Non-religious, socialist societies are happier

[_Droopy]

I wonder if Droopy could get his head round the concept that there exist groups of people who, seeing the alternatives available elsewhere, actually vote in full knowledge of the facts for governments that tax them quite highly, so reducing their cash disposable income, but use the taxation so raised to provide excellent public services such as free child care and recreation facilities, free health care, really good and cheap public transport, a clean and safe urban environment, and so on?

I hope he doesn't mind if they continue to make that immoral, pauperising and really un-American choice?

Chap has fallen for the socialist fantasy lock, stock, and barrel. Notice the dichotomy he presents us. I see no reason to believe that the quality of public services has any connection to the kind of taxation present in socialist economies (as if sheer dollar amounts taken out of the economy are directly related to this - the U.S. public education system in the world, swimming in public funds but the poorest in the western world). Why is it the province of the state to provide child care? Free health care? A failure wherever its been implemented. Canadians and Brits flee here by the many thousands from their own countries each year to escape their own subsidized national systems. Cheap public transport? Why are socialist economic principles needed to ensure this? A clean, safe urban environment is only possible under socialism? Strange, we had that here, for many generations, up until - the mid sixties, quite without a Swedish or western European socialist model in place.

As to the main thesis of this post, that "there exist groups of people who, seeing the alternatives available elsewhere, actually vote in full knowledge of the facts for governments that tax them quite highly, so reducing their cash disposable income", no conservative or libertarian intellectual of which I'm aware does not acknowledge this. The sheepification (read the Mises article referenced above) of a population is one of the primary sociocultural consequences (if not goals) of a socialist economic and social order. This is why democratic socialism is the road to serfdom. Sheep don't need gulags if bread, circuses, and the perception of a warm blanket of security will do.

Many through history, probably a majority, have always preferred security to the risks of freedom.

[_Droopy]

Combine that with stagnant and near stagnant economies, high unemployment, and prohibitive costs of

living, and one can see why all the porn and drug usage. Bread and circuses for the masses as the rulers feed from the labors of those same masses.

It's also worth noting that drug use in the Scandinavian countries, Denmark in particular, is much lower than it is in the US. Maybe Droopy simply assumed the more liberal drug laws translated into more drug use period. Um, no.

e.g.

http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-
document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050141&ct=1&SESSID=
35ff495b43bd2e0b4e7fde8c4c21902f#top

The lower Swedish drug usage rates are probably a matter of culture, less the effects of the moral enervation encouraged by a socialist social order. Similar dynamics are at work when looking at attitudes towards alcohol use across various societies, irregardless of type of government (unless you move to severe totalitarian systems, such as that within the U.S.S.R., which experienced the highest alcoholism rates in the world for much of its existence as many citizens attempted to drink away their suffocating oppression, but that's an extreme case).

[_The Dude]

Have they done a poll of children? I wouldn't be surprised if kids are happier in December and early April if they believe in Santa and the Eastery Bunny. Wouldn't surprise me a bit.

Leave it to Dude to introduce an utter irrelevancy.

You can argue till your blue in the face that religious people are happier, but that placebo happiness is what's really irrelevant.

[_Gadianton]

lol. Coggins will find a way to make Sweden an uninhabitable swamp one way or another. Chap, of course, points out what Coggins dare not ever consider, that at least some of that taxation goes to improve the lives of the citizens paying the taxes. The CIA had this to say:

Aided by peace and neutrality for the whole of the 20th century, Sweden has achieved an enviable standard of living under a mixed system of high-tech capitalism and extensive welfare benefits. It has a modern distribution system, excellent internal and external communications, and a skilled labor force

The lower Swedish drug usage rates are probably a matter of culture, less the effects of the moral enervation encouraged by a socialist social order

But of course, the billboards plastered with pornography are the result of the hideous leftist agenda. All the good stuff about Sweden obviously either is a result of spinning statistics or has "one-off" explanations. All the bad stuff is the direct result of the Left.

[_EAllusion]

Sweden still compares reasonably well when you you look at PPP (purchasing power parity) per capita. Norway, swimming in its oil, is still easily beating the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... y_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

It's difficult to compare the US and Sweden in terms of what a person can buy after taxes and draw conclusions, if only because the Swedish government is buying for people stuff most people in the US acquire through the private sector - health care being the most obvious example. The government is taking a lot of economic choices off the table by providing an extensive cradle to grave welfare state, but that's different than looking at the overall health of the economy. What Gad and I were pointing out was how your statements about the strength of their economy are false. They would not be the 51st state, behind Mississippi.

[_EAllusion]

The lower Swedish drug usage rates are probably a matter of culture, less the effects of the moral enervation encouraged by a socialist social order. Similar dynamics are at work when looking at attitudes towards alcohol use across various societies, irregardless of type of government (unless you move to severe totalitarian systems, such as that within the U.S.S.R., which experienced the highest alcoholism rates in the world for much of its existence as many citizens attempted to drink away their suffocating oppression, but that's an extreme case).

So drug use is higher than it otherwise would be, if not for the socialism. That's not ad hoc or anything. Forgetting your lack of evidence for this for a moment: So when you talk about rampant drug use in Scandiavia, you mean low drug use that you suspect is somewhat higher than it otherwise would be? Meanwhile the US is destroying the world in terms of drug consumption. One can wonder if you think it would be even higher, if not for the economic policies. In any case, we can take that off of the list when talking about what a nightmare those Scandinavian countries are. As far as their drug use goes, they're doing Ok.

Have you considered that a contributing factor to high US drug use is our high levels of disposable income to spend on drugs? I went to the highschool with one of the worst drug problems in my state for a while. It wasn't some inner city hole. It was one of the best public schools from one of the richest areas in the state. The kids just had more money to spend on drugs. But that is a consequence of economic success, not failure.

[_Chap]

Free health care? A failure wherever its been implemented. Canadians and Brits flee here by the many thousands from their own countries each year to escape their own subsidized national systems.

LOL

Life expectancy rankings

https://www.odci.gov/library/publicatio ... 2rank.html

7 Canada
8 Sweden
9 France

[...]

41 Puerto Rico

[...]

47 United States

Does Droopy have health insurance, I wonder? If so, I wonder what proportion of his income it takes, and what he is and isn't covered for.

Americans suffer from various delusions about the rest of the world. One of them is that everyone else wants a health care system just like theirs.

[_EAllusion]

When I was there, in 1971, as a 12 year old, the entire country, including the rest of the Scandinavian countries, and the Netherlands, were quite literally swimming in pornography. Billboards, window posters, bookshops and news stands, it was as if entire peoples had literally given almost their entire media culture over to the production of erotic stimulation. We had porn here then, but I had never conceived of anything remotely like that, and particularly its unrestricted public nature.

Well, I was there for quite a while in the 90s. I went on long walks and travelled around using public transportation.
I saw a stunningly beautiful country, nice people, no sign of poverty that I can recall. I also do not remember any pornography. Of course, I might not be as sensitive as poor Coggy.

http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/anti_homosexuality_sermon

[_Droopy]

Have they done a poll of children? I wouldn't be surprised if kids are happier in December and early April if they believe in Santa and the Eastery Bunny. Wouldn't surprise me a bit.

Leave it to Dude to introduce an utter irrelevancy.

You can argue till your blue in the face that religious people are happier, but that placebo happiness is what's really irrelevant.

Poor, bitter, impotent raging atheist flailing at God as the sun he created warms his face.

Poor, poor sot...

[_Droopy]

Sweden still compares reasonably well when you you look at PPP (purchasing power parity) per capita. Norway, swimming in its oil, is still easily beating the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... y_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

It's difficult to compare the US and Sweden in terms of what a person can buy after taxes and draw conclusions, if only because the Swedish government is buying for people stuff most people in the US acquire through the private sector - health care being the most obvious example. The government is taking a lot of economic choices off the table by providing an extensive cradle to grave welfare state, but that's different than looking at the overall health of the economy. What Gad and I were pointing out was how your statements about the strength of their economy are false. They would not be the 51st state, behind Mississippi.

E and Gad: read my links, take cognizance of all the facts, stop dissembling with those facts, or retire from the arena of ideas here. Sweden, and western Europe proper, is a very, very mixed bag of social indicators.