Hello. I was hoping someone could illuminate for me, through their own writing, or preferrably with some added article links, how to better understand the situation overseas. I often am posed with the question as to how these other countries are doing so well that have high tax welfare states that provide things from house subsidization to healthcare and so on. I do not feel like I have a satisfactory response for them other than what I know based from my light reading of Austrian economics thus far, which is that, in the long term, these systems will essentially destroy themselves. I am aware of the article "The Sweden Myth" here on Mises.org but I was hoping for something more comprehensive and detailed, preferrably with some charts or other graphics even, although that is not a requirement by any means. However, that simply is not a convincing argument to someone that has not read and already believes to some extent in Austrian economics. I have also heard from someone I know that is employed at CATO that many of these european countries referenced are in fact, actually more free market than the U.S. in various respects. This comment struck me as odd, so I was wondering if anyone knows what they meant by that and could elaborate? Thanks everyone.
Read The Grass Is Not Always Greener: A Look at National Health Care Systems Around the World. European healthcare has problems.
Here is a video about Sweden’s economy which supports the free market view.
Economist Daniel J. Mitchell’s conclusion of the Scandinavian countries was, “The Nordic nations offer valuable lessons for policymakers, but they do not fit the traditional stereotype. Conservative critics correctly condemn the large welfare states, but often overlook the positive results generated by laissez-faire policies in other areas. Liberals, meanwhile, exaggerate the economic performance of Nordic nations in an effort to justify welfare-state policies, while failing to acknowledge the role of free market policies in other areas.”
It's a trade-off. In relative terms, Sweden is far more "business friendly" in terms of less regulations and barriers to entry than even the U.S.A., but the taxation is significantly higher. It's important to remember that Sweden was the richest country per capita in the middle of the 20th century and the state had basically squandered that capital within a few decades. The Sweden of today is far more market-orientated even though it still has a lot of welfare statism. Remember also that Sweden is still a vast and wealthy country with a relatively small and ethnically homogenous population not really affected by a lot of immigration due to geographical isolation. These factors give the illusion of the sort of "middle-of-the-road" policy having sustainability. In reality, it's quite a unique situation in the world.
Here is a link to the "The Myth of Scandinavian Socialism" topic:
http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/5616.aspx?PageIndex=1