this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
84 points (70.8% liked)

Memes

45727 readers
880 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] norgur@discuss.tchncs.de 33 points 11 months ago (13 children)

This sounds awfully like one of those weird debates where twisted and contorted buzzwords get thrown around and once one of us Europeans innocently enters the discussion gets downvoted and hated into oblivion because everything we say is taken in some weird context we didn't know shit about.

In what context dies a "Nordic model" come up and what's it supposed to entail?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 12 points 11 months ago (11 children)

The Nordic model is often thrown out as an alternative to Marxism. The argument is that Nordic countries managed to create a capitalist society without exploitation.

[–] norgur@discuss.tchncs.de 18 points 11 months ago (10 children)

Well, I'd say at least less exploitation than the raw capitalism the US has right now.

The funny thing is that the Allied powers helped establish a nation that has fixes for many problems the US faces right now, both constitutionally and economically in 1949.

Germany's economy calls itself "social market economy" and acknowledges that the state has to interfere with "the market" whenever the developing power gradient in capitalism threatens to stomp the weaker. Does it work perfectly? Of course not! Nothing does on that level. Is it in danger of being hollowed out by capitalist fuckfaces constantly? Absolutely. Yet the model might give.some ideas.

https://www.deutschland.de/en/topic/business/social-market-economy-in-germany-growth-and-prosperity

[–] bartolomeo@suppo.fi 2 points 11 months ago

Good point but it's important to note that in the US, the state definitely interferes with "the market", but only when power is threatened i.e. bailing out the banks instead of the mortgage holders in 2008, subsidies for fossil fuels and the meat industries, and other instances of protecting capital which would otherwise get a boo-boo should it be exposed to either free market forces or something like the efficiency of single payer health care.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)