Sweden must be a schizophrenic country. Something strange is happening, after all, if a statist like Jeffrey Sachs and a rabid libertarian like yours truly both cited it as a role model in our remarks last month at the United Nations.
So who’s right? Well, it depends what you care about.
- Jeffrey and other folks on the left are correct in that Sweden has a big government financed by high tax rates. According to OECD data, only France and Denmark have a bigger burden of government spending. And the OECD also shows that Sweden’s top income tax rate of 56.6 percent is the most onerous in the industrialized world.
- But if you look at non-fiscal policy variables, Sweden ranks as one of the world’s most free-market nations. Like Denmark, it compensates for a big public sector with laissez-faire policy in other areas, including nationwide school choice and a partially privatized Social Security system.
- And if you look at the direction of reform, Sweden is moving in the direction of smaller government, rejecting Keynesianism, lowering tax rates, and reducing the burden of the public sector.
In a column for Bloomberg, Anders Aslund elaborates on Sweden’s efforts to reduce the size of the state.
Not so long ago, Sweden could claim world leadership in unmitigated Keynesian economics, with a 90 percent marginal tax rate and a welfare state second to none. …but in the last two decades the country has been reformed. Public spending has fallen by no less than one-fifth of gross domestic product, taxes have dropped and markets have opened up. …no turnabout has been as dramatic as Sweden’s. From 1970 until 1989, taxes rose exorbitantly, killing private initiative, while entitlements became excessive. Laws were often altered and became unpredictable. As a consequence, Sweden endured two decades of low growth. In 1991-93, the country suffered a severe crash in real estate and banking that reduced GDP by 6 percent. Public spending had surged to 71.7 percent of GDP in 1993, and the budget deficit reached 11 percent of GDP. …Sweden’s traditional scourge is taxes, which used to be the highest in the world. The current government has cut them every year and abolished wealth taxes. Inheritance and gift taxes are also gone. Until 1990, the maximum marginal income tax rate was 90 percent. Today, it is 56.5 percent. That is still one of the world’s highest, after Belgium’s 59.4 and there is strong public support for a cut to 50 percent. The 26 percent tax on corporate profits may seem reasonable from an American perspective, but Swedish business leaders want to reduce it to 20 percent.
Interestingly, the Swedish people and the Swedish elite (just like the Estonians, as I discussed in my takedown of Paul Krugman) seem to understand that there’s no going back to the statist era of the 1970s and 1980s.
Where are the left-wing intellectuals to challenge this new order? They have disappeared. The old socialist research organizations have closed down. The Center for Labor Market Studies was a state institution that generated propaganda, not research, and the government closed it. The Trade Union Confederation had a sophisticated research institute, which it eliminated for not being sufficiently political. The union economists, who dominated Swedish economic debate in the 1970s and ’80s, have been replaced by bank economists. The free-market right has influential research centers in Stockholm. After many years of absence from the debate, I attended a conference on the Swedish economy in the southern city of Malmo last month. …the 180 speakers represented the full range of Swedish views. I was amazed to hear how far the consensus had moved to the free- market right, even among Social Democrats and trade-union leaders. …The Social Democrats haven’t only joined the free-market consensus, but seem to attack the current government from the right, pushing for a better business environment. Gone are demands for the restoration of social benefits. Opinion polls have rewarded the Social Democrats for their right turn with sharply improved ratings.
In other words, Sweden is a lot like Canada – a nation that took a misguided turn to the left but since then has moved significantly in the right direction.
I’m not willing to trade places with either nation, but that may change at some point. The Bush-Obama policies of bigger government and more intervention have made America less attractive, while other nations have learned from their mistakes.
If Sweden adopts a flat tax and figures out how to cancel winter, I may have to move there.
P.S. Sweden’s government-run healthcare system can be quite emasculating.
[…] nunca sería tan tonta como para imponer tal impuesto, especialmente cuando otras naciones como Suecia han revocado los impuestos sobre la riqueza debido a su impacto […]
[…] and Congressional control we will likely see wealth taxes despite their very favorite country, Sweden, having repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] assured me, would never be foolish enough to impose such a levy, especially when other nations such as Sweden have repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] me, would never be foolish enough to impose such a levy, especially when other nations such as Sweden have repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] me, would never be foolish enough to impose such a levy, especially when other nations such as Sweden have repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] me, would never be foolish enough to impose such a levy, especially when other nations such as Sweden have repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] me, would never be foolish enough to impose such a levy, especially when other nations such as Sweden have repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] me, would never be foolish enough to impose such a levy, especially when other nations such as Sweden have repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] me, would never be foolish enough to impose such a levy, especially when other nations such as Sweden have repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] me, would never be foolish enough to impose such a levy, especially when other nations such as Sweden have repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] me, would never be foolish enough to impose such a levy, especially when other nations such as Sweden have repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] me, would never be foolish enough to impose such a levy, especially when other nations such as Sweden have repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] they assured me, would never be foolish enough to impose such a levy, especially when other nations such as Sweden have repealed wealth taxes because of their harmful […]
[…] written some nice things about Sweden in recent years, noting that the government has sought to minimize the damage of the welfare state with free market […]
[…] previously shared (many times) observations about the good features of the Nordic nations, so let’s take a closer […]
[…] previously shared (many times) observations about the good features of the Nordic nations, so let’s take a closer […]
[…] Bernie Sanders, they generally point to nations such as Denmark and Sweden, though they never have a good response when you point out that: a) these nations became rich when […]
[…] Bernie Sanders, they generally point to nations such as Denmark and Sweden, though they never have a good response when you point out that: a) these nations became rich when […]
[…] But we have folks like Bernie Sanders openly arguing we should be more like nations such as Denmark and Sweden. […]
[…] In other words, the data back up points I’ve made about policy in nations such as Denmark and Sweden. […]
[…] In other words, the data back up points I’ve made about policy in nations such as Denmark and Sweden. […]
[…] Though Sweden has wised up in many regards. After the crisis of the early 1990s, the country was a role model of spending […]
[…] de sus medidas "neoliberales" como tener un sistema de pensiones similar al de Chile Sweden: The Sensible (and Slowly Shrinking) Welfare State | International Liberty Sweden, Spending Restraint, and the Benefits of Obeying Fiscal Policy?s Golden Rule | […]
[…] since implemented some positive reforms in the area of fiscal policy, along with other changes to liberalize the […]
[…] Hay un montón de como sobre Suecia , pero haga clic aquí si quieres ver un ejemplo increíblemente absurdo de esa nación de la […]
[…] There’s a lot to like about Sweden, but click here if you want to see an impossibly absurd example from that nation of the […]
[…] for its proclaimed cultural superiority by Ayn Rand in the 1960s, but still going strong as part of statist mythology […]
[…] for its proclaimed cultural superiority by Ayn Rand in the 1960s, but still going strong as part of statist mythology […]
[…] La Suède et l'Allemagne font partie des trois pays ayant réduit leurs dépenses publiques en pourcentage du PIB, et ces pays sont dans de meilleures situations que leurs voisins européens. La Suisse n'appartient pas à l'Union Européenne et n'est donc pas inclue dans le graphique de Constantin, mais les dépenses de l’État suisse ont également été réduites pendant la période étudiée ; on constate aussi que son économie est en meilleur état que celle de ses voisins. La morale de cette histoire est simple : réduire le poids des dépenses publiques est la recette gagnante pour une croissance forte et durable. La croissance apparaît lorsque les politiciens se détournent d'une politique fiscale de « lutte des classes » et cherchent à prélever des impôts ayant un impact minimum sur l'économie. […]
[…] Sweden and Germany are among the three nations that have reduced the burden of government spending as a share of GDP, and both of those nations are doing better than their European neighbors. […]
[…] big-government nations – such as Sweden and Denmark – try to minimize the damage of high tax burdens, but there’s no way to […]
[…] won’t be very impressive, but big government doesn’t automatically mean collapse. Sweden and Denmark are good role models for this […]
[…] Sweden: The Sensible (and Slowly Shrinking) Welfare State […]
Our welfare state is doing anything but shrinking. Maybe Sweden will end up like we were and we will replace them as the biggest socialist state?
[…] posts about Sweden and Denmark show why she’s wrong, but I would also call your attention to this World Bank […]
[…] a very good point, and I’ve acknowledged that nations such as Sweden and Denmark are examples of how to do the wrong thing in the best possible fashion. They have large […]
[…] Sweden and Denmark, Germany is a semi-rational welfare state. It generally relies on a market-oriented […]
[…] Sweden and Denmark, Germany is a semi-rational welfare state. It generally relies on a market-oriented […]
[…] (such as Hong Kong) showing that freedom is a key to prosperity, and other countries (such as Sweden) having good and bad […]
[…] (such as Hong Kong) showing that freedom is a key to prosperity, and other countries (such as Sweden) having good and bad […]
[…] Sweden: The Sensible (and Slowly Shrinking) Welfare State […]
Reblogged this on Talon's Point and commented:
Dan Mitchell nails it again
Reblogged this on Gds44's Blog.
The figures for tax as a percent of GDP can be deceptive, because continental European countries tax their deceptively generous welfare benefits, while the UK and USA don’t tax benefits (except for sales tax).
Also, of course, Sweden taxes public sector pay at a higher rate than pretty much any other country.
I wish Sweden well, especially since there seem to be seeds of good liberating thought in the country.
However, Sweden’s — and the rest of the Western World’s — existential problem boils down to one thing: What growth trendline is the Sweetish prosperity riding on in the long term?
Depending on how one looks at it, Sweetish prosperity seems to be riding a 1.5% annual growth trendline. In other words, Sweden is toast, and Sweetish people are losing about 3.5% of their privileged status per year, riding the road to relative decline and world averagedom in a world that grows by 5% every year. That is the central theme of all western world countries in this fast moving and ever accelerating early 21st century.
It’s a race for who will wake up first. But few will, especially when trapped into large homogenizing unions like the European Union or the Union of American states. At a time when three billion people have finally learned the lesson of individual freedom and decentralization, the less than one billion western world voter lemmings seem to be hoping that coercive enslavement of the individual to a centrally planned common good determined by government bureaucrats and publicly funded intellectual elites is the way to preserve superior prosperity. Convergence will come soon. Lemmings think it’s their children’s problem. Yes, perhaps, if you are 60-70 years old or above.
There are some quite interesting points to make from Sweden’s example
http://www.american.com/archive/2008/november-11-08/banking-lessons-from-sweden
but it is still a social-democratic welfare state, with the world’s second highest taxation (right behind Denmark) filled with rules and regulations. Certainly the overall tax pressure has been reduced by the Reinfeldt conservative administration, but it is certainly not a tax hawk government. Borg’s main focus has been on moving money around in the budget (sometimes in a beneficial direction, as the tax cuts to companies for employing young under the age of 25) and keeping the budget balanced. The government may have its house in order, but ordinary Swedish citizens don’t, with a high degree of personal debt.
The economy of Sweden in the first quarter of 2012 shrunk most in the whole of Europe, which is not that surprising as the economy is dependent on foreign trade that produces 60% of the GDP. This is not entirely the fault of the government’s policies, but it shows that the country’s economy has a strong dependency on factors the Swedish government cannot influence – for better or for worse.
The center-right government’s policies have generally been in a good direction, but I am tempted to note that it is rather easy to become the poster boy of fiscal conservatism and liberalization today. You become a tax punk rocker by not being a tax hiker.