Sweden's way of dealing with the poor

[Oscarthecat]

It means he has a prejudice against giving poor people government jobs, which is equated with institutionalizing people. Which is interesting, because a certain percentage of persons have difficulty holding a job for various reasons, including mental handicaps and so forth, which are undoubtedly included in the number.

I’m not sure who the “he” is that you’re referring to-

“Putting people away” is another way to say “institutionalizing people.”

Giving poor people jobs is not “putting them away” or “institutionalizing” them.

I’m not sure how or why you’re trying to juxtapose “institutionalizing people” with “giving poor people government jobs.”

In any event, both are tools of the welfare society, and ultimately result in destroying the human spirit and creating a subculture of people who believe they are dependent on government intervention.

 

[Man]

I’m not sure who the “he” is that you’re referring to-

“Putting people away” is another way to say “institutionalizing people.”

Giving poor people jobs is not “putting them away” or “institutionalizing” them.

I’m not sure how or why you’re trying to juxtapose “institutionalizing people” with “giving poor people government jobs.”

In any event, both are tools of the welfare society, and ultimately result in destroying the human spirit and creating a subculture of people who believe they are dependent on government intervention.

I think that your statement contains far too much pessimism with regards to the good that society can do in further forming individuals to be… to reach their… dreams.

Simply deploring every instance of welfare makes no sense, not least of all, because welfare is not inherently evil.

 

[Arandur]

Long thread. I don’t know if this has been said, but my 2 cents:
Work is dignifying and good. Even (perhaps especially) service work. The more people that work in any capacity, the more productivity there is in society–the more goods or services are provided and produced. Everything possible should be done, then, to get people to work.

And then of course there’s the justice issue of whether its right to give people something for nothing, to provide for more than basic needs but also for luxury desires, when those recipients are capable of doing something but choose not to. Justice is offended and mercy is abused in such a situation.

 

[Man]

Long thread. I don’t know if this has been said, but my 2 cents:
Work is dignifying and good. Even (perhaps especially) service work. The more people that work in any capacity, the more productivity there is in society–the more goods or services are provided and produced. Everything possible should be done, then, to get people to work.

And then of course there’s the justice issue of whether its right to give people something for nothing, to provide for more than basic needs but also for luxury desires, when those recipients are capable of doing something but choose not to. Justice is offended and mercy is abused in such a situation.

The solution is good personal intervention.

 

[Leeta]

You will have food and shelter, but it is very impersonal and with little variety. I lived in such a society. Yes, we were the poor ones. We were limited in travel due to our low income and it was simply not possible to go to certain sites with buses or trains. Meat is very expensive. There is little room to cook or for storage and with a big family this is quite a burden. The taxes are exorbitant.

In Sweden, the taxes on alcohol are so high that they go south to Germany to buy and drink. There is a super high alcoholism rate in all the Scandinavian countries. There are many tragic driving accidents from these tourist binges.

Also, moms are almost forced by the high taxes to work and put their little ones in day care. The cost of living is so high. Few own their own house or condo. Most all must rent and the rents are high and the apartments are small.This is exacting a toll on the emotional well-being of the children. iIt is dififcult to find an appartment for families because of the antichild mentality.

I know a family of 9 who live in a 3 or 4 small room apartment. They have been looking for 8 years for a bigger place and they live in prosperous big city. The oldest children are becoming teenagers and it is rather cramped.

Meanwhile the bums on the street receive cash form the city every week of so. There are shelters with all the necessities, but they prefer to sit and smoke and drink on the street and beg change from the passerbyers. I remember seeing a crowd of heroin addicts huddled in a corner of the subway getting their stuff. It was scary.

 

[Arandur]

Leeta, is the proportion of people on government assistance in this manner growing? The OP seemed to indicate that it was. Is the economy growing, and the prosperity of the middle class?

I doubt it. A society with a government that encourages perverse behavior (by encouraging people to live off of the labor of their neighbors without contributing) will get perverse outcomes. At some point, the productive members of society become effective slaves to the non-productive members. There is no justice in this. And though we should individually work with our neighbors to promote a more harmonious community, the government does play a role; governments are allowed and run by people, and so are called to justice as well.

Contrary to the OP, I would have to say that “Sweden’s way of dealing with the poor” is at best unjust, and most likely visits harm upon all strata of society.

 

[ribozyme]

Leeta, is the proportion of people on government assistance in this manner growing? The OP seemed to indicate that it was. Is the economy growing, and the prosperity of the middle class?

I doubt it. A society with a government that encourages perverse behavior (by encouraging people to live off of the labor of their neighbors without contributing) will get perverse outcomes. At some point, the productive members of society become effective slaves to the non-productive members. There is no justice in this. And though we should individually work with our neighbors to promote a more harmonious community, the government does play a role; governments are allowed and run by people, and so are called to justice as well.

Contrary to the OP, I would have to say that “Sweden’s way of dealing with the poor” is at best unjust, and most likely visits harm upon all strata of society.

So what is the best way of dealing with them so they are insulated from the adverse effects of poverty?

 

[freshwater]

**Do these people," that are being put away" , **have a voice in the matter or not ? freshwater

 

[Opelske]

You will have food and shelter, but it is very impersonal and with little variety. I lived in such a society. Yes, we were the poor ones. We were limited in travel due to our low income and it was simply not possible to go to certain sites with buses or trains. Meat is very expensive. There is little room to cook or for storage and with a big family this is quite a burden. The taxes are exorbitant.

In Sweden, the taxes on alcohol are so high that they go south to Germany to buy and drink. There is a super high alcoholism rate in all the Scandinavian countries. There are many tragic driving accidents from these tourist binges.

Also, moms are almost forced by the high taxes to work and put their little ones in day care. The cost of living is so high. Few own their own house or condo. Most all must rent and the rents are high and the apartments are small.This is exacting a toll on the emotional well-being of the children. iIt is dififcult to find an appartment for families because of the antichild mentality.

I know a family of 9 who live in a 3 or 4 small room apartment. They have been looking for 8 years for a bigger place and they live in prosperous big city. The oldest children are becoming teenagers and it is rather cramped.

Meanwhile the bums on the street receive cash form the city every week of so. There are shelters with all the necessities, but they prefer to sit and smoke and drink on the street and beg change from the passerbyers. I remember seeing a crowd of heroin addicts huddled in a corner of the subway getting their stuff. It was scary.

That’s the problem with too many government programs. The ever rising taxes overwhelm the working classes and the whole society is thrown out of balance. Moms can’t be home with the children and this is very disruptive to family life. The working class becomes poorer and the poor are not helped in the long term. There will always be a poor class, but it is ultimately up to the individual to take that first step to becoming a productive member of a given society. Even a government program can only do so much. A welfare system that supplements income and provides shelter and food should be a jumpstart until the person or family can learn to become self sufficient. Such a system must be done in a way that a person does not lose his dignity. The sick, elderly and hopeless cases are treated in one way and the poor but capable are treated in another way. Education, trade schools, old time shop apprenticeships, farm work are just some ways in which capable ones can learn to become self sufficient. There is nothing inherently bad about being poor, and there is a difference between poor and abject poverty. The bigger problem is that when a poor person moves upward to the next level he then becomes a taxpayer to fund the same programs he used, and if his job doesn’t pay well, then it becomes even more difficult for him to do better because of those ever rising taxes. It is a vicious cycle. But rising taxes are not the answer, they only add to the problem.

 

[ribozyme]

There will always be a poor class, but it is ultimately up to the individual to take that first step to becoming a productive member of a given society. Even a government program can only do so much. A welfare system that supplements income and provides shelter and food should be a jumpstart until the person or family can learn to become self sufficient. Such a system must be done in a way that a person does not lose his dignity. The sick, elderly and hopeless cases are treated in one way and the poor but capable are treated in another way. Education, trade schools, old time shop apprenticeships, farm work are just some ways in which capable ones can learn to become self sufficient. There is nothing inherently bad about being poor, and there is a difference between poor and abject poverty. The bigger problem is that when a poor person moves upward to the next level he then becomes a taxpayer to fund the same programs he used, and if his job doesn’t pay well, then it becomes even more difficult for him to do better because of those ever rising taxes. It is a vicious cycle. But rising taxes are not the answer, they only add to the problem.

I do not think many are capable of earning high paying jobs (such as working at a hedge fund). Those people will always need the loving welfare state. One way is to provide government jobs with high salaries and nice benefits.

 

[freshwater]

**Still waiting for answer . Do the people whom are being put away have a say in whats becomeing to them. Do they have choices ? **

 

[ribozyme]

**Still waiting for answer . Do the people whom are being put away have a say in whats becomeing to them. Do they have choices ? **

I am pretty sure that most people do not want to be homeless. It is a simply a way to insulate them from adversity and I think they will welcome that.

 

[Arandur]

In response to your question, Ribo, I would agree with Opelske. The disabled, however that occurs, need a different kind of safety net than the able. The able need a very basic safety net and then assistance in getting back on their feet. The U.S. has some elements of these programs, but we still don’t do welfare well. We still have perverse incentives, such as those that make a working mother lose all her benefits if she works just over a certain amount of time each week, keeping her stuck in her situation with little opportunity to advance by making the career moves or getting the education that would help her better provide for her family.

Anyway, as Opelske stated, vocational training schools, language/basic education when necessary, job search assistance, financial and career counseling, etc.

You seem to be operating from a very negative view of the poor. Your language seems to consistently target them as lesser people, incapable of doing much of anything useful, undesirable.

You seem to consider only “high paying” jobs to be worthwhile ones, even of those jobs pay a lot artificially (exaggerated by unions and government, which attack the profitability/viability of companies and depress the wages of everyone else by artificially inflating wages jobs of low demand or productivity). There are plenty of jobs that provide a comfortable life in the Western world, one with many luxuries unavailable to most people of the world.

Even living in poverty is not so terrible a fate, so long as dignity is preserved. Most of us have far more than we need. As long as we can provide for basic needs, our situation is not desperate. The lifestyle made possible by a successful “hedge fund manager” is far more luxurious than we need and should not be the baseline drawn below which is considered unacceptable.

 

[Opelske]

I do not think many are capable of earning high paying jobs (such as working at a hedge fund). Those people will always need the loving welfare state. One way is to provide government jobs with high salaries and nice benefits.

Again, the only problem with that is the government salaries come out of taxes and more taxes. It doesn’t solve the problem and only gets worse as more people feed off government programs and seek government jobs. Taxes rise, government grows and all eventually gets out of balance. Everyone needn’t earn a high salary to provide food, clothing and shelter for himself. We can’t all be wealthy. The point is there are other places the poor for the moment but otherwise capable person can work in private industry - a shop trade, farm, etc. Other poor or invalid people who have difficulty keeping a job can do menial government clerical work for a decent salary without losing his dignity. When taxes are lowered people won’t need such high salaries to survive. I hope.

 

[ribozyme]

I

You seem to be operating from a very negative view of the poor. Your language seems to consistently target them as lesser people, incapable of doing much of anything useful, undesirable.

.

Do I have a negative view of the poor? Wow!! I thought many people on this forum complain about poor people voting for politicians who promise more redistribution, and complaining about how they allegedly “steal” from others. I do not see how my attitude is any more negative than those who convey the aforementioned sentiments. I may sometimes express negative feelings of the poor, but many people here express a veiled odium towards them.

And why should I have a positive view of the poor when it is antithetical to reality? Why should I have a positive view of a condition where one is inebriated with despair, fear, discomfort, and financial insecurity?

Unlike those people, I do not want those people to suffer and be humiliated because I subscribe to a negative utilitarian ethical system.

 

[Engelbrecht]

As a Swede maybe I could add some first hand information.
I define myself as Conservative and Nationalist, so this may show in my answer.

It´s nothing fundamentally wrong with the Swedish wellfare system. The real problem is that it´s outdated. It origins from the so called “folkhemmet”, the Swedish post WW2 political doctrine.

It´s aim is reasonable equality between social classes, full employment and a fair amount of material standard. The true origin of this model nobody really want´s to speak about, because the basic idea derives from 1930´s German social politics.

The base for getting this model to work is however a total commitment and honesty from the people. To get that you must have a peoples feeling of belonging. The best word for that I find in the German “Volksgemeinshaft”.

So what has happend since this time? Globalization and secularization. Masses of immigrants have come to Sweden with their culture and habits. They make claims of Swedes altering their ways of life.

Along with this came the cultural marxists from the Frankfurt school, who wanted, and to a great extent succeeded in, turning all traditional values upside down. The Swedish people were robbed of their traditions, heritage and spiritual belonging. The Swedish Church became even more secularized and ruled by secular political powers.

Taking our traditional way of lifes place came a perverted form of politically correct liberalism with an egoistic, mass consuming culture governed by a therapephtic state.

Where does this lead? It results in a egoistic, rootless and cheating people living in a system built on trust.

The few honest people that really needs the help and the hard working backbone are paying the prize with the wolds highest taxes and nothing but accusations of racism and discrimination as feedback.

So either we restore our traditional way of life or we adapt to this evil epoque of modernism.

 

[ribozyme]

As a Swede maybe I could add some first hand information.
I define myself as Conservative and Nationalist, so this may show in my answer.

It´s nothing fundamentally wrong with the Swedish wellfare system. The real problem is that it´s outdated. It origins from the so called “folkhemmet”, the Swedish post WW2 political doctrine.

It´s aim is reasonable equality between social classes, full employment and a fair amount of material standard. The true origin of this model nobody really want´s to speak about, because the basic idea derives from 1930´s German social politics.

The base for getting this model to work is however a total commitment and honesty from the people. To get that you must have a peoples feeling of belonging. The best word for that I find in the German “Volksgemeinshaft”.

So what has happend since this time? Globalization and secularization. Masses of immigrants have come to Sweden with their culture and habits. They make claims of Swedes altering their ways of life.

Along with this came the cultural marxists from the Frankfurt school, who wanted, and to a great extent succeeded in, turning all traditional values upside down. The Swedish people were robbed of their traditions, heritage and spiritual belonging. The Swedish Church became even more secularized and ruled by secular political powers.

Taking our traditional way of lifes place came a perverted form of politically correct liberalism with an egoistic, mass consuming culture governed by a therapephtic state.

Where does this lead? It results in a egoistic, rootless and cheating people living in a system built on trust.

The few honest people that really needs the help and the hard working backbone are paying the prize with the wolds highest taxes and nothing but accusations of racism and discrimination as feedback.

So either we restore our traditional way of life or we adapt to this evil epoque of modernism.

I agree that you need a tight immigration policy to maintain the Swedish state, and increased immigration might destroy the social capital necessary to maintain it.

So do you views match up with the Swedish Democrats?

 

[Engelbrecht]

I agree that you need a tight immigration policy to maintain the Swedish state, and increased immigration might destroy the social capital necessary to maintain it.

So do you views match up with the Swedish Democrats?

To some degree. However they are way too much of opportunists in my view. I can´t see a realistic political alternative in the form of a traditional political party, rather alliances.

But they could in some way contribute to raising the issue on the political agenda.

I wich we had a man like Pat Buchanan over here…

 

[thomfra]

“old people?” “claim moral high ground?” – sounds more like you are doing the claiming.

“…old man …get back to…” - utterly disrespectful comment.

Deary me. It was cleary meant in jest! What an over reaction.

 

[neophyte]

Swedish gov’t does train people who are willing, i read. but for those who aren’t they do continually live comfortable lives.

Let he who will not work also not eat.