This week, Darializa Avila Chevalier was asked if there has ever been a “successful model of socialism anywhere in the world outside the United States in terms of both human rights and widespread economic justice.” The member of the Democratic Socialists of America responded by citing Sweden and Norway. It is a common false claim made by socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders and others. I address the claim head-on in Rage and the Republic.
DSA figures have been claiming that the socialist measures that they are pushing are proven successes in other countries. They often raise the Scandinavian myth. Here is an excerpt from Rage and the Republic:
‘Leaders such as Senator Bernie Sanders have heralded the alleged success of “democratic socialism” in Europe, a pitch that is obviously taking hold with many younger Americans. Sanders and others often refer to the prosperity of Scandinavian socialism, including Sweden and Norway. It is a dangerous myth that is promulgated by many in the media. The question is not whether Scandinavian socialism can work in the United States (it cannot) but whether Scandinavian socialism can work in Scandinavia. Sweden is a particularly curious choice as a model for democratic socialism. In reality, Sweden shows not only the success of capitalism but also the limits of socialism even in a relatively small nation. Sweden turned away from the type of socialist theories increasingly in vogue in the United States.
…
The Scandinavian countries also differ from the United States in other key ways. For example, Norway has largely sustained large public welfare systems through oil revenues. The country imposes a corporate income tax rate of 78 percent on extractive activities to fund its public welfare programs…
Countries like Denmark and Sweden are strong adherents to capitalist principles and are listed among the most capitalist nations on Earth. Indeed, leaders often express surprise by American references to their socialist principles. In 2015, the Danish Prime Minister Lars Rasmussen observed, “I know that some people in the U.S. associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore, I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.” Likewise, Social Democratic Minister of Finance Kjell‐Olof Feldt stated “That whole thing with democratic socialism was absolutely impossible. It just didn’t work.”
As I discuss, these countries are not only committed to capitalism but also ranked among the most free-market economies in the world. These countries are also very different from the United States:
“When socialism was tried in larger nations in Europe, such as France under François Mitterrand, it failed, and capitalist measures had to be restored. In 2025, the populations of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway are approximately 5.9 million, 10.6 million, and 5.6 million—smaller than many American states.”
The DSA and the American left, including many in the media, continue to sell the public a bill of goods on the success of Scandinavian socialism. Ironically, it is the type of disinformation that the left often cites to justify greater censorship. Despite denials from these very countries, socialists in the United States continue to spread this false claim that there is a socialist paradise over the ocean where collectivists labor in picturesque Nordic fishing villages.
The promulgation of such myths is a central feature of Marxism. Lenin stressed that “we must not confine ourselves exclusively to propaganda in the narrow sense of the word.” Stalin likewise warned that “If our Party propaganda for some reason or other goes lame…then our entire state and Party work must inevitably languish.”
The fact is that socialism has repeatedly failed throughout history. The only way to get a people to embrace it is to rewrite that history. That is precisely what we see not only in the United States, but in the recent claims of incoming British Prime Minister Andy Burnham, who condemned the privatization policies of Margaret Thatcher: “The country surrendered control of the essentials — housing, water, energy, transport — and left people exposed to higher costs.” What he does not mention is that she followed the collapse of socialist policies under Labour Prime Minister James Callaghan in 1977–78 during the so-called “winter of discontent,” which I also discuss in the book.
Chevalier is a true believer who has praised Marxism and the concept of “seizing the means of production.” She won her primary despite comments bragging about her using the American flag to wipe her hands and criticizing the dating of white women as Black and Arab men “Fetishizing ugly colonizer women.”
Given that history, the adoption of the Scandinavian socialism myth is par for the course. Like Zohran Mamdani, she is rallying young, disillusioned, college-educated voters who are told that their struggles stem from the failures of the free market. Instead, they are offered free stuff and the illusion of an economic nirvana where lattes and Pilates are virtually costless.
Indeed, the Scandinavian socialism myth is so enticing that I expect Scandinavians must wonder where they can also find it.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
The DSA, like most advertisers today, sell their product assuming their target will not check veracity or validity. Just a fact. It is partly a consequence of exceptionally poor education throughout the USA.
Gee, donaldallen: I thought that voting for Trump was “a consequence of exceptionally poor education throughout the USA.” Or, as a clever political satire goes, “Imagine if you will a country so lacking a moral compass that they will elect this piece of s–t.”
Those who claim the high taxes are burdensome, nope. Because we are comparing their system of taxation with our level of wages. That is how they make it work. Through powerful labor unions and collective bargaining with employers worker wages are much higher, even low income workers earn much more than our average low income wage workers.
On paper, a low-income Nordic worker faces high broad-based taxes (such as a 25% VAT and 30%+ local income taxes). However, strong labor unions enforce high wage floors through sectoral collective bargaining, meaning their pre-tax market income is higher than a U.S. counterpart. Because their health insurance, higher education, child care, and elderly care are fully covered by the state, their post-tax income is pure discretionary spending money.
A low-income American worker pays much lower initial income taxes and has a higher raw per-capita GDP backing the economy. However, because minimum wages are lower and decentralized, their starting pre-tax income is compressed downward. To survive, this worker must spend a massive chunk of their “higher” take-home pay out-of-pocket on private social expenses—like health insurance premiums, deductibles, childcare, and transport—leaving them with significantly lower real disposable income.
Low income workers in those Nordic countries don’t need to worry about just surviving they can focus on actually living and enjoying their lives.
Denmark, Norway, and Sweden levy a standard Value-Added Tax (VAT) of 25% on most goods and services. a sales tax.
Unlike the U.S., which largely excludes essentials from state sales taxes, Nordic systems apply the VAT widely to generate highly stable, regressive consumer revenue.
Consumption taxes alone generate approximately 7.5% (Norway) to 9.1% (Denmark) of total GDP.
Municipal and regional income taxes average a high 29% to 35% in Sweden, hitting almost all wage earners immediately.
The highest marginal income tax brackets—such as Denmark’s top rate of 60.5%—apply to individuals making just 1.2 to 1.6 times the national average wage, capturing the middle class rather than just top earners.
Norway applies a 22% flat “base tax” on all income, layered underneath a progressive bracket tax that tops out around 47.4%.
High flat taxes apply to capital income and dividends (e.g., Norway taxes High flat taxes apply to capital income and dividends (e.g., Norway taxes capital gains at 22% and scales dividends via a 1.72 multiplier).
Norway levies an annual net wealth tax of up to 1.1% on individuals holding significant domestic assets. Yeah, they even have a wealth tax!
Norway enforces a specialized 78% tax on corporate oil and gas activities, directly capturing natural resource profits for public welfare funds.
These mixed economies, Capitalist and Democratic socialist work well for them. Turley’s attempt to minimize their successful applications of democratic socialist ideas. Because they do work.
All taxes are a burden – what kind of idiot are you.
What you pay in taxes is what you can not spend on yourself or invest in your future.
This is not about unions.
So long as government stays out of it – unions will come and go depending on their value.
Unions are not inherently socialist.
You can negotiate with an employer yourself or colletively through a union – your choice
Unions have as much or little power as people give them.
In the US unions had enormous power in the 60’s and 70’s and they abuse that power and destroyed major segments of the economy.
They killed the goose that laid the golden egg and that has massively altered private unions in the US since.
Unions are declining in Sweden – but 70% of all jobs are union jobs
Regardless, I do not are about unions – they are no part of this discussion.
They are not socialism.
You say powerful unions are needed – that is FALSE. Just like everything else the power of unions is dependent on the free market
If workers perceive they are not getting a good deal that will empower unions – if that perception is correct the unions and workers will be rewarded. If that perception is wrong – everyone will be harmed.
Unions power can be good or bad. You can not make blanket statements about union power – other than short of precluding violence, government should stay out.
I seriously doubt that the followers of the Marxist malcontents are “well educated”, more like well indoctrinated. Why is it these people don’t immigrate to Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, Russia, Norway or Sweden, it would seem the road of least resistance.
MB,
Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, Russia they might take them.
Norway or Sweden, likely they would not. They want “well educated,” not indoctrinated.
Well, Sweden might. They took in millions of migrants and they went from one of the safest EU countries to one of the most dangerous. For awhile they tried to censor the migrant violence, the no-go zones, but when the bombings became to obvious to hide it all came out. As a result, the Democratic Socialist parties are losing elections and conservative parties are winning. We see the same thing happening in Germany and parts of the UK, Ireland conservatives are gaining ground.
“Why is it these people don’t immigrate to . . .”
When asked why he targets banks, the infamous thief Willie Sutton said: Because “that’s where the money is.”
Excellent piece, and I have no idea what we do. We cannot pass the torch to these people; they’ll use it to immolate everything, including themselves, that much is clear. I am comfortable saying it goes beyond ideology – they simply are not well.
James,
I think we can stand back and let them immolate themselves. They look like they are doing just that without any help.
Norway socializes oil revenues into a $1.7+ trillion public investment fund.
Because they believe the oil under the ground belongs to ALL citizens not just a few corporations. If we had this kind of system we would be able to finance Universal healthcare and lower the cost of higher education.
In those countries Unions and employers set industry-wide wages, bypassing individual market competition. Which leads to better quality of life and more disposable income than workers in the U.S.
In Nordic countries Trade unions manage unemployment insurance, directly shifting labor market power away from employers. And guess what?, it works.
Also, Government, labor unions, and corporations jointly dictate national economic policies.
Which also have led to successful programs, Democratic socialist programs and again, better quality of life outcomes.
X, you apparently do not understand what you are lifting off of AI. That has always been your problem. No comprehension.
Norway’s “oil revenues” come from its majority investment in Equinor- A PUBLICLY-TRADED, FOR-PROFIT INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION THAT TRADES ON THE NYSE (ticker symbol EQNR). Equinor is headquartered in Norway, and gets much oil product from Norway’s coastal shelves. Equinor paid corporate taxes to Norway of just under $20 billion for 2024 (the most recent report available). From those profits, Norway established two funds to benefit its public.
https://cdn.equinor.com/files/h61q9gi9/global/10de3f91b5c18c4157c65d83299ea9fd8cfa4a77.pdf
Norway investing in a private company, even if much of its profits are used for public benefit, does NOT make Norway a socialist country. The United States has done the same thing since almost its beginning, starting with late 1700s and early 1800s charters and investments in the First Bank of the United States and its successor, the Second Bank of the United States.
In the 20th century, Congress established the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC), and owned stakes in about half the nation’s banks, which capitalized profits made off of multiple loan types and securities traded on private business entities.
You rely on AI so much because you are not smart enough to think on your own.
ROFL!!
It seems it’s YOU who needs to understand what you’re reading.
Equinor is not a private company that the government merely “invested in”. It is a State-Owned Enterprise (SOE) where the Norwegian Ministry of Energy maintains a 67% permanent, majority controlling equity stake.</b? Being publicly traded on the NYSE does not change its ownership structure; it simply means minority shares are traded externally.
Do you even read the links you post? Obviously not.
Equinor did pay $20.1 billion in corporate income taxes globally, but its specific contribution to the Norwegian government alone was $19.2 billion. More importantly, you forget that because Norway owns 67% of Equinor, the public budget receives a massive parallel stream of billions in direct corporate dividendsalongside those taxes, a form of public wealth extraction that does not exist in the U.S. capitalist model.
You say, “The United States has done the same thing… starting with late 1700s and early 1800s charters and investments in the First Bank of the United States…”
Nope. The historical comparison is completely false. The First and Second Banks of the United States were 80% privately ownedand only 20% owned by the federal government. They were specifically designed by Alexander Hamilton to private-sector specifications to catalyze private commercial banking and merchant credit. The U.S. government never held a permanent, 67% dominant controlling stake in the country’s primary natural resource engine to explicitly build a multi-trillion-dollar universal social safety net.
You say, “In the 20th century, Congress established the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC), and owned stakes in about half the nation’s banks…”
Again, incorrect.
The RFC was a temporary, emergency crisis-response mechanism created during the Great Depression to inject liquidity into a collapsing capitalist banking system. The government purposefully sold its bank stakes and dissolved the program as soon as the private market stabilized. This is structurally opposite to Norway’s permanent, multi-generational socialization of natural resources and industrial capital, which is explicitly designed to remain under public democratic ownership indefinitely.
Being lazy with your reading skills clearly showed. Perhaps you should be more thorough with your ‘citations’.
X can’t read. He as usual makes arguments that were not raised. NOTICE that NO ONE said that Equinor was a “private company. ROFL!!! Hilarious, X! So cute! P.S. the RFC operated for 20+ years, is that your idea of “temporary?
ROFL! Hilarious, X! So cute!
“Do you even read [what] you post? Obviously not.
“Equinor ASA (Oslo Stock Exchange: EQNR; NYSE: EQNR) is a fully integrated energy company headquartered in Stavanger, Norway. ORIGINALLY FOUNDED as Statoil in 1972 by the Norwegian government, the company has EVOLVED from a state-owned oil and gas operator into one of the world’s largest offshore energy producers, with a growing portfolio in renewable energy. The Norwegian government, through the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, retains approximately 67% ownership of the company via Equinor’s direct state ownership structure. Equinor operates in more than 30 countries across exploration, production, refining, transportation, and marketing of oil, natural gas, and low-carbon energy solutions.”
Your only knowledge of stocks is apparently AI=learned. Being a major stakeholder does NOT make you the owner. THe corporation is a separate legal entity, although owning a majority of stock DOES likely give you control. Wow, what an idiot.
well, it is a private company, majority CONTROLLED by Norwegian govt. X simply doesn;t understand.
Nope, you’re trying to get away from your implied notion Equinor was a public company by emphasizing, loudly “Equinor- A PUBLICLY-TRADED, FOR-PROFIT INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION THAT TRADES ON THE NYSE”
You don’t even understand what you write. Backtracking after being called out for your “mistake” is hilarious.
“Being a major stakeholder does NOT make you the owner… although owning a majority of stock DOES likely give you control.”
Talk about being stupid.
In corporate governance and economics, holding a 67% permanent, majority voting equity stake is the literal definition of controlling ownership. The Ministry of Energy does not just “likely” have control; it legally dictates the board of directors, corporate strategy, and the distribution of profits.
“P.S. the RFC operated for 20+ years, is that your idea of “temporary?”
It was temporary. Because it was definitely not permanent.
The Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) was explicitly created as an emergency tool to keep private American capitalism from collapsing during the Great Depression and World War II.
As soon as the wartime and depression crises ended, the U.S. government dissolved the RFC and sold its assets back to the private sector.
Reading comprehension really is a problem in America. You’re a great example.
Clown X
“Equinor- A PUBLICLY-TRADED, FOR-PROFIT INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION THAT TRADES ON THE NYSE”
is 1 100% correct statement. X is the one who is wrong, got his dander up now.
LOL! Nope. You’re still not paying attention.
This is what you said in your first post,
“Norway investing in a private company, even if much of its profits are used for public benefit, does NOT make Norway a socialist country.”. You already stated it was a private company. Then I pointed out your mistake.
“Norway’s “oil revenues” come from its majority investment in Equinor- A PUBLICLY-TRADED, FOR-PROFIT INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION THAT TRADES ON THE NYSE.
You claimed it was the government investing in a private company first. Then you pivoted to ”a publicly traded company, a for-profit international corporation”
You clearly don’t know how to read or realize you claimed Equinor was a private company the first time.
Yeah, your second statement is correct, after falsely claiming it was a private company in your first. If you are still in doubt. Here’s your claim.
“From those profits, Norway established two funds to benefit its public.
https://cdn.equinor.com/files/h61q9gi9/global/10de3f91b5c18c4157c65d83299ea9fd8cfa4a77.pdf
Norway investing in a private company, even if much of its profits are used for public benefit, does NOT make Norway a socialist country.”
Page 27 of the document explicitly states that Equinor was “originally founded as Statoil in 1972 by the Norwegian government”. It did not start as a private enterprise. The document notes that the “Norwegian government… retains approximately 67% ownership of the company”. Furthermore, Page 28 explicitly refers to “the actions of the Norwegian state as majority shareholder and exercise of ownership by the Norwegian state”.
You said after your link, again,
“Norway investing in a private company, even if much of its profits are used for public benefit, does NOT make Norway a socialist country.”
You messed up. Not I.
IT IS a private company you clown. Norway is now the major stock holder, period.
did you read what was posted below, clown?
““After our partial privatisation in 2001, we were listed on the Oslo and New York stock exchanges, ensuring broad international ownership.”
READ THAT SENTENCE AGAIN, CLOWN X, AND DON’T TRY TO COPY CAT ME IN THE FUTURE BY SAYING, “REad that again.”
You are truly ignorant, will go to no end to come out ahead, but keep sinking deeper. Enough.
Good grief you really are stupid.
By definition, a company that is listed on the New York Stock Exchange and the Oslo Stock Exchange is not a private company—it is a Publicly Traded Joint-Stock Corporation. A private company is owned by private individuals or venture capital and does not trade on open public stock markets.
You are trying to separate “being a stockholder” from “ownership” to avoid the word “socialism.” Let’s do the basic math directly from the document you provided:
Total outstanding voting shares owned by the Government of Norway: 67%.Total outstanding voting shares owned by the entire rest of the world combined: 33%.
If you own two-thirds of the literal equity and voting power of a public limited company, you are the majority owner. You don’t just have an “investment”; you legally own the company’s direction, its board, and its profits. Because that owner is a democratic state acting on behalf of the public, Equinor is a textbook State-Owned Enterprise (SOE).
The “broad international ownership” applies only to the remaining minority float of 33%. BlackRock, Vanguard, and thousands of other global investors are fighting over a combined tiny fraction of the company. As Equinor’s own disclosure explicitly states, the Norwegian Parliament (the Storting) legally mandated that the state must always own at least two-thirds of the company.Private international investors are completely locked into a permanent minority position where they can never outvote the public interest.
When you said on your first post,
“Norway investing in a private company, even if much of its profits are used for public benefit, does NOT make Norway a socialist country.”
What exact private company were you referring to?
Clearly you were referring Equinor because you don’t mention anything else.
Good lord, you are a clown. do you understand that Equinox is NOT a state-owned corporation since 2001. The state is the majority stakeholder. You again twist what was said. “Private corporation,” as used in this context, means NOT OWNED BY THE GOVERNMENT.
NO ONE said it was “originally a private company.” YOU MADE THAT UP TO PRETEND YOU WERE WINNING THIS ARGUMENT. In truth, this is what I posted,
“ORIGINALLY FOUNDED as Statoil in 1972 by the Norwegian government,…”
Notice, stupid X, it was YOU who claim that “It is a State-Owned Enterprise (SOE) where the Norwegian Ministry of Energy maintains a 67% permanent, majority controlling equity stake.”
Even your beloved Wikipedia supports what I said:
“The current company was formed by the 2007 merger of Statoil with the oil and gas division of Norsk Hydro.[7] As of 2017, the Government of Norway is the largest shareholder with 67% of the shares, while the rest is public stock. The ownership interest is managed by the Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy.[8]
Do you get the difference, sinking boy?
You just make crap up, every day. How many times do you need to have that explained to you, X? Youi’re the one who constantly complains about reading comprehension.”
“Equinor publishes the list of our largest shareholders.
Data collected by third party, authorised by Equinor, 31 March 2026.
Shareholders
Ownership in %
Number of shares
Government of Norway
67.0%
1 713 061 033
Folketrygdfondet
2.7%
68 127 253
BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A.
1.2%
30 920 634
The Vanguard Group, Inc.
1.2%
29 719 729
DNB Asset Management AS
1.0%
24 705 408
Silchester International Investors, L.L.P.
0.9%
22 208 688
Arrowstreet Capital, Limited Partnership
0.5%
12 641 487
Geode Capital Management, L.L.C.
0.5%
12 073 562
State Street Investment Management (US)
0.4%
11 144 901
Welligton Management Company, LLP
0.4%
10 304 007
Pzena Investment Management, LLC
0.4%
9 822 437
Storebrand Kapitalforvaltning AS
0.4%
9 277 528
Schroder Investment Management Ltd. (SIM)
0.4%
8 989 666
ODIN Forvaltning AS
0.3%
8 469 220
KLP Kapitalforvaltning AS
0.3%
8 434 461
Barrow Hanley Global Investors
0.3%
8 335 288
Arga Investment Management, LP
0.3%
7 364 398
Employees Provident Fund Board
0.3%
7 046 761
Nordea Funds Oy
0.3%
6 893 256
Amundi Asset Management, SAS
0.3%
6 787 333
X says “Let’s do the basic math”
how ’bout
“let’s copycat others when they fashion a response”
something X learned on this blog. No wonder he spends so much time here. Is he a student somewhere?
Publicly traded companies are privately owned.
Public in the context you are using means the stock is publicly traded on a stock exchange.
Ownership is still in the hands of shareholders.
When government owes something – it is not traded – publicly or privately
ROFL!! Anonymous thinks private companies are traded on the NYSE. Wow. I guess SpaceX was also traded on the NYSE before it became public. LOL!!
From Wiki:
“The company [Statoil, originally formed by Norwegian govt] was privatised, repeat, PRIVATIZED and made a public limited company (allmennaksjeselskap) in 2001, becoming listed on both the Oslo Stock Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange. At the same time, it changed its name to Statoil ASA. The government retained 81.7% of the shares. Through further privatization in 2004 and 2005, the government’s share was reduced to 70.9%.[15]”
X will chase the moon trying to pretend he is right. Total fail.
X – private companies are traded on the NYSE.
Publicly traded and publicly owned are not the same
Just as public speaking and publicly owned are not the same.
The word public in a description of a company does not normally tell you anything but how its stock is traded.
ROFL!!! Anonymous is a moron.
“ Good lord, you are a clown. do you understand that Equinox is NOT a state-owned corporation since 2001. The state is the majority stakeholder. You again twist what was said. “Private corporation,” as used in this context, means NOT OWNED BY THE GOVERNMENT.
NO ONE said it was “originally a private company.” YOU MADE THAT UP TO PRETEND YOU WERE WINNING THIS ARGUMENT. In truth, this is what I posted,
“ORIGINALLY FOUNDED as Statoil in 1972 by the Norwegian government,…”
Notice, stupid X, it was YOU who claim that “It is a State-Owned Enterprise (SOE) where the Norwegian Ministry of Energy maintains a 67% permanent, majority controlling equity stake.”
Private corporation’ means NOT OWNED BY THE GOVERNMENT.
Who owns the corporation? Who founded it? The government you idiot. Holding 67% controlling interest makes you the owner of said corporation. Man you really walked into that one.
Every company in Russia was founded by the government – thy are now all owned completely privately.
Many companies in britain were either formed privately or confiscated by the british government,
Nearly all are now private.
Not a single US company is government owned, but many are publicly traded.
While you make numerous errors
I still do not see the point to your fixation on Norways investment in oil.
Would you compare the US to Qatar ?
What relevance does a tiny country – a bit more than 1/100th the size of the US.
A small fraction of the population of TX or the GDP or TX have to anything ?
Most of the mideast countries are arguably socialist. The government owns the oil companies, and provides a living to the people from those profits.
Is it proof of the merits of socialism to be able to make a tiny country with enormous wealth which for the most part it ha to do very little to make use of had a standard of living better than Mississippi and worse than Texas ?
You want to debate meaningless details.
Worse still – Norway is heavily subsidized by the rest of the world.
Aside from oi and some fish it produces very little that the rest of the world needs.
And not alot of its own needs. Can it build a supertanker or an aircraft carrier or a tank or a skyscraper?
Norway is a fine country – but it is dependant on the rest of the world and primarily the US for many things.
Much of the world is dependent on the US.
One of th things that pi$$es you all off about Trump is he is telling the world – America is not footing the bill for everything
The EU which is 50% larger than the US in population spends 1/5th what we do on defense.
Who besides the US was going to stop Iran from getting a nuke ?
With zero doubt they would use it to threaten the world.
With near zero doubt they would use it.
Who besides the US is going to deter Russia, North Korea China ?
The world is actually getting more peaceful – and has been for a long time – despite the various mideast ad Ukraine conflicts.
Further the collapse of the USSR leaving the US as the only global super power means we do not need to be there to check the USSR.
As should be obvious from the Ukraine war – any two consequential european countries could stop russia – if they had the will to do so.
The US has massive military power.
But we are tired of being the policeman of the world.
As I have noted before – the US has virtually no national security interests in the mideast or Africa.
Little or none in eastern europe.
What matters to the US is
North America,
China
the pacific rim
the anglosphere
and south and central america
in that order.
Norway is only a small player – but they need to step up.
Th rest of the world needs to step up.
“implied notion” ?
is that how you fashion your arguments, X?
based on your INFERENCE of what you THINK was IMPLIED?
ROFL!!! SO cute!!! Hilarious!
None of this is relevant – it is always a mistake for government to have any ownership or control of the means of production.
But that does not change the fact that being a shareholder in a publicly traded company – even a majority shareholder is not the same as socialism.
No Norway does not LEGALLY control it. They control it by virtue of shares – which they can choose to buy and sell, not by operation of the law.
X:
Learn to read with comprehension before you copy and paste. direct state ownership speaks to CONTROL. Here, let me help you, direct from the mouth of Equinor
“After our partial privatisation in 2001, we were listed on the Oslo and New York stock exchanges, ensuring broad international ownership. Equinor has one class of shares, with all shares carrying equal right to vote at general meetings. The Norwegian state is largest shareholder with 67%, managed by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries.” https://www.equinor.com/investors/our-shareholders
thank you for screwing X’s head back on to face the truth.
LOL! You’re still not paying attention.
This is why you’re desperately backtracking from your original claim that Equinor was a private company first.
The Norwegian government is not just the largest stakeholder it’s also the owner. That’s why it has 67% of the controlling majority, because it’s also the owner. Meaning direct state ownership. If a single entity holds 67% of the total equity, they are, by the literal laws of math and corporate governance, the majority owner. They dictate the dividends, they hire the executives, and they collect the profits for the public treasury.
You’re trippin over your own semantic games. You first claimed it was a private company after linking to a document showing it wasn’t. It is hilarious.
Here it is again,
“Norway established two funds to benefit its public.
https://cdn.equinor.com/files/h61q9gi9/global/10de3f91b5c18c4157c65d83299ea9fd8cfa4a77.pdf
Norway investing in a private company, even if much of its profits are used for public benefit, does NOT make Norway a socialist country.”
LOL!
”’ensuring broad international ownership.”
Just can’t quit losing, can ya, X. Give it up, no one believes you and laughs
LOL, went back and read every one’s comments, don;t see where ANYone said, “your original claim that Equinor was a private company first.” typical George/X/Svelaz making up things that don’t exist.
No one did make that claim. X made it up.
now (typically) X tries to temper his argument by using the term “majority owner.” No one ever argued that, which is NOT what X originally said. He said it was a state owned company. Totally mixing stock ownership with “owner.”
X clearly has no understanding of what he is lifting off the INternet
You are mostly wrong and arguing over something stupid and irrelevant.
Norway owned 100% of its predecessor – it has sold nearly 40% over time. Norways current ownership is not decided by law, it is decided by whether norway buys or sells shares.
Soializing anything is bad
More socialism is worse than less.
It is irrelevant who you think the oil under the ground belongs to oil unground has no value
The US has more oil in the Dakotas that the entire rest of the world combined
It has no value until someone does the work to bring it to market.
Oil is no different from coal or steel or lithium or ….
The only value is in extracting it and delivering it to market.
Norway does not do that – businesses do
Norway is not socializing it – they are taxing it.
And that choice has consequences. It increases the cost of the oil and that makes it less competitive on the market,
BTW what Norway or you BELEIVE is irrelevant.
You already have “universal healthcare” – and you made a mess of it, as predicted.
All countries botch socialism – but the greater the “social trust” in a country the less they tend to botch it
The massive diversity of the US means low social trust – the massive Fraud the US is discovering in social welfare programs is no accident,
it is both a cause of low social trust and a consequence of it. It is a consequence of diversity, it is a consequence of liberty. ‘
The nordic systems will fail – and those countries know that and are trying to unspool the mess they have created without causing a disaster.
But similar efforts in the US will fail worse and faster.
The very aspects of the american character that make this country great – make socialism fail faster.
My problem with the Somalis in Minnesota is that their energy coul have been directed to something productive rather than to fraud
That is the actual american way.
Producing value makes all of us better off – it is the only thing that makes us better off.
Stealing it makes us worse off. Socialism is stealing.
“Because they believe the oil under the ground belongs to ALL citizens not just a few corporations. ”
Why not to all the people of the world ? Why not to the UN ? Why not to the Whales or gerbils ?
Regardless who owns it is irrelevant. Oil has value only after it is extracted.
“If we had this kind of system we would be able to finance Universal healthcare and lower the cost of higher education.”
This kind of system is litterally called socialism – and it fails.
Norway’s oil socialism is mnor and probably not fatal – though it does make th people poorer not richer.
People are the most better off when THE choose for themselves individually what they value.
That is a tautology – Value is subjective. You are always poorer when someone takes the value you produce and give you what THEY think you want than when YOU choose what you want fromt he value you produce.
“In those countries Unions and employers set industry-wide wages,”
By negotiation.
” bypassing individual market competition.”
Nope – INDIVIDUALS choose to join a union or not.
Any other arrangement is actually socialism and is actually totalitarianism.
So long as you are free to join a union or not – it is just another free market mechanism for self regulation.
Once FORCE is involved it is totalitarian
“Which leads to better quality of life and more disposable income than workers in the U.S.”
Lets see Norway a country with a population of 5M – that produces very little of what it needs, but is slightly better off than the average american, because it has more oil than it can possibly need – that is a big deal ?
You can not scale norway to the US.
The average Texan has a 10% highr standard of living than the average norwegian.
“In Nordic countries Trade unions manage unemployment insurance, directly shifting labor market power away from employers.”
You keep running to this tangent about labor unions.
It is a tangent that is all it is. So long as negotiations are between employers and employees – individually or collectiely – I do not are.
Socialism is when government puts its thumb on the scales.
As to whether the results are good or bad – that depends. Labor unions like everything else in a free market sometimes work and sometimes dont.
Unions destroyed the US auto industry and themselves in the 70s
Whether the unions in nordic countries thrive or are harmful depends on the choices they make.
Nordic union membership is still high but it is declining Suggesting that more and more people prefer to negotiate on their own.
REGARDLESS – that is free choices in a free market. That does not mean they always work well.
But it does mean they self correct. Self correction may mean more power to unions it also may mean less,
if is dynamic. There is no universal right answer.
“Also, Government, labor unions, and corporations jointly dictate national economic policies.”
Nope.
“Which also have led to successful programs, Democratic socialist programs and again, better quality of life outcomes.”
You have lost this fight – the nordic countries are not actually doing better than the US – they are doing better than Mississippi. Norway is not doing better than TX.
Norway’s growth rate is 1.1% it was 1.4% last year. That is its average for the past 2 decades
The US growth rate is 2.1% and rising. it has averaged over 2% for decades.
The nordic countries are doing better than they did under actual socialism.
Wow, Turley seems to be going after Mamdani and the idea that Democratic Socialist ideals don’t work. They do.
Of course when he starts conflating Democratic socialism with socialism as envisioned by failed states you already know the professor is being disingenuous.
Let’s go through the facts and show why he’s wrong.
Turley claims Nordic countries are capitalist. That is half true. What he ‘neglected to point out, is that those countries have mixed economies not purely capitalist like ours.
The Nordic model integrates socialist principles into its market economy through the universal decommodification of services like healthcare and education, which removes them from profit-driven market dynamics.
Is it capitalist when Norway owns a 67% majority stake in the nation’s dominant energy corporation? Because we don’t have something like that. How about Norways’s 100% full ownership of Europe’s largest generator of renewable energy.?
Sweden’s government maintains 100% full ownership of Europe’s largest iron ore mining corporation.. It also maintains 100% full ownership of one of Europe’s largest electricity and heat producers.
Finland’s government maintains a 51.26% majority ownership stake in this major clean energy utility provider.
Norway’s government retains a 53.97% majority stake in this global telecommunications conglomerate.
The Swedish government maintains 100% full ownership SBAB Bank, a major mortgage and finance company.
The government of Norway maintains a 34% minority control stake in Norway’s largest financial services group.
Norway holds 100% full ownership of the national postal and logistics network.
The Finnish government has a 55.69% controlling stakeof Finnair via the Prime Minister’s Office.
“Let’s go through the facts…”
“Let’s copycat others’ style in forming replies.”
X –
I have no idea how you did it, but you completely sold me that the Scandinavians are actually socialists despite their own argument to the contrary. Also, the fact that level of interference from the government in any economy stifles growth and innovation.
Once again, you are the best voice for the GOP on this website!
Cheers!
Not socialst. Democratic socialists. There is indeed a difference.
YOu never started using the term “democratic socialism” until you were called out over your praise of socialism in Scandinavia. When you were corrected, you started using the “democratic socialism” term instead. Don’t make me pull up your old posts.
So? At least I corrected it. You keep thinking it’s plain old authoritarian socialism. You’re not disputing that it is democratic socialism and it’s a different thing. Which proves my point. Thanks.
no idiot, it proves you lied and then tried to hide it.
Regardless you are still playing word games – the US DSA has no resemblance to nordic social democrats.
The right would love to pass nordic social democrat policies like denaturalization of immigrants, and school choice
The very few nordic polices the DSA wants – like rent control have failed everywhere including sweden
So what policies of nordic countries that actually work is it that Mamdani and the DSA are pushing ?
Everything you are shilling for has fAILED in those countries. and they no longer have.
A rose by another name is still a rose
Communism relabeled as DSA is still communism.
But you have not corrected – you are still pretending that apples are oranges.
The DSA is not the same as nordic social democrats, they are not the same as european socialists,
they are the mirror immages of Castro and Maduro
“You keep thinking it’s plain old authoritarian socialism”
Wrong – the DSA is WORSE – it is more like Mao and he Cultural revolution.
Regardless it is NOTHING like nordic social democrats – which btw are SOCIAL DEMOCRATS – not “democratic socialists” – which is an oxymoron.
Yes nordia “democratic socialists” are not socialists, while in the US Democratic socialists of america are communists – not nordic social democrats.
word games are not honest discussion – the DSA is essentially communist. the Nordic social democrats are to the right of 60’s US democrats.
We actually are MIXED socialism too…so there is that. All of the Scandinavian countries with universal health care find themselves waiting months to get medical appointments. so there is that too. I could go on…but you obviously only read articles that make socialism…mixed or otherwise …as a thing to aspire to.
While Nordic countries do face wait times for non-urgent, elective procedures (like knee replacements), their triage systems ensure that urgent, life-threatening care (like oncology or emergency surgery) is immediate. Furthermore, data from the Commonwealth Fund demonstrates that healthcare wait times are a global issue tied to post-pandemic doctor shortages, not the funding model. In fact, the U.S. frequently ranks poorly in healthcare accessibility due to cost; millions of Americans wait indefinitely for appointments because they cannot afford the out-of-pocket insurance deductibles or copays.
I’d rather wait and pay nothing than wonder how much in debt I would be if I had to go to the ER.
Plus, being healthier in those Nordic countries keeps you away form the doc more often.
GSX, I do not want to dispute your facts, which are too often jumbled up with mistruths; I just want to provide a bit of information.
A poor or typical middle-class person in America, from the moment they enter an emergency room needing immediate, life-saving surgery, is more likely to get it, and get it faster, than in virtually any country with socialized medicine
S. Meyer, in any country an emergency surgery will always be immediate. The real difference is the astronomical bill when it’s all done. That poor middle class American will likely be uninsured or underinsured and ending up in serious debt.
“immediate. The real difference is the astronomical bill”
GSX, that is your pen placing uneducated ideas as truth. Plainly, you are wrong, and it shows you haven’t researched the issue. What do you think happens to these people who have debt from such serious problems? Go ahead. Use AI, and if you use it properly, it will give you the right answer.
The poor will with near certainty end up getting it paid by medicaid. Even if they did not – they are already poor
They are judgement proof.
They wont pay, they wont go bankrupt and eventually the cost will just be forgotten.
The only people who have any negative impact from huge medical costs are uninsured people who are NOT poor
They go bankrupt.
Sorry X – but that is not common and not a big deal. You keep your job, you keep your home,
you keep your car. You generally have to sell the EXCESS assets you have accumulated – boats, vacation homes
and after that you pay a few points more for loans for several years.
Your life does not end.
I have absolutely no problem with bankruptcy over medical debt
I have never been uninsured, but had I ever been uninsured and my child required 300K in medical care than I could not have afforded – I would be fine with a system where she got treatment and I had to give up my 2nd car and credit rating for 5 years.
You left wing nuts pretend people die
The fact is for 99.99% of people NOTHING happens.
The poor usually get medicaid – because the Hospital will get it for the to get them paid.
Often that does not happen – because the poor DO NOT CARE – getting or not getting medicaid will not change their lives one iota.
The only people who get screwed are the underunsured who ARE building a life.
They should have been insured – they could have afforded to be insured,
they gambled, lost and are going bankrupt.
Their lives are not ruined.
Their WORST outcome is that a fortune is spent FAILING to save someone, and they end up bankrupt with a dead spouse or child.
That is tragic – but the death was going to happen anyway.
If the care available to americans can not save you NO CARE IN THE WORLD CAN.
Regardless everything we wish could be fixed – can’t. We do not live for ever. We all die sometime. Some of us tragically too soon.
Sen. Graham died suddenly of an Aortic disection – unexpectedly.
People die.
It is extremely rare that is actually preventable.
You want the impossible, you want governent to pay for it.
BTW PPACA has determined that the value of a human life is 250K and they will not allow life saving care that costs more.
So all you have really done is make it easier to DENY life saving care.
You want utopia, but you are making things worse not better.
Data from all kinds of left wing nuts constantly proves things that are obviously not true.
This is quite simple – price controls lead to shortages and rationing.
You say that only things like knee replacement get delayed
My wife and I went to Tokyo in 2019 – Tokyo was wonderful, she was miserable. Her knees were shot and she was in pain and could not do most of what she wanted.
Her Knees have been replaced – we spent the day at Montecello yesterday, We are in ashville NC today and walked miles.
We are walking the mountains tomorow,
Next year we go to Ireland, after that we go to italy and south korea.
We could not have done any of this before
Getting your knees replace without delay is a STANDARD OF LIVING issue
If you must delay because of the limits of your healthcare system
YOUR STANDARD OF LIVING IS LOWER
YOUR QUALITY OF LIFE IS LOWER
These are days weeks months that you can not do things you could be doing in a working system.
Yes you die without some cancer treatments – but delays in so called elective care means you SUFFER
Last I heard torturing people unnecescarily was not a feature of a high standard of living – it is a deficit of poverty.
“Wow, Turley seems to be going after Mamdani and the idea that Democratic Socialist ideals don’t work. They do.”
Nope.
You keep pretending that because these nordic states have some vestiges of socialism left that they have not yet gotten rid of – they are socialist.
Sweden does have rent control and like everywhere it has been tried it is a disaster – even the BBC thinks so.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58317555
https://www.36northpm.com/swedens-housing-shortage-lessons-on-rent-control-and-planning/
What is it that you think that DSA members are striving to do that even exists in these nordic countries ?
You rant over Norways stake in an energy company – Is Mamdani preparing to invest in Exxon ?
You praise them as proof of something they are not – with very few exceptions – all examples of socialist policy failure.
The policies of this purported nordic democratic socialist countries are NOT what you, Mamdani or the DSA is shilling.
What you call an example of working “democratic Socialism” – whatever it is – is NOTHING like what the DSA is trying to do
Mamdani and he DSA are following the cuba and venezuellan mode
It is a lie to claim that the nordic countries are socialist – most are significantly LESS socialist than the US.
Honestly even our healthcare since Obama is more not less socialist than theirs and everyone admits is a failure.
You want government pensions – the US has them – it is called social security and is costs you about 15% of what you earn.
You want unemployment – we have that.
You want “universal healthcare” – we have that – and it has not improved anything and it has raised costs dramatically.
You want free college – is there is single nordic country with a college in the top 100 in the world ? ONE.
The US dominates the list Regardless americans can actually go to Sweden and get free college – it is complicated, but you can do it.
Of course their going to want proof that you are going to succeed in college, and your going to have to put down a large refundable deposit to assure you do not become indigent – but you will get that back
So if you want free college – go to sweden.
Do not further F$%K up colleges here.
The least talked about aspect of all this DSA fervor is intergenerational warfare. The view by a lot of the young generation is that the baby boomer generation has hoarded all the wealth for themselves, leaving them with scraps – and there is a kernel of truth in this view. There are millions of angry youth who have college degrees, very high student debts, and no good job prospects. They want to expropriate the old now, as they are unwilling to wait for the oldsters to die naturally. They are the energetic base of the DSA.
I agree.
As a boomer I got one of those degrees that had no earning power. As luck would have it I got a job that exposed me to engineering. I worked at that job for 3 years. I took a few night classes in math and basic science to see if I could still handle it which I could. I had saved a few thousand dollars so I quit the job and returned to school to get an engineering degree. I had some debt after graduation but paid it off in a few years. I married during this period as well. Just celebrated our 44th anniversary. Bottom line, I made some poor decisions early on but recognized it and changed the course of my life. I did not wait around for someone else to fix it for me. There are millions of opportunities out there for anyone willing to try and there’s a lot more than scraps to be had for the effort.
“Tolerance will reach such a level that intelligent people will be banned from thinking so as not to offend the imbeciles”. Dostoievski
We must keep calling out the leftist imbeciles.
Great article.
There is an old cartoon of Dennis the Menace. He has a lemonade stand with a big sign “All you can drink 5¢”. Dennis has his hands on his hips. Mr. Wilson has an empty glass and a sour face. Dennis is telling him “And I say that’s all you can drink for 5¢.” There you have the warmth of collectivism.
Maybe Chevalier read a little from books on history and economics. Maybe reading about Tony Blair and New Labor. And how the Labor Party was renamed in 1994 in order to bring them out of the Wildeness in UK Politics. The Conservatives had ruled the UK for 18 years before losing in 1997. The Conservative had ruled that long because of the total wreck the previous Labor Party had forced on to the UK economy with their Socialism in the late 1970’s. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown rebuilt the Labor Party by embracing a market economy and preferring social justice to socialism. Now Labor has ditched the “New” and Starmer has stepped down and Labor is trying to hang on without an early election and England begins to look like the UK in the 1970’s.
Interesting how the Danish People and Swedish emphasize their market economies so much. Sweden did try Socialism also in the 1970’s-1980’s and their wealth per capita dropped from 3rd in Europe to 13th and there was a turnaround to market economies with a large welfare state but they have also instituted other market economies in medical care and education but only partially.
The opinion is about Scandinavia socialism. Not UK.
No one seriously believe that the nitwits who run out governments can run our large enterprises better than the people now in charge. Government at all levels is operated incompetently. What our socialists really believe in is their entitlement to control the lives of others. The consequences of that control does not bother them.
That’s particularly true with our current administration. They are complete incompetents and they are costing us billions every day. From useless ballrooms, arches, and reflecting pool problems to a totally unecessary war and waste of valuable military armament.
Gigi, wasn’t the ballroom paid for using private donations? Wasn’t the reflecting pool something that needed to be addressed, was it also a waste of money when the Obama administration addressed it? Isn’t the war in Ukraine also not our problem, just as Europe stated that the conflict in Iran wasn’t theirs? Why is one conflict an acceptable use of US military armament but the other isn’t?
Sweden and Norway are both capitalist countries. They are also both kingdoms with kings, but a parliamentary system of ruling. That means they also have limited democracies much like the US.
“Sweden and Norway are both capitalist countries.”
Actually, they are mixed economies — part free market capitalism; part socialist controls and welfare programs.
What is also unmentioned is the strong social, cultural, and demographic cohesion of those countries. At least until now, eg. Sweden.
Yep, not to mention the fact that Swedes are much smarter than our mal-educated American leftists.
And you speak from experience?
I am now. You just proved me right.
Diogenes,
Well said.
The annony repeatedly shows us, time and time again, how mal-educated annony is.
Annony could not even solve a simple word problem: If Mike has three cars and a RV, how many vehicles does Mike have to register?
But, in annony’s defense, annony has never had to register a vehicle. Annony does not own a vehicle. Annony’s parents do. They pay the registration, the insurance, the upkeep and likely the gas.
Again its the media who leads most people astray
Andy Burnham said, “The country surrendered control of the essentials — housing, water, energy, transport — and left people exposed to higher costs.”
Let me see, it was the left that arbitrarily drove nuclear power out of existence, heavily penalized fossil fuels, flooded Northern Europe with the jails and back allies of the Sahel and gave those same fugitives free housing that everybody else has to pay for in higher rents…
and now Andy complains about how it’s all Margaret Thatcher’s fault.
No, it’s actually all Andy’s fault. And George’s fault. And GiGi’s fault. And Sleestak’s fault.
If civil war in Northern Europe doesn’t wake up America, nothing will… except possibly a war here. Worrisome times.
But what will the leftys point to as a socialist success now that their made up stories are exposed with indisputable FACTS?
I predict their response will be “nuh uh”.
Maybe we should list the socialist failures as an antidote to their poisonous lies.
“But what will the leftys point to as a socialist success now that their made up stories are exposed with indisputable FACTS?”
Facts are the building blocks of reality, a commodity that the leftists steadfastly refuse to acknowledge. Within the hour, our George/X/Enema in Black/etc. troll will be here to demonstrate that at interminable length.
What about the facts I posted?, are not true? Care to correct the record if you have evidence proving they are wrong?
I believe in this age of AI they will claim it is fabricated. It is almost as though to believe the Soviet and National Socialist horrors these days, one had to have lived those eras, but even that would be disputed. It is terribly frightening to see the speed at which young people are falling for this garbage, but it is not surprising. Name a social upheaval/revolution in which the young were not pawns. None that I can think of.
The only solution is God’s global, eternal Kingdom, which was predicted to take over the world when USA was the world power.
https://postimg.cc/gallery/975VfsG
Democrats are more like fascists
They hate America
The people Sweden and Norway don’t hate their country
Come On Man – American Socialists don’t need no stinkin facts!! Especially from the Colonialist, Racist, Supremacist, Misogynist public like we have here in America!! Like the Phoenix the nirvana paradise of Socialism will rise from the ashes of Capitalism once the Enlightened Illuminati of the Proletariat Class get their dirty little mitts as a disruptive minority in Congress!! Che Guevara (yeah yeah he was a filthy communist – no difference really) LIVES!!!