[Mirioron]

>If more people start more companies, we're probably all better off even if they don't all survive.

Not if the policy causes more inefficiencies itself. If people can, at will, take 6 months off, then all companies need to plan for more redundancy. This is obviously inefficient. So it ends up being a question of whether the benefits outweigh the negatives.

Considering that Sweden isn't exactly topping the charts in economic growth or wealth or GDP per capita or disposable income, I'm not sure whether this system is good in the long run.

[danmaz74]

Efficiency is important, but if all the benefits of the efficiencies accrue to the rich, we're not "all better off".

Plus, GDP per capita doesn't capture some very important aspects of of what makes people live better lives, eg job security, not being afraid of health issues, leisure time, etc.