ken hanly wrote:
What Sweden are we talking about? Sweden has been beset by liberal reforms
for more than a decade.
According to the Luxemboug Income Study, as of the mid-90s, Sweden
had a poverty rate (50% of median income) of 6.6%, barely changed
since 1975; Canada was 12.8%; and the U.S.,
Yes.
There was a Brookings book on Sweden some time ago
that motivates their outlook. I don't remember what
it said about LM mgmt.
max
Max B. Sawicky wrote:
Sweden is the liberal mainstream ideal because it is
viewed as a place with relatively little market-distorting
policy and a
The Brookings book was quite critical of Sweden, proposing a strong dose
of neo-liberalism. Even Richard Freeman was not altogether positive about
Sweden.
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 12:31:11PM -0400, Max B. Sawicky wrote:
Yes.
There was a Brookings book on Sweden some time ago
that motivates
The Brookings book was quite critical of Sweden, proposing a strong dose
of neo-liberalism. Even Richard Freeman was not altogether positive about
Sweden.
Social democracy in Sweden was not achieved through piecemeal, legislative
baby steps. It came as a result of a general strike in the
Yes, but it did not remain militant. Many of its leaders were devout
Christians, and not particularly sympathetic to Marx. I also think that
it did come about in baby steps, even though the strike was very
important. Also, I think that it was evolved into a general strike, but I
am on shakey
What Sweden are we talking about? Sweden has been beset by liberal reforms
for more than a decade. Changes in the health care system are very much
towards a more quasi market system and exhibit the same penchant for
privatization cost-offloading through user fees etc.etc as other regimes.
The
