A nice article, Dave, and from a structural perspective it is A/ hard to argue with and B/ I disagree with it anyways : -)

This image says one thing and one thing only: The top 0.1 percent has been gaining grounds since the early 1980s (Reagan and Thatcher). Both other groups have been declining since the early/late 1980s with the 9.9 percent steadying itself after that point.

What I have heard about the Scandinavian system is that this one-level system has been entrenched. I actually do not blame the system, but would need to point to Scandinavia’s geography not close to the heart of Europe. The political influences move toward Scandinavia therefore more slowly. Said differently, their mirrors are fewer.

One example I heard about is that the rules were such that young people make the same amount of money as older people (sounds decent, doesn’t it), but as side-effect this made it harder for young people to get hired. If a company can pick between a person with little experience and a person with more experience, then the company will pick the one with more experience if the pay is going to be the same.

— -

I think I am saying this louder and louder: a political system must have a system with xyz-axes. Somehow, the Scandinavians have still incorporated one axis that is weaker than the others. I am not surprised in the current global neo-libertarian climate how having one axis be weaker plays out over time, creating a barrier that was not intended. But it needs to be addressed anyway.

— -

Having barriers is ultimately the downfall of a good democracy (and a decent economy). Choices made in the past need to be reviewed and one should ask if they are functioning most optimally. Complains from society must be taken seriously, and I am convinced the Scandinavians can do a good job. They need to understand that complains from a relatively small group still need to be addressed.

The box with rocks comes to mind. When shaking a bock with all different sizes of little rocks in them and shaking them up and down, the end result will be a separation of the big rocks and the little rocks. Surprisingly, the big rocks end up on top and the little rocks end up on the bottom.

If we do not turn the box every now and then, but rather congratulate ourselves with a perfectly executed up-and-down movement all the time, then we will automatically create that barrier.

— -

The solution in Scandinavia? People voting for parties that listen to the specific groups better. It can be complicated to have a party setup for the young, but it is not impossible. Their needs will then be addressed (whether that specific party ever comes to power or not; the game is about taking seats away from the larger parties to make the larger parties pay attention, which today they are not to the highest level).

Yes, stratification occurs everywhere, but I would not call Scandinavia a class society. If it is stuck in near-perfection right now, then they will learn to move the box over time because they have a full-color democracy.

Thank you, Dave.

P.S. I’ll try not to repeat myself

(okay, failed that one miserably already : -)