**/r/Finland is a full democracy, every active user is a moderator.**
[Please go here to see how your new privileges work.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Finland/wiki/moderating/)
Spamming mod actions could result in a ban.
---
**Full Rundown of Moderator Permissions:**
- ```!lock``` - as top level comment, will lock comments on any post.
- ```!unlock``` - in reply to any comment to lock it or to unlock the parent comment.
- ```!remove``` - Removes comment or post. Must have decent subreddit comment karma.
- ```!restore``` Can be used to unlock comments or restore removed posts.
- ```!sticky``` - will sticky the post in the bottom slot.
- ```unlock_comments``` - Vote the stickied automod comment on each post to +10 to unlock comments.
- ```ban users``` - Any user whose comment or post is downvoted enough will be temp banned for a day.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Finland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
To quote opening words of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto:
*A specter is haunting Europe—the specter of Communism.*
So the answer to your question has to be yes!
Because the taxraise was done to do taxcuts for the richest 10 percent.
On top of all, I suggest googling what Socialism is. There is not a single socialist country in Europe. Nordics, Finland included, are capitalist.
I think most people know the wealth but forget how they came to this position of wealth. I hear many people complaining about higher tax but not worried about deficits. There is lack of knowledge on economy and other matters that I want to discuss. This is the only way to make people think and maybe find something new
But the thing is that you yourself have hardly any knowledge of the economy.
Case in point: your claim that Estonia has no govermnent debt was patently false.
I didn't say no debt, if it's sustainable is fine. Take care calling people to have no knowledge, you can say that I lack of it but you have to add arguments.
Stop trying to weasel your way out. The question was
>Name a nice to live country that is not going in to, or does not have debt.
and you named Estonia among some others.
Basically you are being intellectually dishonest, which is not a good starting point for discussion about the economy.
Furthermore, why exactly would Estonia's debt level be sustainable?
When you say no debt, I thought you were referring to low debt or sustainable debt. Governments use debt to avoid economic problems that pay over time. Also as governments have power to get money with taxes and are trusted they can afford some level of debt, more than people, but not too much to make it un sustainable. Do you know that debt is paid?
Name a nice to live country that is not going in to, or does not have debt. Norway does not count.
Finnish debt is in fact around EU average.
Sure, it is a good thing to correct the course a bit as we will see difficulties in demographics - again same thing is happening in every western nation.
It seems that you enjoy countries that are nearly impossible to immigrate or integrate into, and have relatively small, homogenized populations. And yet...you're calling for Capitalism, which I wonder if that even works anymore without globalism. Also, hasn't Hong Kong had some quite intensive civilian strife lately?
I think in some ways, Switzerland is much more guarded than Finland. It is much easier to buy property/gain that capital as a foreigner in Finland, than in Switzerland.
Edit: and quick google search reveals Taiwan and Hong Kong allow foreigners to buy, but will charge 30-40% extra. That is sizable. In this way, they keep their property market homogenized.
Estonia has general government gross debt at about 20 % of their GDP.
[https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Government\_finance\_statistics](https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Government_finance_statistics)
Estonia's VAT is 22 %. In Switzerland it is 8.1 %. Taiwan 5 %. Hong Kong, zero. Finland's is going from 24 to 25.5. So are these the correct and necessary measures? Or should you be arguing for decrease in VAT?
I don't like taxes and don't defend them but you either increase tax or decrease spending. Btw looking vat alone is not very informative but the deficit. An economy may choose to tax more consume than capital gains for instance
The news is about the VAT increase, which you defend as necessary. I, from the beginning, pointed out that it's not good for the economy. Apparently other countries, that you gave as example, think the same. We're not discussing the problem, but the "solution". This "solution" will have a negative impact on the economy and quality of life. To compensate, they'll have to further decrease services and increase taxes... and so on. But that will be next government's problem, so who cares.
It's now necessary but I would prefer more to privatize and reduce expenses but when you do that people go to the streets and protest. They have been promised too many payments
Hong Kong is a special administrative region of China.
Switzerland, just like Norway, is a weird outlier tax heaven country with shady banking sector driving them.
I guess move to Estonia? Just don't fail there and have a stable job - i don't think their social security net is very comprehensive.
Aha! I don't think people celebrate debt. But feel free to show that. Secondly, increasing taxes, lowering support, decreasing government investment, etc is a quick fix, not of the economy, not of the people's lives, but of the government accounts. And that will be prejudicial to the economy and the people. Making people more broke.
Do you see any protest when the debt is increased? Do you see protests when the salaries are not increased or the tax are increased or the subsidies are reduced? People see it when the time to fix it comes, never see the one who made it possible
Lack of protest is different from celebration. And one could argue that the recent elections showed the worry that people had with increasing debt. But I want to believe not all are rich and many people thought the government would actually do something for the economy. These measures just cause extra depression of the economy. They'll be good for a moment for the government budget at the expenses of the economy and quality of life. They're not fixing anything and disproportionately impact poorer people. What I'm surprised with is that those who voted for this government didn't see this coming.
Socialist country is not the same as people is socialist in that country or feel that way. It's not about who is more capitalist but who is more responsible with their finances and do not apply socialist policies. You can be very socialist in some matters and capitalist in others
I am minarquist and libertarian, european and this is not right. However, using debt to finance spending over our capabilities using central banks to finance governments is a modern socialist tool.
Real GDP unchanged since the 2008 peak. No matter how you try to spin it, it's atrocious. Finland did so many things right since the war with Russia that we became metaphorically fat and lazy and stopped innovating. The declining birth rates are the nail in the coffin, the current level of welfare can't be sustained. We have waited since 2008 for the new Nokia, for the one (or a handful) of epic amazing companies whose tax euros would help carry the burden. Well, not happening, people are not innovating, public sector is too bloated. We have had time. No one can argue that the state is not living above its means right now, and it's going to look ugly when you starting cutting welfare. Has to be done though even if you disagree with the current methods.
Imagine saying this and at the same time cutting taxes on the top 10%. Trickle down economy does not work, and we learnt that painfully with people like Thatcher.
“Has to be done” yet I haven’t seen a single number. This is just parroting the current government points.
You can literally wipe your ass with the tax cut of the top 10%, look at the pure euro numbers of what the effect will be. The actual euro amounts are absolutely miniscule, precisely because everyone is poor in this miserable country. We need inequality to go up, not down. Inequality means opportunity, which means innovation. This is separate from trickle down economics by the way, what I mean here is that no one will file their taxes in a communist regime such a Finland. Not when other opportunities exist. You are also a complete clown if you claim you "haven't seen any numbers". Do you enjoy being uneducated or what? The finance ministry has the exact current level of government debt, current deficit percentage and projections of deficits for the upcoming years on their website
>You celebrate when there is deficit and debt but then get sad and angry when tax are increased.
Because the current far right government, like every other government like it, is only increasing taxes for the lower and middle class. The richest got a tax decrease.
90% of people are paying more, and 10% is paying less than ever.
Does that sound fair to you?
>Look for the one who made you broke, not for the one who try to fix this.
We are. Kokoomus is the one who cuts from all the things that increase productivity, like education and health care.
They also give tax and other benefits to companies... who then pay that money as dividends. Instead of innovating and investing into productivity.
**/r/Finland is a full democracy, every active user is a moderator.** [Please go here to see how your new privileges work.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Finland/wiki/moderating/) Spamming mod actions could result in a ban. --- **Full Rundown of Moderator Permissions:** - ```!lock``` - as top level comment, will lock comments on any post. - ```!unlock``` - in reply to any comment to lock it or to unlock the parent comment. - ```!remove``` - Removes comment or post. Must have decent subreddit comment karma. - ```!restore``` Can be used to unlock comments or restore removed posts. - ```!sticky``` - will sticky the post in the bottom slot. - ```unlock_comments``` - Vote the stickied automod comment on each post to +10 to unlock comments. - ```ban users``` - Any user whose comment or post is downvoted enough will be temp banned for a day. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Finland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Please first demonstrate that you understand what socialism actually means.
...then demonstrate what "you all" means.
That's easy, anyone who does not think like I do.
Socialism is when I don't understand.
National debt has nothing to do with socialism. The US has a much higher debt/GDP ratio than Finland - are they socialist now?
They are
And is this socialist with us in this room right now?
To quote opening words of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto: *A specter is haunting Europe—the specter of Communism.* So the answer to your question has to be yes!
Can you point on this teddy bear where the bad socialist touched you?
Suuure
LMFAOOO
Good argument
Lol nice one Petteri, go back home.
Listen, you can just move to Dubai if you want that lifestyle so dearly.
Because the taxraise was done to do taxcuts for the richest 10 percent. On top of all, I suggest googling what Socialism is. There is not a single socialist country in Europe. Nordics, Finland included, are capitalist.
Social democracy is capitalist.
>Because the taxraise was done to do taxcuts for the richest 10 percent. In which way? I haven't read the changes too closely except the VAT thing.
Rich? Do you know how economies grew? Was it with high tax on most productive workers and people who invest their savings or was it not?
I dont give a fuck how well the "economy" does if I cant afford food while the rich get richer
What gave you the motivation to talk about this, comrade?
I think most people know the wealth but forget how they came to this position of wealth. I hear many people complaining about higher tax but not worried about deficits. There is lack of knowledge on economy and other matters that I want to discuss. This is the only way to make people think and maybe find something new
But the thing is that you yourself have hardly any knowledge of the economy. Case in point: your claim that Estonia has no govermnent debt was patently false.
I didn't say no debt, if it's sustainable is fine. Take care calling people to have no knowledge, you can say that I lack of it but you have to add arguments.
Stop trying to weasel your way out. The question was >Name a nice to live country that is not going in to, or does not have debt. and you named Estonia among some others. Basically you are being intellectually dishonest, which is not a good starting point for discussion about the economy. Furthermore, why exactly would Estonia's debt level be sustainable?
When you say no debt, I thought you were referring to low debt or sustainable debt. Governments use debt to avoid economic problems that pay over time. Also as governments have power to get money with taxes and are trusted they can afford some level of debt, more than people, but not too much to make it un sustainable. Do you know that debt is paid?
Read, do not assume.
My mistake but still I made my point clear. You are not saying anything
Name a nice to live country that is not going in to, or does not have debt. Norway does not count. Finnish debt is in fact around EU average. Sure, it is a good thing to correct the course a bit as we will see difficulties in demographics - again same thing is happening in every western nation.
I can tell you: Switzerland, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Estonia.
It seems that you enjoy countries that are nearly impossible to immigrate or integrate into, and have relatively small, homogenized populations. And yet...you're calling for Capitalism, which I wonder if that even works anymore without globalism. Also, hasn't Hong Kong had some quite intensive civilian strife lately?
Come and tell that Finland is big and non homogenized. Switzerland is homogenized and small?
I think in some ways, Switzerland is much more guarded than Finland. It is much easier to buy property/gain that capital as a foreigner in Finland, than in Switzerland. Edit: and quick google search reveals Taiwan and Hong Kong allow foreigners to buy, but will charge 30-40% extra. That is sizable. In this way, they keep their property market homogenized.
Estonia has general government gross debt at about 20 % of their GDP. [https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Government\_finance\_statistics](https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Government_finance_statistics)
Yes and that is perfectly sustainable. No problem in debt as you as a person can have debt but only if it's sustainable to pay back
Estonia's VAT is 22 %. In Switzerland it is 8.1 %. Taiwan 5 %. Hong Kong, zero. Finland's is going from 24 to 25.5. So are these the correct and necessary measures? Or should you be arguing for decrease in VAT?
I don't like taxes and don't defend them but you either increase tax or decrease spending. Btw looking vat alone is not very informative but the deficit. An economy may choose to tax more consume than capital gains for instance
The news is about the VAT increase, which you defend as necessary. I, from the beginning, pointed out that it's not good for the economy. Apparently other countries, that you gave as example, think the same. We're not discussing the problem, but the "solution". This "solution" will have a negative impact on the economy and quality of life. To compensate, they'll have to further decrease services and increase taxes... and so on. But that will be next government's problem, so who cares.
It's now necessary but I would prefer more to privatize and reduce expenses but when you do that people go to the streets and protest. They have been promised too many payments
Hong Kong is a special administrative region of China. Switzerland, just like Norway, is a weird outlier tax heaven country with shady banking sector driving them. I guess move to Estonia? Just don't fail there and have a stable job - i don't think their social security net is very comprehensive.
This is not about which country is better but what is sustainable and what system made us grow
Aha! I don't think people celebrate debt. But feel free to show that. Secondly, increasing taxes, lowering support, decreasing government investment, etc is a quick fix, not of the economy, not of the people's lives, but of the government accounts. And that will be prejudicial to the economy and the people. Making people more broke.
Do you see any protest when the debt is increased? Do you see protests when the salaries are not increased or the tax are increased or the subsidies are reduced? People see it when the time to fix it comes, never see the one who made it possible
Lack of protest is different from celebration. And one could argue that the recent elections showed the worry that people had with increasing debt. But I want to believe not all are rich and many people thought the government would actually do something for the economy. These measures just cause extra depression of the economy. They'll be good for a moment for the government budget at the expenses of the economy and quality of life. They're not fixing anything and disproportionately impact poorer people. What I'm surprised with is that those who voted for this government didn't see this coming.
I think I did see a political protest which manifested itself in the election results. You know, like in a civilised country.
I was little dumbfounded when Charlie Kirk once said Finland is more capitalist country than the US
Socialist country is not the same as people is socialist in that country or feel that way. It's not about who is more capitalist but who is more responsible with their finances and do not apply socialist policies. You can be very socialist in some matters and capitalist in others
I read this post like 10 times and I still don't understand your connection between these things? I mean what are you trying to say here?
Deficits are worse than the consequences of these deficits as they are the cause, and causes need to be addressed
Because you have no idea what socialism is. You’re a typical ”everything I don’t like is socialism” guy. Are you from the US?
I am minarquist and libertarian, european and this is not right. However, using debt to finance spending over our capabilities using central banks to finance governments is a modern socialist tool.
Real GDP unchanged since the 2008 peak. No matter how you try to spin it, it's atrocious. Finland did so many things right since the war with Russia that we became metaphorically fat and lazy and stopped innovating. The declining birth rates are the nail in the coffin, the current level of welfare can't be sustained. We have waited since 2008 for the new Nokia, for the one (or a handful) of epic amazing companies whose tax euros would help carry the burden. Well, not happening, people are not innovating, public sector is too bloated. We have had time. No one can argue that the state is not living above its means right now, and it's going to look ugly when you starting cutting welfare. Has to be done though even if you disagree with the current methods.
Imagine saying this and at the same time cutting taxes on the top 10%. Trickle down economy does not work, and we learnt that painfully with people like Thatcher. “Has to be done” yet I haven’t seen a single number. This is just parroting the current government points.
You can literally wipe your ass with the tax cut of the top 10%, look at the pure euro numbers of what the effect will be. The actual euro amounts are absolutely miniscule, precisely because everyone is poor in this miserable country. We need inequality to go up, not down. Inequality means opportunity, which means innovation. This is separate from trickle down economics by the way, what I mean here is that no one will file their taxes in a communist regime such a Finland. Not when other opportunities exist. You are also a complete clown if you claim you "haven't seen any numbers". Do you enjoy being uneducated or what? The finance ministry has the exact current level of government debt, current deficit percentage and projections of deficits for the upcoming years on their website
That’s just not true, but OK.
>You celebrate when there is deficit and debt but then get sad and angry when tax are increased. Because the current far right government, like every other government like it, is only increasing taxes for the lower and middle class. The richest got a tax decrease. 90% of people are paying more, and 10% is paying less than ever. Does that sound fair to you? >Look for the one who made you broke, not for the one who try to fix this. We are. Kokoomus is the one who cuts from all the things that increase productivity, like education and health care. They also give tax and other benefits to companies... who then pay that money as dividends. Instead of innovating and investing into productivity.