[euio757]

Easy to make a snarky comments at Democrats US who always love to say “Follow the Nordic Model” “Follow Scandinavian countries” on almost every topic... Safe to say they wouldn't agree here.

But serious question here: What happened in Sweden that lead to this parliament move?

[satvikpendem]

Europe in general is seeing a reversal in their philosophy towards migrants, especially from the Middle East, North Africa, Pakistan and Turkey (MENAPT is the acronym governments use). It's probably the lack of integration into the host cultures and ghettoization of many areas. Japan is doing something similar too to the article.

[djoldman]

Follow the Nordic model has never been anything but a fantasy.

All the Scandinavian countries put together have slightly more people than the NYC metro area and are extremely homogeneous in terms of ethnicity, religiosity, etc. as compared to the USA.

In short, it's never been a good policy testbed for the much much larger and more diverse USA.

[ochrist]

Just guessing it has to do with this: https://nri.today/swedens-crisis-immigration-bloodshed/

[Procrastes]

> Democrats US who always love to say “Follow the Nordic Model”

past performance is not indicative of future results

I'm not about to run out and suggest Finnish lunches or buy a tin of Surströmming for breakfast, but it might be nice to have a balanced budget.

[ribs]

Hold on hold on hold on, tell me about Finnish lunches, as from searching they sound pretty innocuous. (Surströmming I know of, no questions there)

[sakex]

Too much immigration too quick, people got fed up from what I gather

[bwhiting2356]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden_Democrats rightward shift

[dataflow]

I imagine they don't want to end up where the US is now.

Edit: is reality too upsetting for folks? Hopefully nobody was asleep when American candidates ran on immigration policy, their constituents voted based on that, and we ended up with the current politicians and the overall status quo? Or do people not see a causal chain here?

[ForHackernews]

You mean the wealthiest country in the world with a thriving, educated, well-integrated Muslim population that earns well above the national average income?

[combyn8tor]

People don't want to live in a mansion when it's on fire.

[noncoml]

> Safe to say they wouldn't agree here

Maybe because they do not like to blindly follow the "leader", but instead prefer to judge for themselves?

Democrats don't want "bad" immigration as much as you do. No-one wants criminals or people who are unwilling to follow the law.

I am not an immigration expert, but blanket rules and blanket statements are seldom giving good results.

When the right says ban immigrants they sounds as stupid as when the left says ban billionaires.

[quaverquaver]

marginal tax rates reached 94% in 1944 on income over 200k in the US. The high marginal tax regime gave rise to a period of relative equality. Nothing stupid about it - if a long right tail is a social ill (it is) then why have it?

[csa]

> marginal tax rates reached 94% in 1944 on income over 200k in the US.

Tell me you’re young without saying you’re young.

Those headline rates were not the rates actually paid.

The quantity and scope of tax write offs at that time were substantial and often generous. The tax reform act of 1986 lowered the headline rates and substantially reduced the scope of deductions.

As such, referring to that “high taxation” era as some sort of halcyon days due to the tax rates is quite misguided.

If you ever want to hear a tax accountant get excited, talk to one who was practicing in the 80s. The stories you will hear…

[noncoml]

That's different than chanting "Ban Billionaires"

[AngryData]

Who would still be a billionaire at that tax rate?

[jleyank]

Depends on what’s taxed at 94%. If it’s wages, they’ll just switch to passive 8ncome or stock/loans as they use now. If it’s all income, there’s going to be total change in the us compensation system.

[AngryData]

If the average person was told they would have to pay 94% tax on high level income and other people could skirt it to remain billionaires there would be riots and/or changes in how income is defined, so in the end I don't think it would matter. It would have to settle one way or another in short order, although it could get pretty bloody.