@TC, just to point out, there are other European nations, which happen to differ from Greece

"Sweden has one of the most highly developed welfare states in the world. The country has a higher level of social spending to GDP than any other nation." - according to wikipedia

If your point was so devastating, why is the Swedish economy doing so well?

Perhaps it wasn't socialism at fault here, perhaps it was democracy. Greek recent history is very different from Swedish history. It's a difficult one to call.

The only thing i am certain of is, your post proved absolutely nothing, other than the fact that you are aware of what makes media headlines today.

I find it funny that TC thinks he needs to provide swift and scathing retorts to arguments he can't hear. How can he say someone's points are invalid when he doesn't know what they are?

Orathaic,

You are one funny guy. You being your post with this quote.
"The argument that social services are on the whole wasteful or not cost effective is largely a myth."
I posted this in response to that quote
Orathaic, Thanks for the chuckle. I appreciate it.

Please let Greece know that the argument that their social programs and entitlements have no bankrupted the county that is something else entirely, and in fact the way the Greeks should save themselves is not to cut social programs but to double them.

Like I said man, thank you for the chuckle.

Try to keep up Orathaic,

Orathaic, Are you serious claiming that the Swedish economy is "doing well?"
Please tell me this is a misprint.
You just love to post fantasy don't you.

Orathaic, educate yourself.

If Sweden Left The EU and Joined the US, It Would Be the Poorest U.S. State, Below Even Mississippi

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/11/sweden-mississippi-if-sweden-joined-us.html

" Unless you think that Mississippi and Michigan represent ideal economic models of growth and prosperity, you probably shouldn't think about Sweden as economic nirvana."

Talk about ending social programs.

The Justice Department will not ask the 11th Circuit to reconsider its August ruling that the law’s requirement that individuals carry health insurance or pay a penalty is unconstitutional.
By not seeking an 11th Circuit review, the DOJ has increased the chances that the Supreme Court will consider the health-care law during this coming term and issue a ruling before the 2012 presidential election.
For those of you who are ignorant of the Supreme Court's history of dealing with massive government overreach like Obamacare you should study up on your New Deal history from the 1930's.
Bye Bye Obamacare before the 2012 election!

It doesn't matter. When Tettleton's Chew grants me even a single point that I made, hell will freeze over. Also don't use the "If the welfare state is so bad then why is Sweden doing well?" argument on TC. He'll just claim that Sweden has one of the lowest standards of living in the developed world and that it's welfare state is therefore a complete disaster. Which is of course not even remotely true, but that's never stopped him before.

Seriously, no one quote this post and Tettleton won't see it. Then let me know when he says that Sweden has a lower standard of living than the poorest state in the US; Mississippi. I'm almost certain he will.

"you have 59 replies in your thread. I see 13 of them. "

then... who are you talking to TC?

HA, ten of those posts are TC.
dude.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/discourse

alas, TC can't mute any mods... which may mean i've only made 3 posts and he has muted everyone else. :-x

http://www.google.ie/search?gcx=c&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=swedish+economy

with hits like: "Why Sweden's economy is thriving - FCW.com", "The Swedish economy: North star", "Swedish economy continues to grow "

Poor people don't deserve to live, they are poor and a ballast to modern society.. I mean, I respect the fact that we can't have a second holocaust, too many dumbnuts are against that, but the least we can do is just let them die in there own filth.

and from the CIA - "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.... the Swedish economy slid into recession in the third quarter of 2008 and growth continued downward in 2009 as deteriorating global conditions reduced export demand and consumption. Strong exports of commodities and a return to profitability by Sweden's banking sector drove the strong rebound in 2010."

Too far Lopt. You're obviously trolling there. It needs to be not clear whether you mean it or not. Don't get discouraged though. You'll get it eventually.

Thanks for the encouragements Mafialligator, though mark my words, eventually people will get twisted enough to regard my words as the truth.. someday.. some glorious day!

the thing about TC is, its not his words that you cant handle or even his ideas. it's that he doesnt listen to you

Orathaic, I love how you completely ignored the material in the post I gave you.

I guess it really blew away your fantasy to read that if Sweden was a state in the United States it would be the poorest state in the country.

Sorry to blow your mind like that dude.

Thucy, I listen to you talk out of your ass all the time about things you don't know the first thing about.
Who can you post I don't listen to you.

But TC, Sweden is not in the US, the number of dollars per day which the people there earn has nothing to do with the standard of living of the population. I don't know much about the article you posted, but my very limited research seems to indicate that your article isn't very useful.

You however would contend that there is something about Greece which has resulted in their government not being able to pay off it's loan, and that this is because of social welfare, and yet other european states with social welfare do not have this problem. Your basic premise is flawed.

That said, since Sweden is so impoverished compared with the 50 states united in America, perhaps you can explain what the people in those states do if they get sick? I know in Sweden the government pays for the health care (so the amount you earn personally may be lower than in the US, but your relative well being could still be higher... ) back to being muted, thanks for trying...

Hahahahahahahahaha. Called it!

Orathaic, no individual in the United States is ever denied health care. No one is ever turned away from an emergency room, ever. They don't have to pay the tax rates that have destroyed Sweden's economy either.
You keep posting that Sweden is a great success economically.
The Swedes have a standard of living worse than rednecks in the poorest state in the United States.

You spin it any way that you want. The report took into account Sweden's welfare benefits as well.
When a pair of Levis costs $124 you know your economy is shambles.

Why you people refuse to read an educate yourselves in beyond me.
I give you a link that gives you cold hard facts that demolish your fantasy. I didn't tell you to believe in a fantasy. You could have educated yourself at anytime.

But when you post something that's totally indefensible and easily refuted that's what happens.
Sorry about that, but you brought it on yourself.

Here is a nice article on Sweden for you Orth,

It's about how Swedes were sick and tired of socialism and the devastating effect it had on their economy so they elected RIGHT-WING Conservatives in Sweden!!!!!

Read the results you fool,

Sweden is making a political right turn, in a very Swedish way: cautiously, consensually, unflamboyantly. But decisively even so.

One of contenders for the most highly taxed country in the Western world has cut taxes significantly since 2006. Tight fiscal policy has pushed the public sector’s share of GDP back down toward 50 percent. The economy is growing, the budget is balanced, unemployment is declining.

The governing center-right coalition was re-elected last year; the once dominant Social Democrats suffered their worst defeat since before World War One.

Over dinner in a Stockholm restaurant, an impressively multiethnic and multiracial group of Swedish conservatives (the majority of the group were immigrants themselves or the children of immigrants) argue that less has changed than meets the eye. “Swedish values,” they argue, still emphasize economic security over economic liberty.

They know best. But quite a lot of change meets the eye even since my first visit to Sweden a decade ago, especially here in Stockholm, but even in the old Social Democratic industrial and mining heartland of the country. The shops and restaurants are looking less drab, the cars are bigger and newer as personal disposable after-tax income shoots up.

Between 1980 and 1992, Sweden lost ground relative to other rich countries, according to a McKinsey study. Since 2009, however, Sweden has one of the faster-growing economies in Western Europe. The growth has been led by the private sector, where jobs are multiplying at what Radio Sweden calls “a record pace.”

"No one is ever turned away from an emergency room, ever. "

Really, look at all those people with cancer getting ER care.

@Lopt: In *their* own filth. Remember, never let poor spelling get in the way of some ol' fashioned hatred ;).

It's great to have elections and drastic policy change as irrefutable evidence to point to.

Poor Orth wants to claim that socialist Sweden is a beacon of collective government control leading to a better life everywhere, and the hilarious fact is that the Swedes themselves rejected it because it socialism delivered them a worse standard of living than the poorest state in the US has.

Hey, TC, I know you can't hear me, but it amuses me that you contradict yourself. How?

Sweden is poor, Sweden is poor, Sweden is poor. And then you quote a passage that says, "Between 1980 and 1992, Sweden lost ground relative to other rich countries, according to a McKinsey study. "

"Other rich countries."

So which is it? Is Sweden among the rich countries or the poor? Your two pieces of evidence say two very different things.

I feel like TC is a net terrorist and has hijacked my plane/thread. I hope he doesn't crash it into anything, because we all know fighting back doesn't work.
but really, @ Lopt
We can't eliminate the poor, or we'd have to pay workers more money. Without the threat of unemployment, workers would be at a premium, and as irreplaceable, would cost much more. Therefore, it is actually in society's interest to kill all the poor, but against business interest, which is why it will never happen.

If you pay workers more money you simply restrict the number of workers, unless revenue goes up, and increase the number of unemployed, which means you need more benefits which means you raise taxes, which cuts into revenue, which means fewer workers, and on and on in a vicious downward cycle of government created chaos in the economy.

Warden, you can eliminate my "terrorism" at the click of a button.

Tettleton's chew, your posted article serious misunderstandings about Sweden. As it happens, I live there. I won't respond to relative poverty as I don't have the time to look up statistics right now, but personally I doubt that Sweden would be as impoverished as your cited article described (the nominal GDP per capita for Sweden and USA is the same accordning to wikipedia).
What I do know is that your description of right-wing conservatives ruling sweden is far from the truth. The alliance of the Moderates, the Liberals, the christian democrats and the Centre party is what you would call liberal. They all support welfare, unions, and the liberal social society of sweden, and they all supported Obama for US president, who would be considered right wing in Sweden. They are slightly more rightwing than the social democrats, but one of the main reasons that they won the election at all was an enourmous swing to the left in the form of the "new moderates", who essentially copied the social democrats in a lot of issues. Our balanced budget is because of rules put down by the social democrat goverment during the nineties, and not a new idea brought by the right.

Also, no party and no opinion is against socialism or welfare of my knowlege, so if you have some source for that it would be interesting to read.