I have always thought about the idea that life is so happy-go-lucky and laid back in Scandinavia, and why exactly it is this way. After visiting Spain in high school, I noticed a similar lifestyle: there is less urgency for everything and much less overall anxiety about life. Being an American in Spain, I had at least twenty people thank me for "my contributions." While I personally have not made any world-altering innovations, I knew that they meant that our country is a world leader and that their country, specifically, benefited from our advancements. Similarly in countries like Switzerland and Norway, there is less pressure to advance because the rest of the world is not relying on it to carry it on its back. This goes along with the idea of capitalism and incentives--the U.S. has more responsibilities and is held to a higher standard, so our stress level affects our standard of living. Cut throat capitalists argue that technologically advanced societies are those that are socially unequal and have high levels of poverty. This is partially true, with the U.S. as an example. We lead the world in technological advancements, but fall short in the area of quality of life, but there needs to be a balance so that the rest of the world does not fall apart without our help.
The people in the United states, due to self centered leaders, have lost the battle for economic justice and social justice that was the defining element of progress during the Twentieth Century. At least one political party has turned against the best interests of "We the people..." as defined by our Constitution to serve and to protect the best interests of some people in the republic. Needless to say justice has been skewed to serve people who claim to have moral superiority and to serve people who do have economic superiority. People who do not fill inclusive/exclusive definitions of moral righteousness and who cannot buy justice are ignored in affairs of state which is contrary to many progressive ideas of democracy. Yes, the United States is losing its grasp of the notion for a better future of all of its citizens. It is a sad loss but not an excuse to be hopeless about turning the situation around. We are living in an era where one political party is focused on destroying a president and everything the president believes and represents for the citizens of the nation. Something is horribly wrong with this picture of a once great nation.
Well, I am Swedish, so obviously I am biased, but I still feel I have to comment on this article. While it is true that the whole world is dependent on the US financial system due to the global capitalist economy, the author of the article seems to have forgotten that it was the high levels of inequality and cut throat capitalism of US corporations and banks that dragged the whole world (including Scandinavia) into a major recession less than 10 years ago. So saying that "Scandinavian success" is because of Americans sacrificing equality for the good of the world economy seems slightly distasteful to be honest. Also, the article makes it seem like Scandinavian "cuddly" economies are preventing technological innovation because of lacking incentives, but a quick google search shows that Scandinavian countries rank in the top 10 or top 5 in most technological innovation-indexes, not just the living standard-indexes. However, this could all be written off as lack of research or just spin, but the thing that really annoys me with this article is that the perpetual growth of the economy on a long term scale and endless technological advancement is portrayed as something that is inherently good and unproblematic. It says nothing of the impact this has on the environment or the fact that a lot of technological innovation in sustainable development has been made in "cuddly" economies such as Scandinavia. These advancements, however, don't really matter on a global scale as long as other countries with more production, and hence more pollution, try to implement the same or similar approaches in order to fight environmental problems (something that in some cases - not all - can decrease the growth of the economy). - Malin Niklasson
The author kind of sounds like a hater. He is saying that the rigid capitalism of the United States is the reason behind Scandinavian however, Scandinavian countries actively work towards improving social welfare. In at least Canada, the Netherlands, and Sweden, the government offers almost Universal health care and much cheaper education in the United States. This pride and patriotism identified by the author is because the people can feel like the government has their best interests at heart and works towards improving society fro all not just the wealthy. Things such as universal health care would not pass in this country because we fear the free rider problem and there are institutions in place used to guarantee that some groups of people retain some semblance of power. Also, it is much easier to have social progress and happiness in wealthy homogeneous societies because there are not discriminatory institutions in place causing the disenfranchised to spend time focusing on social justice as opposed to general social progress.
Lezah Calvin, I have to agree with you. The author sounds like the typical American in some ways. It seems like he is trying to justify the lack of social progress in the U.S. simply because they are the leaders of the world and therefore have to work hard in order for other countries to be "happy." Although I agree with this to some extent, I also believe it has a lot to do with the overall mentality and of course Capitalism. Life in other countries is nor nearly as hectic as it is here therefore people have a lot more time to enjoy their life and relax. Here, it seems that we are always running from one place to the other, always worried about making more money and not spending enough time actually enjoying life. I just think the cultures are completely different and it would be very hard for a mentality and lifestyle like that to work here because that's just not how Americans think. Unfortunately, we are motivated by profit and competition not by higher social progress or equality.
I think the point the author makes about these countries that rank better than America using “cuddly capitalism” is an interesting point. He says that America, being the powerful country that it is, would be unable to adopt to this form of economy. While I understand that point, I think America could still learn from these other countries to help to minimize the inequalities and better the overall living conditions of Americans. Jessica Glassman
in smaller countries you have to think that they have way less stressors than that of a big high power like the United States. The United States is worried out creating the next best thing in technology, the government here is hectic, everyone is trying to live that American Dream even the outsiders. I think that the author is right that the US doesn't have to stay in its current state but it would be quite difficult to live life like Scandinavia.
I think that what the author is saying is kind of true. I mean the U.S. has a much higher influence in the world than any other country. It is true that there is still social inequality in the U.S., but economically speaking, the U.S. has a much more history and experience withing all the other countries, including Europe. The reason why Europe, including Scandinavia countries (Norway, Denmark, and Sweden), has a much social equality is because they have a much more history in dealing with society than the U.S. Europe's countries were the first potentials in the world. That is why they have a better system, in that section. But, as the article says it, even they depend in U.S. economic actions. If the U.S. economic suffers, the whole world suffers, including the Scandinavia countries. I think that Capitalism do play a role in social inequality, but it also play a role in increment the countries wealth and power. And that helps to balance the country. I do not think that in this world, there is such a thing as a country where social equality is perfect. It does not exist.
I don't really see a big difference between ''cut-throat'' capitalism and ''cuddly'' capitalism with regard to the role it plays on motivating technological innovation. The Scandinavian countries are also capitalist in very much the same sense as the U.S, meaning that if someone develops something that person will get very rich. There are a couple of impressive technological products that have come from Sweden for example, which has a very small population, for example Skype, Spotify, Minecraft. It seems to me that the prospect of earning a lot of money is an important incentive for entrepreneurs, but also a system which provides free education, healthcare, good welfare etc which will allow people to reach their capacity. Imagine how many people and talents are lost in the U.S because people are born in the 'wrong' class, race, neighborhood etc. - Visar Berisha
The conclusion was thought provoking. I had always believed that workers in the United States worked hard because that is the lifestyle we’ve become accustomed to. To learn that our work rate can affect the global market is an enormous responsibility. Achieving this, the way of life has been sacrificed and lags behind particular European countries. It’s difficult to choose: have a better economy or have a better way of life. I’d choose a better way of life.
It was truly eye opening for me to see how low then United States was ranked when it came to assuring that ordinary citizens are provided with a high quality of life. Our nation has been built on a promise made by our forefathers to ensure that all citizens, no matter what, would be given the opportunity to chase the American Dream. Yes, maybe some countries do benefit from some of the technological advances from recent years but I still find it extremely hard to believe that the United States is ranked 16th in then entire world in this category. The title of the article was a little odd because this issue was never really centered around Scandinavia, but the author used it as a joke to finish off the article to make the title seem relevant.
I think that the core proposition that this class attempts to investigate is how America functions as this "cut-throat" capitalistic society, and how this approach impacts the quality of life of its citizens. Like we've been learning, our economic system favors the prosperous while it widens the chasm between the rich and the poor. I don't think it was necessary for the author to make an excuse for why America was doing so poorly on the wellness charts by putting down Scandinavia. Claiming that we need to have this particular system in order to "protect" the European countries is not going to resolve the problem that we have at home - we still have this ever-growing gap, and a growing tension revolving around inequality. Don't digress into how America is suffering because of these other countries, when you have a greater issue at hand.
Reading this article made me realize about the reality about America. The majority of people I know are very proud to be Americans. Like the article mention the United States has the nuclear capacity to wipe out an entire country if they wanted to. Also, the emphasis the government about the importance of having a strong military is overwhelming. People who are against the military are seem as Un-Americans. I feel like the United States government invest too much money on military programs rather than programs that would benefit its citizens; and that might be the reason why the United States accelerates when it comes to most powerful countries, but doesn’t in quality of life for its citizens. These should be a balance between the two. Why invest tons of money in creating a huge Army when they could increase funding on social security. There are many people living in poverty in the United States, and the ones that suffer the most are children. Creating or investing on programs to help children living on poverty could definitely help increase the quality if life for its citizens.
The author brings up an interesting point regarding how America is viewed as a central powerhouse, but at the same time it fails to provide comfortable living to all of its inhabitants. The country boasts its hyper-advanced technological innovations, but fails to provide affordable technology to people in need. As the country moves forward technologically, our institutions adapt to the changes and incorporate them into every day life, and slowly we have moved past traditional ways of doing things (we use laptops to take notes, cell phones to do most communicating, etc), and for people who lack economically, life is noticeably more complicated. I think the author's point is important because we stress innovation and technology as a prime example of out prestige but fail to supply everyone with at least the most basic of the innovations that become very important in every day life. As we advance, we speed up, we become more fast paced and efficient, and if a large population cant keep up, they will only become more unequal.
The fact of the matter is that everyone benefits from United States technological innovation. i just find it a little troubling when we compare social progress with other smaller and less diverse countries. There is no denying that the united states has many issues and flaws they can work on but to say that unites states is losing the race against social progress is misleading.
Sara-Ruth Gabriel I agree that everybody can benefit from United States technological innovation, but I could say the same thing about other countries too. Everybody bounces ideas off everybody, no matter who you are, or what nation you came from. However, Why would you not think United States is losing race against social progress.
Innovation is becoming a large part of US culture with growing technology. However, I view innovation a cause for concern in the sense that once a machine is built to soomething, a job is lost for someone in that field.
Interesting article. I am a psychology major, and one of the first things my professors taught us to do when looking at different countries (and therefore different cultures) is to look at Hofstede’s dimensions. So, that is exactly what I did after reading the article. Interestingly Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and the U.S. are all high on individualism, of course the U.S. is greatly higher than all of them. The U.S. is in the 90 range; while the rest are in the 69 to 75 range. But, Scandinavia is close enough. The only difference I saw was on the masculinity score. Denmark, Sweden, and Norway are all considered feminine; while the United States is masculine. Therefore, the U.S. is more competitive and success driven according to Hofstede. So, there might be some (again some) truth in the author’s cut-throat capitalist vs “cuddly capitalist” model comments.
It does not surprise me that the U.S. is ranked below the Scandinavian countries. The author of this article sounded very bitter to me that other countries who are not doing better than the United States in terms of technology advancements are doing better than the United States. The author is stating that the success of Scandinavians is not due to the Scandinavians themselves, but rather due to other countries that are greater powers, which support their economic growth. It is hard to choose between having a better economy for a nation or a better life for the individuals living in the country.
I agree with the author’s main point that Scandinavians rely on the success of the United States. Clearly a region with less than 10% of the population of Americans could not have created and produced all the modern technology they use. However, this small population is exactly what allows them to be outliers in social indexes. They can sustain high tax rates and expensive government programs to reduce inequality while larger countries cannot even try. These countries and similar ones such as Switzerland, New Zealand, and Canada have the parameters (population and social policies) to take advantage of the global wealth of technology and industry and it is not surprising that they rank so highly. -Kaiwen Zhang
After reading the article I felt that the author seemed envious of the Scandinavians results. I do not believe that his argument was at all strong enough to make the claim that the United States is what makes these countries better.
It is not surprising that the United States is ranked lower than Scandinavian countries. There is both racial and social inequality in the United States. If you are of a certain race that is not seen as superior, you are treated as less than, as well as if you rank lower in class. With that being said, equal opportunities are not available to everyone. Yes, people like Steve Jobs have paved the way for many technological advances across the world, but they underpay people from other countries and keep them in poor conditions so that the price of the goods they make can be affordable to most people who make less than six figures a year as well as those who make six figures or more per year. The author seems to be jealous of the Scandinavian countries for ranking so high, so much so that he claims that they owe some of their success to the United States. To me, this is once again another act that shows the element of greed that is instilled in this country's people by the forefathers that colonized this nation. Although it may be true that the United States does help to stimulate the economic growth of these Scandinavian countries, other countries do the same for us as well. So, if the author is going to try to take away from the Scandinavian countries' ranking, then he should do the same to the United States because there are many countries that stimulate our economic growth as well.
It seems as though the author of this article is making the US out to be a martyr for the well-being of the rest of the world which, to me, is kind of an excuse for our shortcomings. The theory that the rest of the world benefits off of one gung-ho capitalist nation is interesting, though, and most likely true. But I think the author is taking this theory and misusing it. The US giving away its title as the ultimate "cut-throat capitalist system" would most likely benefit our nation which should be our only concern when it comes to domestic issues. And inequality, which is one of our biggest issues right now, obviously falls under the category of domestic issues. -Greg Battista
I find this article to be exceedingly narrow-minded and full of self-righteous beliefs that are used to justify the significance of inequality in the United States. While I understand what the author is trying to point out in its response to “sacrificing” the US as a reason others ay live better, but it seems to gloss over the systematic issues the US is facing as well as other social (and even cultural) factors/incentives that attribute to Scandinavian well-being. Stating that the US innovation rate thrives in a cut-throat environment for the benefit of others (which I am still waiting for linked evidence proving this) des not make sense to me in a finance perspective, where it depends more on the ability for firms to borrow money and continue to make money off of said borrowed funds.
In some ways I can see where the author is coming from. I think that politics have completely muddied the water in regards to equality and in aiding the government to do what's best for people. That being said, inequality is caused by competition for resources, the more uneven the odds, the higher the inequality. Government is largely to blame, but in many cases people are doing this to themselves.
This article is pretty self-righteous. I hate the fact that the author tries to center the success of other countries around the United States. To think imply that our die-hard capitalist nature allows other countries to properly take care of their citizens is a self-centered notion. Instead of urging columnists to stop pumping out articles about the success of Scandinavian countries, the author should listen to the message being put across. America is not as great as many Americans love to pretend it to be, and that we should care more about the social welfare of our citizens and less about our reputation as the biggest and baddest nation.
This article focuses too much on the US's culture in comparison to the other smaller European countries. Yes, as an American I believe the US to be one of the top core countries of the world, that does not take away from the fact there are numerous societal issues in the US that become overlooked with the good the US does. The US cannot win everything. Maybe they are apart of the reason for the success of some of those other countries, but that should not hurt our pride as a country. I believe credit should be paid where it is due, and if the Scandinavian countries are the ones showing the most success, they should be praised for that.
I am not exactly sure how I feel about this article. As an American it's only natural to pat ones self on the back for how powerful we are as a country, I guess, but I don't understand why this author is so annoyed with the pat on the back other countries give themselves. It is perfectly fine that we don't excel at everything, kind of, maybe, I mean to be honest why can't we work on being a less stressful country? I get that we do carry a lot on our backs, we are expected as a country to do a lot, to be great, but how great are we when the bulk of our society is crumbling. Maybe there is something to learn from others. The title of his article completely sets the tone of someone who sounds bitter, making an excuse as to why we aren't topping those list, instead of coming up with a way that maybe we could. Welp.
I agree with the majority of the comments here in that the writer comes off as a bit self righteous and I don't think comparing Scandinavia so heavily to the US is unproductive. Sure those countries have far lesser population than we do, but their infrastructure is significantly better regardless. There are significant differences in limiting factors between the two, but not enough that the shortcomings of the US are excused or the strengths of Scandinavia are negated.
I agree with the majority of the comments here in that the writer comes off as a bit self righteous and I don't think comparing Scandinavia so heavily to the US is unproductive. Sure those countries have far lesser population than we do, but their infrastructure is significantly better regardless. There are significant differences in limiting factors between the two, but not enough that the shortcomings of the US are excused or the strengths of Scandinavia are negated.
I'm not surprised the US doesn't rank highly in social progress. When we still have to develop plans to improve the quality of public school lunches, create programs for ending child homelessness, and still fighting over educational reforms within our government, there is a problem. In my opinion, I am in agreement with the author: there are several things we could improve on to better our social living standards. However, the author's response to what another columnist wrote seems a bit off-topic with respect to Scandinavians; he barely touched on that subject.
The author is making it seem like a country being a world leader and providing its citizens higher quality of life is mutually exclusive. Yes, it may be true that Scandinavian countries have a higher quality of life in part because of advances from the United States, but that leads me to the question: Why does this mean the U.S. can't provide that same QOL for its own citizens? By that logic, it would seem that Americans should have higher QOL purely due to how close they are to the leading edge of tech. I don't necessarily disagree with the author, I just think his argument is a bit one-sided.
The author of this article, and the title itself, is very egotistical. While the author's point is not completely absurd, the author fails to mention many other factors. For example, the author does not consider how other countries have helped the United States, whether it is with innovative inventions or economic support. Additionally, he does not mention how the United States have harmed other countries for our own benefit, this is evident in wars and operations conducted for oil resources and things of that nature
I feel as though America could learn some lessons from Scandanavia, which focuses more on improving quality of life for its people with its "cuddly capitalism". However, whether America can afford to adopt this is another question, given America's role in the global economy; if the US economy goes down, the rest of the world goes down with it, as we saw ten years ago. Its role in the global economy allows it to provide other nations a more comfortable lifestyle, but at the same time, the burden falls on its citizens, who struggle to attain that same comfortable lifestyle for themselves.
I personally was not a fan of this author. His pro-U.S. standpoints fill the article with biases. Rather than writing about why Scandinavian countries are performing better than other countries, he spends the majority, if not the entirety, of the article comparing these countries to the U.S. and criticizing their successes. The author also does not put in to perspective how the demographics and size of the U.S. influence how other countries measure up in terms of quality of living.
I think this author makes some very good points. I like how the writer states that in a society where technological innovations are prevalent, due to capitalism there is going to be inequality. The writer explains how although the quality of life might be better in these Nordic countries, the opportunity to have this quality of life stems from the innovations of countries such as the United States. I happen to agree with this author on this matter, and found the article very enjoyable to read.
I have always thought about the idea that life is so happy-go-lucky and laid back in Scandinavia, and why exactly it is this way. After visiting Spain in high school, I noticed a similar lifestyle: there is less urgency for everything and much less overall anxiety about life. Being an American in Spain, I had at least twenty people thank me for "my contributions." While I personally have not made any world-altering innovations, I knew that they meant that our country is a world leader and that their country, specifically, benefited from our advancements. Similarly in countries like Switzerland and Norway, there is less pressure to advance because the rest of the world is not relying on it to carry it on its back. This goes along with the idea of capitalism and incentives--the U.S. has more responsibilities and is held to a higher standard, so our stress level affects our standard of living. Cut throat capitalists argue that technologically advanced societies are those that are socially unequal and have high levels of poverty. This is partially true, with the U.S. as an example. We lead the world in technological advancements, but fall short in the area of quality of life, but there needs to be a balance so that the rest of the world does not fall apart without our help.
ReplyDeleteThe people in the United states, due to self centered leaders, have lost the battle for economic justice and social justice that was the defining element of progress during the Twentieth Century. At least one political party has turned against the best interests of "We the people..." as defined by our Constitution to serve and to protect the best interests of some people in the republic. Needless to say justice has been skewed to serve people who claim to have moral superiority and to serve people who do have economic superiority. People who do not fill inclusive/exclusive definitions of moral righteousness and who cannot buy justice are ignored in affairs of state which is contrary to many progressive ideas of democracy. Yes, the United States is losing its grasp of the notion for a better future of all of its citizens. It is a sad loss but not an excuse to be hopeless about turning the situation around. We are living in an era where one political party is focused on destroying a president and everything the president believes and represents for the citizens of the nation. Something is horribly wrong with this picture of a once great nation.
ReplyDeleteWell, I am Swedish, so obviously I am biased, but I still feel I have to comment on this article. While it is true that the whole world is dependent on the US financial system due to the global capitalist economy, the author of the article seems to have forgotten that it was the high levels of inequality and cut throat capitalism of US corporations and banks that dragged the whole world (including Scandinavia) into a major recession less than 10 years ago. So saying that "Scandinavian success" is because of Americans sacrificing equality for the good of the world economy seems slightly distasteful to be honest. Also, the article makes it seem like Scandinavian "cuddly" economies are preventing technological innovation because of lacking incentives, but a quick google search shows that Scandinavian countries rank in the top 10 or top 5 in most technological innovation-indexes, not just the living standard-indexes. However, this could all be written off as lack of research or just spin, but the thing that really annoys me with this article is that the perpetual growth of the economy on a long term scale and endless technological advancement is portrayed as something that is inherently good and unproblematic. It says nothing of the impact this has on the environment or the fact that a lot of technological innovation in sustainable development has been made in "cuddly" economies such as Scandinavia. These advancements, however, don't really matter on a global scale as long as other countries with more production, and hence more pollution, try to implement the same or similar approaches in order to fight environmental problems (something that in some cases - not all - can decrease the growth of the economy). - Malin Niklasson
ReplyDeleteThe author kind of sounds like a hater. He is saying that the rigid capitalism of the United States is the reason behind Scandinavian however, Scandinavian countries actively work towards improving social welfare. In at least Canada, the Netherlands, and Sweden, the government offers almost Universal health care and much cheaper education in the United States. This pride and patriotism identified by the author is because the people can feel like the government has their best interests at heart and works towards improving society fro all not just the wealthy. Things such as universal health care would not pass in this country because we fear the free rider problem and there are institutions in place used to guarantee that some groups of people retain some semblance of power. Also, it is much easier to have social progress and happiness in wealthy homogeneous societies because there are not discriminatory institutions in place causing the disenfranchised to spend time focusing on social justice as opposed to general social progress.
ReplyDeleteLezah Calvin, I have to agree with you. The author sounds like the typical American in some ways. It seems like he is trying to justify the lack of social progress in the U.S. simply because they are the leaders of the world and therefore have to work hard in order for other countries to be "happy." Although I agree with this to some extent, I also believe it has a lot to do with the overall mentality and of course Capitalism. Life in other countries is nor nearly as hectic as it is here therefore people have a lot more time to enjoy their life and relax. Here, it seems that we are always running from one place to the other, always worried about making more money and not spending enough time actually enjoying life. I just think the cultures are completely different and it would be very hard for a mentality and lifestyle like that to work here because that's just not how Americans think. Unfortunately, we are motivated by profit and competition not by higher social progress or equality.
ReplyDeleteI think the point the author makes about these countries that rank better than America using “cuddly capitalism” is an interesting point. He says that America, being the powerful country that it is, would be unable to adopt to this form of economy. While I understand that point, I think America could still learn from these other countries to help to minimize the inequalities and better the overall living conditions of Americans. Jessica Glassman
ReplyDeletein smaller countries you have to think that they have way less stressors than that of a big high power like the United States. The United States is worried out creating the next best thing in technology, the government here is hectic, everyone is trying to live that American Dream even the outsiders. I think that the author is right that the US doesn't have to stay in its current state but it would be quite difficult to live life like Scandinavia.
ReplyDeleteI think that what the author is saying is kind of true. I mean the U.S. has a much higher influence in the world than any other country. It is true that there is still social inequality in the U.S., but economically speaking, the U.S. has a much more history and experience withing all the other countries, including Europe. The reason why Europe, including Scandinavia countries (Norway, Denmark, and Sweden), has a much social equality is because they have a much more history in dealing with society than the U.S. Europe's countries were the first potentials in the world. That is why they have a better system, in that section. But, as the article says it, even they depend in U.S. economic actions. If the U.S. economic suffers, the whole world suffers, including the Scandinavia countries. I think that Capitalism do play a role in social inequality, but it also play a role in increment the countries wealth and power. And that helps to balance the country. I do not think that in this world, there is such a thing as a country where social equality is perfect. It does not exist.
ReplyDeleteI don't really see a big difference between ''cut-throat'' capitalism and ''cuddly'' capitalism with regard to the role it plays on motivating technological innovation. The Scandinavian countries are also capitalist in very much the same sense as the U.S, meaning that if someone develops something that person will get very rich. There are a couple of impressive technological products that have come from Sweden for example, which has a very small population, for example Skype, Spotify, Minecraft. It seems to me that the prospect of earning a lot of money is an important incentive for entrepreneurs, but also a system which provides free education, healthcare, good welfare etc which will allow people to reach their capacity. Imagine how many people and talents are lost in the U.S because people are born in the 'wrong' class, race, neighborhood etc. - Visar Berisha
ReplyDeleteThe conclusion was thought provoking. I had always believed that workers in the United States worked hard because that is the lifestyle we’ve become accustomed to. To learn that our work rate can affect the global market is an enormous responsibility. Achieving this, the way of life has been sacrificed and lags behind particular European countries. It’s difficult to choose: have a better economy or have a better way of life. I’d choose a better way of life.
ReplyDeleteIt was truly eye opening for me to see how low then United States was ranked when it came to assuring that ordinary citizens are provided with a high quality of life. Our nation has been built on a promise made by our forefathers to ensure that all citizens, no matter what, would be given the opportunity to chase the American Dream. Yes, maybe some countries do benefit from some of the technological advances from recent years but I still find it extremely hard to believe that the United States is ranked 16th in then entire world in this category. The title of the article was a little odd because this issue was never really centered around Scandinavia, but the author used it as a joke to finish off the article to make the title seem relevant.
ReplyDeleteI think that the core proposition that this class attempts to investigate is how America functions as this "cut-throat" capitalistic society, and how this approach impacts the quality of life of its citizens. Like we've been learning, our economic system favors the prosperous while it widens the chasm between the rich and the poor. I don't think it was necessary for the author to make an excuse for why America was doing so poorly on the wellness charts by putting down Scandinavia. Claiming that we need to have this particular system in order to "protect" the European countries is not going to resolve the problem that we have at home - we still have this ever-growing gap, and a growing tension revolving around inequality. Don't digress into how America is suffering because of these other countries, when you have a greater issue at hand.
ReplyDeleteReading this article made me realize about the reality about America. The majority of people I know are very proud to be Americans. Like the article mention the United States has the nuclear capacity to wipe out an entire country if they wanted to. Also, the emphasis the government about the importance of having a strong military is overwhelming. People who are against the military are seem as Un-Americans. I feel like the United States government invest too much money on military programs rather than programs that would benefit its citizens; and that might be the reason why the United States accelerates when it comes to most powerful countries, but doesn’t in quality of life for its citizens. These should be a balance between the two. Why invest tons of money in creating a huge Army when they could increase funding on social security. There are many people living in poverty in the United States, and the ones that suffer the most are children. Creating or investing on programs to help children living on poverty could definitely help increase the quality if life for its citizens.
ReplyDeleteThe author brings up an interesting point regarding how America is viewed as a central powerhouse, but at the same time it fails to provide comfortable living to all of its inhabitants. The country boasts its hyper-advanced technological innovations, but fails to provide affordable technology to people in need. As the country moves forward technologically, our institutions adapt to the changes and incorporate them into every day life, and slowly we have moved past traditional ways of doing things (we use laptops to take notes, cell phones to do most communicating, etc), and for people who lack economically, life is noticeably more complicated. I think the author's point is important because we stress innovation and technology as a prime example of out prestige but fail to supply everyone with at least the most basic of the innovations that become very important in every day life. As we advance, we speed up, we become more fast paced and efficient, and if a large population cant keep up, they will only become more unequal.
ReplyDeleteThe fact of the matter is that everyone benefits from United States technological innovation. i just find it a little troubling when we compare social progress with other smaller and less diverse countries. There is no denying that the united states has many issues and flaws they can work on but to say that unites states is losing the race against social progress is misleading.
ReplyDeleteSara-Ruth Gabriel
DeleteI agree that everybody can benefit from United States technological innovation, but I could say the same thing about other countries too. Everybody bounces ideas off everybody, no matter who you are, or what nation you came from. However, Why would you not think United States is losing race against social progress.
Innovation is becoming a large part of US culture with growing technology. However, I view innovation a cause for concern in the sense that once a machine is built to soomething, a job is lost for someone in that field.
ReplyDeleteInteresting article. I am a psychology major, and one of the first things my professors taught us to do when looking at different countries (and therefore different cultures) is to look at Hofstede’s dimensions. So, that is exactly what I did after reading the article. Interestingly Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and the U.S. are all high on individualism, of course the U.S. is greatly higher than all of them. The U.S. is in the 90 range; while the rest are in the 69 to 75 range. But, Scandinavia is close enough. The only difference I saw was on the masculinity score. Denmark, Sweden, and Norway are all considered feminine; while the United States is masculine. Therefore, the U.S. is more competitive and success driven according to Hofstede. So, there might be some (again some) truth in the author’s cut-throat capitalist vs “cuddly capitalist” model comments.
ReplyDeleteIt does not surprise me that the U.S. is ranked below the Scandinavian countries. The author of this article sounded very bitter to me that other countries who are not doing better than the United States in terms of technology advancements are doing better than the United States. The author is stating that the success of Scandinavians is not due to the Scandinavians themselves, but rather due to other countries that are greater powers, which support their economic growth. It is hard to choose between having a better economy for a nation or a better life for the individuals living in the country.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the author’s main point that Scandinavians rely on the success of the United States. Clearly a region with less than 10% of the population of Americans could not have created and produced all the modern technology they use. However, this small population is exactly what allows them to be outliers in social indexes. They can sustain high tax rates and expensive government programs to reduce inequality while larger countries cannot even try. These countries and similar ones such as Switzerland, New Zealand, and Canada have the parameters (population and social policies) to take advantage of the global wealth of technology and industry and it is not surprising that they rank so highly.
ReplyDelete-Kaiwen Zhang
After reading the article I felt that the author seemed envious of the Scandinavians results. I do not believe that his argument was at all strong enough to make the claim that the United States is what makes these countries better.
ReplyDeleteIt is not surprising that the United States is ranked lower than Scandinavian countries. There is both racial and social inequality in the United States. If you are of a certain race that is not seen as superior, you are treated as less than, as well as if you rank lower in class. With that being said, equal opportunities are not available to everyone. Yes, people like Steve Jobs have paved the way for many technological advances across the world, but they underpay people from other countries and keep them in poor conditions so that the price of the goods they make can be affordable to most people who make less than six figures a year as well as those who make six figures or more per year. The author seems to be jealous of the Scandinavian countries for ranking so high, so much so that he claims that they owe some of their success to the United States. To me, this is once again another act that shows the element of greed that is instilled in this country's people by the forefathers that colonized this nation. Although it may be true that the United States does help to stimulate the economic growth of these Scandinavian countries, other countries do the same for us as well. So, if the author is going to try to take away from the Scandinavian countries' ranking, then he should do the same to the United States because there are many countries that stimulate our economic growth as well.
ReplyDeleteIt seems as though the author of this article is making the US out to be a martyr for the well-being of the rest of the world which, to me, is kind of an excuse for our shortcomings. The theory that the rest of the world benefits off of one gung-ho capitalist nation is interesting, though, and most likely true. But I think the author is taking this theory and misusing it. The US giving away its title as the ultimate "cut-throat capitalist system" would most likely benefit our nation which should be our only concern when it comes to domestic issues. And inequality, which is one of our biggest issues right now, obviously falls under the category of domestic issues.
ReplyDelete-Greg Battista
I find this article to be exceedingly narrow-minded and full of self-righteous beliefs that are used to justify the significance of inequality in the United States. While I understand what the author is trying to point out in its response to “sacrificing” the US as a reason others ay live better, but it seems to gloss over the systematic issues the US is facing as well as other social (and even cultural) factors/incentives that attribute to Scandinavian well-being. Stating that the US innovation rate thrives in a cut-throat environment for the benefit of others (which I am still waiting for linked evidence proving this) des not make sense to me in a finance perspective, where it depends more on the ability for firms to borrow money and continue to make money off of said borrowed funds.
ReplyDeleteIn some ways I can see where the author is coming from. I think that politics have completely muddied the water in regards to equality and in aiding the government to do what's best for people. That being said, inequality is caused by competition for resources, the more uneven the odds, the higher the inequality. Government is largely to blame, but in many cases people are doing this to themselves.
ReplyDeleteThis article is pretty self-righteous. I hate the fact that the author tries to center the success of other countries around the United States. To think imply that our die-hard capitalist nature allows other countries to properly take care of their citizens is a self-centered notion. Instead of urging columnists to stop pumping out articles about the success of Scandinavian countries, the author should listen to the message being put across. America is not as great as many Americans love to pretend it to be, and that we should care more about the social welfare of our citizens and less about our reputation as the biggest and baddest nation.
ReplyDeleteThis article focuses too much on the US's culture in comparison to the other smaller European countries. Yes, as an American I believe the US to be one of the top core countries of the world, that does not take away from the fact there are numerous societal issues in the US that become overlooked with the good the US does. The US cannot win everything. Maybe they are apart of the reason for the success of some of those other countries, but that should not hurt our pride as a country. I believe credit should be paid where it is due, and if the Scandinavian countries are the ones showing the most success, they should be praised for that.
ReplyDeleteJames Bull
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI am not exactly sure how I feel about this article. As an American it's only natural to pat ones self on the back for how powerful we are as a country, I guess, but I don't understand why this author is so annoyed with the pat on the back other countries give themselves. It is perfectly fine that we don't excel at everything, kind of, maybe, I mean to be honest why can't we work on being a less stressful country? I get that we do carry a lot on our backs, we are expected as a country to do a lot, to be great, but how great are we when the bulk of our society is crumbling. Maybe there is something to learn from others. The title of his article completely sets the tone of someone who sounds bitter, making an excuse as to why we aren't topping those list, instead of coming up with a way that maybe we could. Welp.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the majority of the comments here in that the writer comes off as a bit self righteous and I don't think comparing Scandinavia so heavily to the US is unproductive. Sure those countries have far lesser population than we do, but their infrastructure is significantly better regardless. There are significant differences in limiting factors between the two, but not enough that the shortcomings of the US are excused or the strengths of Scandinavia are negated.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the majority of the comments here in that the writer comes off as a bit self righteous and I don't think comparing Scandinavia so heavily to the US is unproductive. Sure those countries have far lesser population than we do, but their infrastructure is significantly better regardless. There are significant differences in limiting factors between the two, but not enough that the shortcomings of the US are excused or the strengths of Scandinavia are negated.
ReplyDeleteI'm not surprised the US doesn't rank highly in social progress. When we still have to develop plans to improve the quality of public school lunches, create programs for ending child homelessness, and still fighting over educational reforms within our government, there is a problem. In my opinion, I am in agreement with the author: there are several things we could improve on to better our social living standards. However, the author's response to what another columnist wrote seems a bit off-topic with respect to Scandinavians; he barely touched on that subject.
ReplyDeleteThe author is making it seem like a country being a world leader and providing its citizens higher quality of life is mutually exclusive. Yes, it may be true that Scandinavian countries have a higher quality of life in part because of advances from the United States, but that leads me to the question: Why does this mean the U.S. can't provide that same QOL for its own citizens? By that logic, it would seem that Americans should have higher QOL purely due to how close they are to the leading edge of tech. I don't necessarily disagree with the author, I just think his argument is a bit one-sided.
ReplyDelete-David Teitelbaum
The author of this article, and the title itself, is very egotistical. While the author's point is not completely absurd, the author fails to mention many other factors. For example, the author does not consider how other countries have helped the United States, whether it is with innovative inventions or economic support. Additionally, he does not mention how the United States have harmed other countries for our own benefit, this is evident in wars and operations conducted for oil resources and things of that nature
ReplyDeleteI feel as though America could learn some lessons from Scandanavia, which focuses more on improving quality of life for its people with its "cuddly capitalism". However, whether America can afford to adopt this is another question, given America's role in the global economy; if the US economy goes down, the rest of the world goes down with it, as we saw ten years ago. Its role in the global economy allows it to provide other nations a more comfortable lifestyle, but at the same time, the burden falls on its citizens, who struggle to attain that same comfortable lifestyle for themselves.
ReplyDelete- Brian Kang
I personally was not a fan of this author. His pro-U.S. standpoints fill the article with biases. Rather than writing about why Scandinavian countries are performing better than other countries, he spends the majority, if not the entirety, of the article comparing these countries to the U.S. and criticizing their successes. The author also does not put in to perspective how the demographics and size of the U.S. influence how other countries measure up in terms of quality of living.
ReplyDeleteI think this author makes some very good points. I like how the writer states that in a society where technological innovations are prevalent, due to capitalism there is going to be inequality. The writer explains how although the quality of life might be better in these Nordic countries, the opportunity to have this quality of life stems from the innovations of countries such as the United States. I happen to agree with this author on this matter, and found the article very enjoyable to read.
ReplyDelete-Jeremy Levin