Quote:
Quote by: Milton Bradley  |
What exactly am I supposed to be refuting? That Sweden had high unemployment between 95 and 98? I don't dispute that. What conclusion are you trying to draw from that? The US has also had periods of high unemployment, no?
The other statistical claims are sourced to another opinion piece by another blogger, and they are out of date.
Sweden's current economic indicators;
GDP (purchasing power parity):
$333.1 billion (2007 est.)
GDP (official exchange rate):
$431.6 billion (2007 est.)
GDP - real growth rate:
3.4% (2007 est.)
GDP - per capita (PPP):
$36,900 (2007 est.)
GDP - composition by sector:
agriculture: 1.4%
industry: 29.2%
services: 69.4% (2007 est.)
Labor force:
4.66 million (2007 est.)
Labor force - by occupation:
agriculture: 2%
industry: 24%
services: 74% (2000 est.)
Unemployment rate:
4.5% (2007 est.)
Population below poverty line:
NA%
Household income or consumption by percentage share:
lowest 10%: 3.6%
highest 10%: 22.2% (2000)
Distribution of family income - Gini index:
23 (2005)
Inflation rate (consumer prices):
2% (2007 est.)
Investment (gross fixed):
19.6% of GDP (2007 est.)
Budget:
revenues: $241.2 billion
expenditures: $229.1 billion (2007 est.)"
https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../print/sw.html
US indicators;
GDP (purchasing power parity):
$13.86 trillion (2007 est.)
GDP (official exchange rate):
$13.79 trillion (2007 est.)
GDP - real growth rate:
2.2% (2007 est.)
GDP - per capita (PPP):
$46,000 (2007 est.)
GDP - composition by sector:
agriculture: 0.9%
industry: 20.6%
services: 78.5% (2007 est.)
Labor force:
153.1 million (includes unemployed) (2007 est.)
Labor force - by occupation:
farming, forestry, and fishing 0.6%, manufacturing, extraction, transportation, and crafts 22.6%, managerial, professional, and technical 35.5%, sales and office 24.8%, other services 16.5%
note: figures exclude the unemployed (2007)
Unemployment rate:
4.6% (2007 est.)
Population below poverty line:
12% (2004 est.)
Household income or consumption by percentage share:
lowest 10%: 2%
highest 10%: 30% (2007 est.)
Distribution of family income - Gini index:
45 (2007)
Inflation rate (consumer prices):
2.7% (2007 est.)
Investment (gross fixed):
15.6% of GDP (2007 est.)
Budget:
revenues: $2.568 trillion
expenditures: $2.731 trillion (2007 est.)
Public debt:
36.8% of GDP (2007 est.)
https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../print/us.html
From your source;
"After more than 30 years of high taxation and an expanding welfare state, Sweden is not the 4th richest OECD-country any longer, but the 15th. This hurts the least well off most. Between 1980 and 1999, the gross income of Sweden's poorest households increased by just over 6% while the poorest in the U.S. enjoyed a three time larger increase."
That data is from the late 90s, when Sweden fell to 18th place. It had a recession. The US has had recessions and will continue to have them.
So what is your point?
The most recent placing;
"Sweden has moved up to a ninth place tie with Denmark in the 2007 prosperity rankings by the Organization for Economic Growth and Development (OECD)."
The Local - Sweden rises in OECD ranking
You're using out of date and your source is a blogger. 'Nuff said.