680f1640   
   XPost: soc.culture.baltics, soc.culture.czecho-slovak, soc.culture.russian   
   XPost: alt.politics   
   From: ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com   
      
   In article ,   
    Jaakko Raipala  wrote:   
      
   > Yet that's exactly what's happening. The welfare states are slowly (and   
   > quietly) being dismantled down to American levels.   
      
   ...   
      
   > Nordic liberalism was based on homogeneity: when we could largely   
   > assume similar ethics throughout the population - similar views on the   
   > rights of women (like walking alone and not covered in a burka not   
   > being an invitation), similar work ethics, similar attitudes on small   
   > girls not being for adult men and so on - it was easy to be liberal.   
   > Adding groups with very different attitudes on all that is eating it   
   > all away, leaving old leftism an ideology of fossils who can't grasp   
   > that they're getting their diversity and it's killing them.   
      
   Let me offer an alternative explanation, one that doesn't depend on   
   immigration.   
      
   In order for a society to function, lots of people have to spend lots of   
   time doing things that aren't much fun--producing, transporting,   
   selling, and the like. Some people enjoy those activites a lot, but most   
   can think of other things they would rather do. Those things get done   
   because people make their living doing them.   
      
   A welfare state transfers money from people who work to people who   
   don't, thus reducing the advantage to being one of the former. In the   
   short run, the effect on production isn't all that large, because there   
   is a lot of inertia in human behavior and social institutions. Someone   
   who is brought up to believe that going on welfare is a sign of failure   
   may keep working even when his income from working isn't much more than   
   his income from not working.   
      
   Over time, that changes. It becomes accepted that everyone has a right   
   to a decent living, hence if you don't get a decent living it is someone   
   else's fault and there is no reason for you to be ashamed of being   
   supported by the state. Given the choice between having to do a job that   
   usually isn't much fun at regular hours, and having a lot of leisure and   
   a decent, if not as good, income, more and more people opt for the   
   latter. The society is then increasingly faced with the choice between a   
   generous welfare state where people are poor and a much less generous   
   one where they are considerably less poor. As that becomes clear, there   
   is increasing political pressure to reduce the scale of wealth transfer.   
      
   --   
    http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/   
    Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.   
    Published by Baen, in bookstores now   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)