Swedes are very different from, say, Norwegians. Swedes are forthcoming and ambitious; if you succeed in your ambition, you're celebrated by your countrymen (so long what you're doing is in the politically correct sphere). You're allowed to be proud of your achievements. Norwegians keep their head down; most seem content with what little they have. If you do achieve more success than your average countrymen, you're scrutinized, not celebrated. You must have done some immoral stuff along the way, right?
All Norwegians know this. Any other Norwegians here who can confirm?
Finns are kind of similar to Norwegians, in this aspect, only, drunker and more depressed. Danes are even more content than Norwegians with having even less, giving almost everything back to the state. They just want their "hygge".
As a Swede I disagree; I find that "Jantelagen" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante) is as strong in Sweden as anywhere else that I've been in Scandinavia if not even more so. Although, I live in Northern Sweden: far away from Stockholm. Maybe individual success is viewed more kindly there, I do not know.
Trust me, Janteloven is still going strong in Sweden as well. I guess that if you look at Sweden from the outside, you mostly see those that have been successful and defy it, which might make you think it's not present.
Strongly disagree. As a swede I've been taught my entire life not to think I'm special or in any way better at anything than anyone else. It's only in recent years I've come to realize that being good at something does actually give you the right to say you're good at it as long as it's true and not empty bragging.
That's not to say Swedes aren't hard working but you'll rarely hear a swede talk about their achievements in the way a person from the US would for instance.
Everyone's biased, but descriptions matching those above are commonly observed here regardless of political views. They are in fact common to the point of triteness.
If I were to talk about what's actually going on and explain why Norway fosters less tech innovation than Sweden it would have to be in a different form than comments. But I wanted to point out that the explanation might have to do with things unrelated to regulations, taxes, and safety nets.
Just for a starter, "Danes are even more content than Norwegians with having even less, giving almost everything back to the state" is blatantly and utterly false. The effective tax rate in Denmark is not particularly remarkable among OECD countries.
This misconception, as well as call to "all Norwegians know this", and your use of the term "politically correct" as a pejorative makes it clear that you have a political agenda, an axe to grind with the social democracy practiced in the Scandinavian countries.
Danish tax rate is one of the highest in the world if not the highest in the world. On top of that you have 25% VAT and on cars, you are up to around 200% (recently lowered)
The tax rate is high, but on the flipside we also have pretty much the best and most extensive public services and social safety nets in the world. Still, it's around 25-35% all-in, nowhere near the 50+% a lot of right-wing pundits keep lying about.
Car registration tax has never been 200%. It has been 105% up to ~$15K of the car's value and 180% above that for years, which was lowered to 150% some time ago. Now the lower rate has been reduced to 85% and the cutover raised to around ~$20K, and rebates for fuel economy and safety gear have increased significantly. A small car is only marginally more expensive in Denmark compared to Germany, while larger and luxury cars are rightfully more expensive.
You obviously only have a very tenuous grasp of what you're talking about, so please stop, listen and learn instead.
You seem to agree that Denmark's vehicle taxation is remarkably high. Many people are reliant on having a vehicle, and one larger than a Polo, so their total taxation is remarkably higher than in other countries based on this alone. You used the word "rightfully" as if it's a moral given that people in need of bigger vehicles should be taxed more.
Vehicles aside, in Denmark, you have a gross tax of 8% in addition to payroll tax. You have municipal tax, a health contribution tax, etc. If you make more than DKK 479 600, you are taxed an additional 15%. This means you will be taxed around 50% on income tax alone. Then add the vehicle taxation, and VAT, etc.
You can try to justify this massive taxation. Rationalize it, based on your political views. But it's not wrong to say that Danes are taxed even more than Norwegians.
Yes, the vehicle taxation is high. Should it have been set that high originally? Maybe, maybe not.
But the simple fact is that it highly encourages people to buy cars that pollute less, and with the new rules, also cars with the best safety ratings. It also encourages people to keep their cars for longer, which is better for the environment (producing a new car uses a lot of energy).
And yes, if you buy a bigger and more expensive car (which probably also gets worse gas mileage), you get taxed more, in absolute numbers. It's not a complicated concept. Overconsumers pay more, it's only fair.
You seriously misunderstand the marginal tax rate. It is only applied to income above 479,600kr. Nobody pays even close to 50%. The ~40% in your link is on a 635,000kr/year income, which is rather high, includes marginal tax, and again is nowhere near the 50% you claim. It also doesn't take into account deductions for debt, charitable donations and other things, which help bring down the effective tax percentage.
Your third link is highly misinformative, since it only looks at the marginal tax rate, which again is only applied to income above 479,600kr. If you make 480,000kr/year, the marginal tax rate is only applied to the last 400kr.
I still don't understand where you get 25-35% tax "all-in" from, as you wrote in a previous post. It seems if you're to make what's considered anything like a decent wage in this sector (tech) you will pay at least 40%, and the more you make the more you pay, hence progressive tax.
Cars are a major cause of global warming, so there is a pressing need to curb their use. People don't inherently need cars (or big cars), we have to change our ways to drive less.
I won't really get into the politics of vehicles, but many people do need a car if they are to make a living, thinking otherwise is naive and unrealistic. For many, it is their living. Others need it for personal freedom, some people enjoy a road trip; others like to be able to visit friends and family. Perhaps some even use a vehicle to come take care of sick and elderly living in rural areas. People who don't live in cities need cars; public transportation is not widespread enough or flexible enough.
Maybe you want to condemn everyone to live in cities? Or to not have big families, or to not produce goods where at one point those goods need to be transported to outlets by vehicle. The manufacturing of goods cause pollution as well, you don't want to have that production in urban areas and affect the health of those living there. Not all transportation can be done by other means, shipping, trains, etc. Goods have to get to stores. Sometime in the future, we will have more efficient means of delivery, at the very least all the vehicles delivering goods will be autonomous and electric, but for now, we're not there.
In the case of Denmark, first off, their vehicles per capita is very low, and not because of taxation. Going after the few people who need their cars is punishing, kind of hypocritical as well, when you're at the same time burning coal. Second, Denmark's contribution to global warming is infinitesimal, let's focus on the United States and China who's the biggest polluters, by far. You don't cut the snake's tail.
> I won't really get into the politics of vehicles, but many people do need a car if they are to make a living, thinking otherwise is naive and unrealistic.
Like I said with "people don't inherently need cars", this line of thinking is anchored in the wrong thing. It's of course trivially true that many current jobs rely on cars, but we have to rapidly change that - otherwise much worse things than carlessness and change of job will happen to people and the ecosphere.
Try s/cars/slaves/ in your text to see what I mean.
Re coal - it is a logical fallacy to deny necessary improvement A because we have not made a tangential, equally necessary improvement B yet. Of course we have to stop burning coal as well.
Re cities - history does know instances of people living outside cities before widespread private car ownership...
> Like I said with "people don't inherently need cars", this line of thinking is anchored in the wrong thing.
Inherent need as in without you die? No. But right now, for efficient (compared to walking) mobility outside of the public transportation infrastructure, we need vehicles.
What is your suggestion for mobility outside cities, in a way that grants as much liberty, personal freedom as a car does?
> Re coal - it is a logical fallacy to deny necessary improvement A because we have not made a tangential, equally necessary improvement B yet. Of course we have to stop burning coal as well.
The logical fallacy is putting the cart before the horse.
> Re cities - history does know instances of people living outside cities before widespread private car ownership...
In case anyone is interested, Statistics Norway believes that the median after tax income for households consisting of persons living alone under 45 years old was 280,200 NOK/year in 2015. The exchange rate with the dollar varies of course, but this is somewhere between 33,300--38400 USD/year.
I am not sure how to compare the before and after tax measures, but even if I could, there are still many remaining differences between the United States and Norway. Also note that the two groups being compared are not the same, because of the age restriction.
For being one of the richest countries in the world the median income is way too low (especially for single-households). And a direct comparison with other countries can't be done without factoring in all the taxes we have in addition to payroll tax. Norway is also one of the most expensive countries in the world. We have 25% VAT on most goods and services. 15% for food and drink. Alcohol is heavily taxed, for high alc/vol 65% of the purchase price is taxes. Vehicles are heavily taxed, compared to, i.e., Sweden. A $50k car in the U.S. would be $100k here, or more, depending on engine size, emissions, etc. High environmental taxes for fuel, electricity, etc. Taxes on gifts, inheritance, property, wealth, pension, etc.
All Norwegians know this. Any other Norwegians here who can confirm?
Finns are kind of similar to Norwegians, in this aspect, only, drunker and more depressed. Danes are even more content than Norwegians with having even less, giving almost everything back to the state. They just want their "hygge".