THE LEAST 4-6 million people out of work and crashed the economy.
Now, again...why is my taking that into consideration "reactionary"...and you just flinging out random wild pie-in-the-sky thoughts a "rational cost/benefit analysis"?!?!?
Posted by Mask at 04/01/2008 @ 4:26pm
cancer can set one person back upwards of $100,000. do you have that much money?
if not, then someone else will have to pay for your necessities (unless, of course, you don't think surviving prostate cancer is a necessity). whether it's an insurance company, or the government, does it really matter?
Posted by DARLADOON 04/01/2008 @ 2:54pm
No surviving cancer is not a necessity. It is a challenge. One faced by many people, most of whom (in my humble experience) tend not to put a price on life.
There also are many such people who are willing to donate their time and skills and products to help those who need it. It's called charity and many people assume that it no longer exists. They are wrong. This has always been the case. 100 years ago there would have been no amount of money that would save your life.
Also, see my previous post regarding risk.
Posted by fatboy02 at 04/01/2008 @ 4:30pm
Vote for Lemminkäinen! He will build us a Sampo and end poverty.
Posted by sntauri at 04/01/2008 @ 6:56pm
By allowing market forces to operate, we enjoy the best, most innovative, and most widely used health care system in the world
"most widely used" and "most innovative" do not necessarily translate into "the best." in fact, if our health care system is so widely used, then why do 47 million americans not have health insurance?
from reading your responses, i have learned one thing about you: you are incompetent, inhumane, and, frankly, pretty shallow.
oh btw, the world health organization ranks our system 38th worldwide. we lag behind cuba, btw. a communist country. just thought i'd let you know, shallow fool.
Your original suggestions were "higher taxes for everybody"..."everybody stop driving"...and "gettting people into the cities and out of the suburbs and turning them back into parks and farms"
that's a very narrow characterization of my argument, mask, and you know it. but that's pretty much what you're good at: twisting arguments to fit your agenda, and generally just acting foolish.
Posted by darladoon at 04/01/2008 @ 8:25pm
Posted by SNTAURI 04/01/2008 @ 6:56pm
Sorry, Frank, but I've invested your life savings into "Un-happy Meals" and they haven't sold as well as I expected!
Posted by Mask at 04/01/2008 @ 8:26pm
so, let me get this straight, because insurance companies are taking a "risk" by insuring someone with a family history of, say, cancer, they have every right to charge higher rate? even if said person is currently 100% healthy?
does anyone else here see the problem with this?
Posted by darladoon at 04/01/2008 @ 8:29pm
If the amount insurance companies charge is too high, the market will correct it.
Posted by FATBOY02 04/01/2008 @ 4:13p
nonsense.
if there is a monopoly or oligopoly, no "market" (whatever THAT means) is going to "correct" anything.
Posted by frosty zoom at 04/01/2008 @ 11:32pm
Government does not build my car or decide which car I should drive.
Posted by FATBOY02 04/01/2008 @ 3:48pm
no, but you should be happy that emission and safety standards are set by said government.
Posted by frosty zoom at 04/01/2008 @ 11:33pm
By allowing market forces to operate, we enjoy the best, most innovative, and most widely used health care system in the world.
Posted by FATBOY02 04/01/2008 @ 4:13pm
put down that bong!
Posted by frosty zoom at 04/01/2008 @ 11:34pm
"Vote for Lemminkäinen! He will build us a Sampo and end poverty."
Posted by SNTAURI 04/01/2008 @ 6:56pm | ignore this person
I say, vote for Värttinä. Because those women rock!
(And because I have no idea what a "Sampo" is. I do know what a sauna is!)
I don't know why some commenters here insist on talking about Cuba when the topic should be Finland. To my mind, the Grand Old Cuba Debate: Is it Heaven or Hell? is a sport that only the Old Left and the Old Right can enjoy. Carry on, gentlemen!
The difference between Finland, Cuba, and the USA is: whereas Cubans have no real choice when they vote and we in these United States have at most two choices and one spoiler, the Finns have four or five real choices.
Proportional representation folks, check it out!
The health care issue complicates things, but only a little. You remember what they said about Mussolini - that he was a nasty dictator, but made the trains run on time? In Cuba, you have a similar situation, but you have to replace trains with doctors and hospitals. Also, Cuba has much better allies and a much better foreign policy, so you have to replace Hitler and Hirohito with Nelson Mandela and Hugo Chávez. In Finland, you get the great healthcare AND lose the dictator, receiving in return a comparatively youthful, sometimes female leader who is elected by popular vote. I'll let YOU draw your own comparisons with the USA here.
Good night to you all.
Posted by JakobFabian at 04/02/2008 @ 12:04am
SAMPO:
In the Kalevala, compiler Lönnrot interpreted it to be a quern or mill of some sort that made flour, salt, and gold out of thin air. Ilmarinen works for several days at a mighty forge until finally the Sampo is created:
On one side the flour is grinding, On another salt is making, On a third is money forging, And the lid is many-colored. Well the Sampo grinds when finished, To and fro the lid in rocking, Grinds one measure at the day-break, Grinds a measure fit for eating, Grinds a second for the market, Grinds a third one for the store-house.[1]
I think a Sampo is a tax payer!
As far as Värttinä , Seelinnikoi is a fun tune. See it at Youtube
Posted by sntauri at 04/02/2008 @ 12:24am
maybe finland does so well because they have a language nobody else can understand.
Posted by frosty zoom at 04/02/2008 @ 12:31am
Is America "ready" to listen to the experience of countries such as Finland? What a silly question. We got THE HAMBURGER from Finland for heaven's sake. How American is that! According to The Joy of Cooking, "merchants of the German port of Hamburg through centuries of trade with Estonians, Latvians, and Finns, had acquired the Baltic taste for scraped raw beef. The Germans of South St. Louis cooked it and introduced it at the St. Louis 1904 World's Fair". And no, no one is saying Americans should become Finns - just use our smarts to look and see what we can learn from them and adapt. Like the hamburger.
Posted by aterrificjob at 04/02/2008 @ 07:19am
Often said here is that China is kicking our ass, we should learn something from their new found capitalist ways, work harder, longer, for less.
But, the same people are TOTALLY unwilling to look at Finland, or Denmark, Germany etc, to see what we could learn from them.
If a socialist country has cheap labor, the cons will deal. If they have a high standard of living, equitable income levels and good education systems...well, they must be the anti-christ.
Lets hear from the nuts again that claim China is not really socialist!
Posted by crabwalk at 04/02/2008 @ 07:22am
February 3, 2005 Illness and medical bills caused half of the 1,458,000 personal bankruptcies in 2001, according to a study published by the journal Health Affairs.
Bankruptcy Bill • Senate Passes MBNA's Bankruptcy Bill • Congress Ready to Tighten Bankruptcy Law • Medical Bills Leading Cause of Bankruptcy, Harvard Study Finds
The study estimates that medical bankruptcies affect about 2 million Americans annually -- counting debtors and their dependents, including about 700,000 children.
Surprisingly, most of those bankrupted by illness had health insurance. More than three-quarters were insured at the start of the bankrupting illness. However, 38 percent had lost coverage at least temporarily by the time they filed for bankruptcy.
Most of the medical bankruptcy filers were middle class; 56 percent owned a home and the same number had attended college. In many cases, illness forced breadwinners to take time off from work -- losing income and job-based health insurance precisely when families needed it most.
Families in bankruptcy suffered many privations -- 30 percent had a utility cut off and 61 percent went without needed medical care.
so, that means that the neo-cons (and the rest of us) picked up the tab for these medical bills anyway, along with any other outstanding debt. then, because the now bankrupt probably will not seek basic care, their long term healthcare costs will actually increase. That cost will be passed along to us, again.
"The paradox is that the costliest health system in the world performs so poorly. We waste one-third of every health care dollar on insurance bureaucracy and profits while two million people go bankrupt annually and we leave 45 million uninsured" said Dr. Quentin Young, national coordinator of Physicians for a National Health Program.
"With national health insurance ('Medicare for All'), we could provide comprehensive, lifelong coverage to all Americans for the same amount we are spending now and end the cruelty of ruining families financially when they get sick."
then, there is the idea of cheap to free higher education. Can any of the cons explain to us looney librools why more education would be bad juju for us?
Posted by crabwalk at 04/02/2008 @ 07:28am
mmmm. scraped raw beef!
mmmm. With Reindeer milk and Kalekukko
Posted by crabwalk at 04/02/2008 @ 07:34am
With national health insurance ('Medicare for All'), we could provide comprehensive, lifelong coverage to all Americans for the same amount we are spending now and end the cruelty of ruining families financially when they get sick."
Finland couldn't do it for the same amount...had to raise taxes to 60%, and now had to cut taxes and open up more healthcare to the private sector, with strong support of the people. Those heartless, greedy Finns...must be Neo-cons.
then, there is the idea of cheap to free higher education. Can any of the cons explain to us looney librools why more education would be bad juju for us?
Had that covered 100% in our State budget up until 1937 (about the same time that SS started). Which one are you willing to cut to make this happen? And what are Universities doing to keep their costs down, so that more kids can attend? Here, they're raising tuition rates at twice the rate of inflation, and in some cases more. 50% of the inner-city kids don't graduate from high school. Do we get a refund at some point? It's only fair.
Posted by Sliver at 04/02/2008 @ 08:03am
Do we get a refund at some point? It's only fair.
Posted by SLIVER 04/02/2008 @ 08:03am
ask bear stearns.
Posted by frosty zoom at 04/02/2008 @ 09:56am
Frosty, I don't agree with the Bear-Stearns bailout either. But it wasn't taxpayer funding that they were pissing away while half the employees failed to show up....so take your equivalencies elsewhere.
20 years ago, mortgage lenders were being sued for not lending to risky borrowers under the guise of discrimination, so they're damned if they do and damned if they don't. So the only difference is who's gonna fuck you...the lawyers or the borrowers. And in the end, it's the responsible ones that foot the bill anyway.
Someone e-mail me when the tax rates hit 60%, healthcare is free, and you're not financially allowed to fail due to your own ignorance. That's just the incentive I need to never work again.
Posted by Sliver at 04/02/2008 @ 11:04am
"then, there is the idea of cheap to free higher education," "Crabwalk" wrote, and then asked, "Can any of the cons explain to us looney librools why more education would be bad juju for us?"
I think you already know the answer to that one! Better education would mean fewer conservatives. Their only hope is to keep us all ignorant, frightened, and uncritical.
"50% of the inner-city kids don't graduate from high school," "Sliver" observed. "Do we get a refund at some point? It's only fair."
What about the inner-city kids themselves? Do they get a refund? Frankly, I don't believe you are the primary victim of our failure as a society to educate these "inner-city kids"; THEY are. I sympathize with the notion that our poorly educated youth need some kind of a refund - and such a refund has even been proposed, by the name of REPARATIONS. But I'd be much happier if we simply invested enough money to educate ALL young people in the first place.
"Someone e-mail me when the tax rates hit 60%, healthcare is free, and you're not financially allowed to fail due to your own ignorance. That's just the incentive I need to never work again," groaned "Sliver."
You speak as if a 60% tax rate would necessarily entail free healthcare, freedom from the effects of failure, no reduction in ignorance, and the disappearance of incentive. But none of this follows.
It is possible, though of course not desirable, for the government to increase the upper tax bracket to 60% and then to spend all the proceeds on hundred-year wars and Bear-Stearns bailouts, in which case, yes, we'd have no reduction in ignorance and probably a significant reduction in incentive. But nobody actually favors this corrupt policy in its entirety, not even in the government (where I'm sure there are plenty of highly-paid lobbyists working hard to make this happen).
If we all had free healthcare, businesses could spend more money on research and development. The Big Three automakers could get out of the health-insurance business and back into the business of making high-quality cars. I cannot imagine how this could produce a reduction in incentive of any kind.
It is commonly assumed that higher taxes ruin people's incentive to work, as if there were no other factors. It could just as reasonably be argued that a low minimum wage ruins people's incentive to work. It's just that THOSE people aren't the people whom the pundits of plutocracy mean when they say the word "people."
Incentive does not emerge from any magic number, such as 30%, 40%, 50%, or 60%. It emerges from each person's relative economic standing compared to others, commonly called "the Joneses." If we had higher taxes levied on a steeply progressive curve, RELATIVE income differences would still persist (though they would be reduced in absolute terms), and they would still matter, because the economic pecking order would not change - and this is what really creates what we call "incentives."
In other words, if both the Joneses and I were taxed at 60%, it would change nothing about the jealousy I feel when the Joneses get a shinier new car, and nothing about what the Joneses feel when I get a shinier new computer.
Since the Finns have both higher and more steeply progressive taxes, the Finnish income classes are a little closer together, and consequently, Finnish pundits (including a few plutocrats) are compelled to use the word "people" a little more inclusively than ours do. (Having more than two political parties to choose from also has this effect.) However, the Finns are by no means a classless society. The Finns also have all the high-tech goodies that we have, as well as all the jealousies - and incentives - that these things entail.
Posted by JakobFabian at 04/02/2008 @ 11:53am
finns are just lazy.
clearly that is why they have such a high standard of living. Their incentive has been bread out of them.
what the cons fail to see is that they already pay, in higher premiums, higher medical bills, more money for prisons, higher prices for products not manufactured in socialist countries etc. But, they are willing to pay higher overhead in order to keep the word "tax" out of the equation.
JACKO's point about business being better off with SOME of these ideas is sound. The CEO's of many business are already coming around. And as we know, there is nobody smarter in the room than a CEO.
Posted by crabwalk at 04/02/2008 @ 12:51pm
from reading your responses, i have learned one thing about you: you are incompetent, inhumane, and, frankly, pretty shallow.
oh btw, the world health organization ranks our system 38th worldwide. we lag behind cuba, btw. a communist country. just thought i'd let you know, shallow fool.
Posted by DARLADOON 04/01/2008 @ 8:25pm
Ahh the true mark of a leftist, you run out of cogent arguments and start calling names. No matter, I could care less what you think of me. Someday you will realize (or perhaps not) how life works.
W.H.O., wow there's a unbiased source. I wonder what measurements they use to calculate those rankings? Probably the same silly stats used by those who are calculating quality of life.
I guess the millions of people from all over the world who risk their very lives and fortunes to get the US do so in order to access the 38th best health care system in the world. Yet they're not stampeding to Cuba.
Posted by fatboy02 at 04/02/2008 @ 2:08pm
When did Cuba annex Finland?
I missed that.
Posted by crabwalk at 04/02/2008 @ 4:39pm