Quote:
Originally Posted by lucifer_sam
don't worry, you're damn polite compared to all the neo-communist wankers out there. 
i think one of the major hurdles which prevents a large-scale socialist policy from being accepted into our economic policy is that it's almost an antithesis to the American dream -- the ideology that if you work hard, success and a good quality of life will follow. that's not to say that other people can't afford to have a decent living, but intrinsic to many Americans is the idea that the means to provide for yourself is well within your own power and certainly your responsibility, not the government's. |
I have some vague understanding of that and it is true that you don't have to work as hard here to accomplish your goals (if they are reasonable goals, such as getting an education with a job to fit later on). As I hinted at in my earlier post, I've been nurtured by the state my whole life, I've gotten surgery, I've gotten a quality biology education which included trips to the north polar ice cap, driving snow scooters over glaciers and weeks spent away on fieldwork where we had dinner at restaurants every night and so on paid by the government. The apartment I live in is part paid by the government (~40% of all my cash comes from them, so they also sponsor my beer drinking and other things). They've spent a huge amount of money on me and the government will do it for my children as well.
For the government, it's an investment. When a freshly educated doctor or biologist such as me comes out of school, he will have cost the state a lot of money. However, when that doctor has kept his job and paid his taxes for X amount of years, he will become a giver. It might happen late in his career (higher education is expensive), but on average that's what happens. That's part of why the government can afford to keep this up. The wonderful thing is that it doesn't matter who you are, where you come from or how much money your family makes. You'll get a quality education for free if you want one. To me, that is freedom - it gives you many options in life that many people won't have in a country where you need money to be free.
However, it probably does make people a little lazier and a little more secure in the knowledge that there is a safety net should things go wrong. However, I also think it raises the quality of life and I think that's one of the top things of what a society should do, raise the quality of life of the people.
Of course we don't have the same ideals (american dream) as you guys do in America and neither do we have the same political history - in particular we don't have much of a cold war and history with hostility towards leftist thinking. I think historically, people in Norway have been mostly concerned about not starving and if you could put food on the table and it was your table to put it on, then that was your life goal accomplished right there. Traditionally, we've valued modesty and getting by on what you need. Our society is rich, but it's never been able to churn out the kind of extravaganza you guys have overseas so we don't know all that except from what we see on the telly.
I realize though I probably seem more red than I am and I'm probably portraying Norway as a redder country too. I'm for a regulated market. I don't like the idea of the private sector entering schools and health care and I'm currently for protecting our agriculture from having to compete with outside markets (which is why Norway is not part of the EU, our farmers wouldn't make it), but shoes, books, CDs and other things I don't mind - bring on the competition. I believe it's important that people should be able to accomplish things and be rewarded for ambition, motivation and hard work, but I also believe in the government as a provider and nurturer of the people with free education and health care where providing the best service, not making money, is the number 1 priority. I'm sorta for the golden middle road although it might percieved a little more to the left over here than it is in America.