Talk:Social democracy

	This Social democracy related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

Raven is an idiot and illiterate in statistics

Among all the things I've seen in RW (actually, in 15 years editing and browsing wikis), so far his correlation with union membership and and social indicators is by a wide margin the most idiotic. First, you don't use a single variable in your regression. Doing such thing means a round zero in your report card. Second, even if you do, you don't add outliers, especially if you have a small sample splace. It's absurd to add Iceland to this regression (and also because Iceland welfare state is smaller than the one in US). But let's ignore these basic facts I've stated. I've run the regression here in my house and his correlation is still weak. But hey, Raven does have a correlation, maybe he's right! No. He isn't. The p-value shows that the correlation is insignificant at 0.01, (It is the bare minimum to publish an article in a second rate journal). But hey, we're a wiki, we ain't that serious, maybe it's relevant if we have a bigger margin of error. How about a p-value of 0.05? No. Still irrelevant. Let's push to the limits then. A p-value 0.1!~ Still irrelevant. I'm removing right away, this is the kind of thing that people take screenshots in order to vilify sites over the Internet. GeeJayK (talk) 03:43, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

You're so brave attacking someone who is banned and can't respond in kind. So courageous! @GeeJayK SomeoneX (talk) 06:24, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

so to be clear you are not disputing the criticism, just that it is being made. well done. dumbfuck AMassiveGay (talk) 07:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Awn, did I strike a nerve of yours? Are you triggered that the banned person in question can't respond to criticism? Do you know what a multivariate linear regression is, then? SomeoneX (talk) 08:04, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Stop complaining and using fancy words to seem smarter than you actually are and come with actual salient arguments instead of mudslinging. Unless of course you're Raven, in which case; don't you have a wiki to attend to. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 08:22, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok, Raven. Now can you please explain why a simple linear regression, with outliers and without statistic significance is a good argument? GeeJayK (talk) 16:26, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

dont expect any defence of their edits. they never bothered when they were officially here. AMassiveGay (talk) 17:05, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

And this is what the modern day Giordano Bruno is reduced to! Implicitly admitting his own wiki is a failure, he bothers a superior community he otherwise pretends to have gotten over. Oh, and Raven still can't argue with any competence.-Flandres (talk) 17:30, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@GeeJayK Then do this: collect all the countries data in regards to HDI, unionization, Gini index and make a MvLR. Instead of bitching about a user who is no longer on that wiki and can't defend himself (but still triggers the fuck out of the reactionaries in here that can't wait to judge said user), do that. Be better! SomeoneX (talk) 00:10, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘This may surprise you, but there is a big difference between criticizing the methodology (which, in the way it was used in the article, was fractally wrong) and the conclusion (which is reasonable). GeeJayK (talk) 00:14, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Possible source of Criticism -- I need to find the paper first which may require me to email one of my past profs.

I took a gender studies course in university and we covered an essay that described how social democratic countries and countries that use the Nordic system are especially reliant on the overseas labour of developing countries. Often from suppliers that have their workers work under conditions with zero health and safety protocols, extremely poor pay, etc. An example we covered in class in the company JSYK being supplied textiles from countries like Bangladesh where the workers have incredibly high cancer rates possibly due to work with hazardous chemicals with no PPE. The academic article we were reading itself was arguing that to be constantly sourced with relatively inexpensive goods in developed nations, these nations require the extreme exploitation of overseas labour. This also predominately means the extreme exploitation of people of Colour in service to white majority countries. This isn't really a problem unique to socdem countries per se but the author themselves felt the need to emphasize (or at least it needed to be emphasize in class) that the seemingly ethical Nordic model still rely on the extreme exploitation that other "less progressive" capitalist countries do. I am wondering if it's worth finding this article and including it or if such a piece would be more so relevant elsewhere on the wiki. I forgot the author's name and the title of the article itself, so to get the source I would need some time to contact my old prof. Does this raise any interest for anyone? - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 03:48, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, this is an aspect of social democracy that often gets overlooked. The Nordic Model doesn't rid itself of exploitation, it just exports the harshest forms of it to the global south. I have no qualms with you adding this here. Vee (talk) 06:00, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

While it's true that Social democracies take advantage of other countries in this way, it's hardly a criticism unique to Social Democracy. (I accept you make this point.) It's really a criticism of all western cultures in general and which is shared by Social Democracies.

You could equally well point out that some forms of animal welfare (for example) could be improved in Nordic countries. But that's because animal welfare needs to be improved everywhere - it's a not a problem unique to social democracies.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 15:55, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

While that's true, many people seem to think the Nordic Model is this sort of utopia with no problems whatsoever. No system should be held up on a pedestal. This wiki criticizes neoliberalism, socialism, monarchism, and whatnot. Why is the Nordic Model exempt? Vee (talk) 17:56, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

You may have a bit of a straw man with "many people seem to think the Nordic Model is this sort of utopia with no problems whatsoever". If not, it might be worth identifying these "many people" and pointing out where they go wrong. Furthermore, I would certainly say that if there are problems which are uniquely generated by Social Democracy then we should certainly mention them.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 17:50, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Keynes as the Father of Modern Macroeconomics?

Is there any Source? I mean, even if there is a Source, it’s still just false, but I'm sure some academic autor would write something like this. Especially a fan of Keynes. ^{— Unsigned, by: 2A02:8071:60A0:92E0:84DC:DF1D:AF36:FDE6 / talk / contribs}

It is accurate though. According to the IMF. [1]:

If Adam Smith is the father of economics, John Maynard Keynes is the founding father of macroeconomics. Although some of the notions of modern macroeconomics are rooted in the work of scholars such as Irving Fisher and Knut Wicksell in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, macroeconomics as a distinct discipline began with Keynes’s masterpiece, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, in 1936. Its main concern is the instability of aggregate variables. Whereas early economics concentrated on equilibrium in individual markets, Keynes introduced the simultaneous consideration of equilibrium in three interrelated sets of markets—for goods, labor, and finance. He also introduced “disequilibrium economics,” which is the explicit study of departures from general equilibrium. His approach was taken up by other leading economists and developed rapidly into what is now known as macroeconomics.

GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 17:29, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Income inequality criticism seems out of date?

I'm too amateur to conduct an actual edit but I don't know if it's warranted to begin with. Article about income inequality, under 'actual criticism' says; "The Nordic countries generally rank among the lowest countries in the Gini coefficient" but that does not appear to be the case, at least not in the last couple years- unless I'm misunderstanding this which I probably am. Sweden (28.8), Norway (27), Finland (27.4), Denmark (28.7) and Iceland (26.8) average 27.7 on the Gini Coefficient according to 2018 data. This number is lower than the US, UK, France, Germany, Spain, Poland, Italy, Portugal, etc. So when it says 'generally to rank among the lowest', I mean they score lower, but I thought this was a situation where a lower number is better so it seems that they certainly do not rank among the lowest anymore. However, I don't know enough to know if this is because of something else entirely to where the criticism still stands. I don't know if this needs to be updated, removed or left alone. I don't mean to waste anyone's time but I need help understanding this. I'm user THV but I don't wish to log in at work. 136.226.67.73 (talk) 08:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Socialism and socia-democracy

To many, and in many sources they are described as socialist. More generally in countries where reformist socialist parties are not called democratic but simply socialist (I.e Spain, France etc.) and Marxist parties communist, reformist socialist parties are simply reformist, and use the terms, democratic socialism, in the sense of a democratic socialism, and social-democracy, interchangeably to describe anti-liberal but not necessarily anti-capitalist, i.e reformist socialist policies. I see an anglophone bias here, as the US and Canada, and partially Britain, are isolates, when it comes to this. There are many French books (Winock, for exemple, has written plenty about it. I come from France, so naturally I am familiar with it, but plenty in Spain, Latin America, and even Scandinavia, too, although things have largely changed there when it comes to social-democracy in Scandinavia) describing it as such, and the official declaration of the French socialist party openly uses social-democracy and democratic socialism interchangeably. This is why I, and many others, hate when American newspapers say Bernie Sanders "was wrong" (I think he is intelligent enough to know about socialism and social-democracy). He introduced socialism to America, because before Americans were mainly referring to communism (revolutionary socialism, or, more specifically, Marxism. Stalin, Trotsky and Mao all thought of themselves as Marxists. Their theories only got separated because of they’re horrible crimes, or because of opposition to those crimes. At the core though, it is Marxism, which the reformists don’t agree with) as socialism (common name for reformist socialism in many countries, not however in the USA. I am not arguing the US doesn’t have the right to its own tradition, but that this article is simply an article written in English, not an American, British, or whatever else article. I’m talking about Europe because American liberalism isn’t exactly social-democracy, and Britain had always had a less radical form of it). Also, since the 90s and 2000s there is a "liberal consensus", where figures such as Tony Blair, Gerhard Schröder, later François Hollande (Lionel Jospin was still more radical, and yet he was a social democrat unquestionably), the successors of Olof Palme in Sweden, etc. made economically liberal and centrist laws, going away from radical social-democracy, which imposed compromises which had a penchant in favor of government, left-wing compromises, since the government was left-wing. This provoked outburst in certain wings of the socialist parties, and so they left them to found new parties. Those parties are in the middle of a debate over what is "far-left", and if they fit into that category. Now simply stating that social-democracy isn’t socialist, according to many non-English experts, is false. And the French socialist party still uses the terms equally, even after the liberal consensus, and recently they had a move tot eh left (sources? Just read some french newspapers on NUPES). You can’t just leave the article like this. Anyway, I’m a Wikipedia editor, and I do see how biased this page is. Good bye (and no. I’m not a troll, I don’t edit under IP, and I know how to sign. I am a French Wikipedia admin, and this is in a way, surprising), and happy new year. Cordially, 80.209.216.81 (talk) 01:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Rank Market Liberal theory

Rank Market Liberal theory in substitution of much actual history. Its the usual fluff that defines anything that is potential victories of the socialist movements as "not actual socialism" given that there still exists markets. But then again, there existed markets in Yugoslavia and the various USSR countries too. If one defines "excessive leftiness" as the abscence of any markets, then yes. Its not "real socialism" but the entire project of much of European Nationalism was building a common national market, as was much of the work of the USSR. The planned economies meaning to jump start backwards economies that could not afford the slowness of market economies. As did South Korea, a Capitalist country defined by its use of planning in many of its early stages after independence from the Japanese Empires. Inspired often by literal Stalin, yes, Capitalists using Plan Economics, ie something called Developmentalist regimes. Again, this is so heavily Americanist Market Liberal bullshit that it kind of seems like a Democrat version of Conservapedia. I recommend reading Matt Bruenig for an explanation of The Nordic Model that goes beyond, socialism is when the markets does not do anything. ^{— Unsigned, by: Akiosn / talk / contribs}