Cupcake Tragedy

Pretty much everything she said in that segment is wrong. We have higher employment rates than the U.S, unlike what she said. We have a social democracy, not a socialist government. Thirdly, we don't have cupcake cafes, just like this comic says.......we only have muffins...

@MB-Bergholtz If this was Fox, I'd be surprised if the percentage of truthful or accurate statements hit the break-even mark.

@MB-Bergholtz Actually a quick google search shows that, as of February 2018, the Danish unemployment rate is 4.8%, while the US unemployment rate as of April 2018 is 3.9%. So no, Denmark doesn't have higher employment than the United States presently.

Actually, in June 2018, the employment rate in Denmark was 65.50%, whereas the United States had an employment rate of 60.50%. Denmark has a 5% higher employment rate.

@MB-Bergholtz
Denmark has a better population, in a way.

@Aquilinus actually if you were to search deeper you'd find that both the US and Denmark have an unemployment rate of 3.9%
unemployment rates do not necessarily exactly correspond to employment rates as the employment rate is the percentage of people in the country who are currently employed compared to the total population of the country. Unemployment rate is the percentage of people looking for work compared to the total number of people currently in work.

@Aquilinus Well your "quick google search" is obviously why you have those statistics wrong. If you looked a little deeper you'd find that the supposed "3.9%" unemployment rate America has is actually based only on people who've looked for a job in the past month and still don't have a job. As you can guess, this leaves out a huge chunk of the total population. The actual percentage is around 7.8%, the lowest it's been since 2001, and much lower than Denmark's.

@Aquilinus

Actually both are right.
The US has a lower unemployment rate based on people who are activly participating in the work force. The keyword here is activly. So a stay at home mom doesnt show up in this statistic as "unemployed"

Denmark on the other hand has in general a higher participating work force (defined as every adult between 15-65 years old)

So while the unemployment rate is higher in denmark, the are more people working there. (which probably goes back to more people unemployed since more people show up as active work force)

If its better to have a lower unemployment rate but less people participating in the labor market or a higher participation rate with a higher unemployment rate is up for discussion i guess.

@MB-Bergholtz Important distinction. Denmark is actually a very capitalist country... that's why you can keep the wellfare system alive.

Her video was not only stupid but plain offensive too. She bullshat Venezuela completely. Their inflation is not because of "socialism", but because of a monarchical asshole ruling the country (and being bad at it). What. The. Hell

@Edhellas If it wasn't for the high oil prices, things would already have gone very bad for Venezuela under Chaves. It's just that Maduro is a completely incompetent nutcase in addition which makes things go even worse. You need more than a bus driver's license to steer a country. But socialism certainly is one of the main reasons why things are bad in Venezuela. Socialism doesn't work anywhere, has never worked anywhere and will never work anywhere. A social democratic state, on the other hand, actually works, but social democracy is something completely different than socialism, like national socialism differs from socialism.

@ImportViking national socialism doesn't differ any more from socialism than democratic socialism. The modifier only points to the focus of the socialism. It's still socialism. Nazi Germany was still incorporating socialist policies; claims that Nazism or Fascism are "right wing" ideologies come from the fact that <i>in Europe<\i>, they are right of communism. But in the US, they are left wing because they are to the left of American conservative economic and social agendas. The American center is to the right of the European center.

@Aquilinus The Nazi party in Germany were "socialist" in name only, appropriating the term while pretty much going in the other direction. They don't strictly fall on the left-right spectrum in the traditional sense, but their proponents today are very much at the far right end on social issues.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/09/05/were-nazis-socialists/

@Aquilinus #9785027 I hope you're not trying to say that Nazism was not of far-right.
While it is true that the political spectrum can confuse, as for example, the democrats or social democracy is, for many places, right-wing and not left-wing, there are unmistakable things. For all, right or left, Nazism was a variant of Fascism, which are far-right. The current neo-Nazis and fascists are not only of the right-wing but admit it, they are characterized by their hatred towards all kinds of leftists.
The political spectrum may vary, but there are things that do not. It only makes reading book and understand economics to realize all this.

@Aquilinus To me, being a democratic socialist is something completely different than being a social democrat... I don't think 'democratic socialism', whatever it may be, might work anywhere in the world. So far, all socialist states are/were failed states.

Fully agree on national socialism: a lot of ideas are left wing.

And also fully agreed, most 'right wing' parties in Europe are in many respects still to the left of the Democrats in the US.

@Edhellas That's what happens in socialism. Venezuela's inflation is due to socialist policies by a socialist dictator, and any argument to the contrary is ignorant or disingenuous. When you mandate the minimum wage rise, mandate price controls, demonize producers for trying to make ends meet, and nationalize businesses under crony control, you'll kill the economy. But wage controls, price controls, demonization of capitalist producers, and nationalization of industries IS socialism.

@Aquilinus Venezuela’s problem is Maduro is an idiot. His solution to inflation was to print more money, he’s an idiot plain and simple. What’s more i don’t know where you got your information but the minimum wage has been going down in Venezuela not up. Venezuela would be just as screwed under Maduro if it was a Capitalist nation because it’s absolute leader is an absolute idiot.

@Aquilinus How hard is it grasp that there are idiots on all sides of the political spectrum, and that whilst this guy professes he supports a socialistic ideology, the problems the state has is due to incompetence, and that incompetence is not exclusive to the left. The Nordics are socialdemocratic and are ranked consistently amongst the best countries to live in...

inb4, "Hurr durr companies and market are allowed to exist so is not socialist". That's Communism. What is often called Socialism nowadays is social democracy, and it is not a failure

@JustarandomDutch Stop calling social democracy socialism! It is not the same and today there are really socialist countries, and it is the socialism of the 21st century. And Social democracy is not let-wing, but center.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_of_the_21st_century
In addition, there are countries that are neither social democrats nor socialists, but rather a middle ground, such as Russia and Belarus, China perhaps, which support a State Capitalism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
I understand that nowadays studying is boring but make an effort.

@HHWinston
The social democrats (can) also have some pretty left-wing tactics, and frequently call themselves socialist. (Literally, the Dutch SP, social democrats according to Wikipedia, call themselves Socialistische Partij "socialist party')

And believe me, they're very much on the left wing of contemporary politics

@JustarandomDutch In fact no, in Europe we don't know what the left-wing is, we think that the social democracy is left, but it is not. Calling social democrats socialists is a total ignorance. As I said and as I show in the articles that I left, social democracy and socilism are not the same nor up close and there are real socilaist countries nowadays. In Europe, Belarus is, for example, a country of state capitalism that is very close and similar to socialism, the same with Russia, but social democracy is in center, it doesn't matter if they are stupidly called "socialists", in fact, social democrats hate socialists. As a clear example is the betrayal of the Social Democrats to the Spartacists in the German Civil War after the WWI.
I used to live in Argentina when they were under leftist governments (read about 21st century socialism), and believe me, the Europeans don't know what the left is. I know what it is to live under a real left-wing, and it is not a social democracy, which has nothing to do with it.

Back, try to read carefully the articles that I gave you.

@JustarandomDutch social democracy is something completely different than socialism. Just look it up and be amazed. The first works, the second leads to failure every single time.

@Aquilinus Oops. I think I've lived in a semi-socilist country then. I lived in a country where companies were nationalized, wages were raised, we were allies of Russia and demonized everything very capitalist, and let me tell you ... it was great. Never in that country lived better.
But it was not socialism exactly, and it was too left for a social democrat shit, it was state capitalism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism

'@Edhellas' Which monarchical asshole? Maduro...or Hugo Chavez? *canned laughter*

Churlishness aside, Venezuela was on its current course while Chavez was still alive, largely because of his dedication to socialist ideologies. When his reforms and "revolution" started showing signs of not working.going to far his response was always to double-down instead of backing off. Nationalizing the oil made sense (since it had basically been stolen out from under them) but nationalizing granaries because of imaginary conspiracies by farmers did not.

Really though, the word "socialism" is so broadly-defined as to be meaningless. It's basically any economy that exists in the real world.

@Edhellas
>Socialist government starts to implement socialism
>Economy crashes, famines ensue

I-it's not because of Socialism! Next time, it'll work!

Spoiler: It won't.

@Ladoga You understand it! In history, there has NEVER been a sample of a functional socialist state. And there never will be. SO I really don't understand why still millions of people believe in it...

@Ladoga Well... It's way more complicated than that...

First off, there hasn't be a lot of countries experimenting socialism in history, as there has been a lot more of countries experimenting capitalism (and a lot of them failed miserably by the way). So you can't just say "oh we tried once, it didn't work so it never will".

Secondly, USSR was an experiment that kindof succeeded actually if you really examine the fact. The ultimate doomfall of the regime was perhaps due to its economic regime but more likely it was due to its diplomatic isolation and its tyrannical rule of its neighbours that all revolted ultimately. Now let's understand why I think it did work. Let's start with the examination of the late 20th century superpowers : USSR and USA. All started in 1917 when during WW1, russia (who was losing ground against germany, and was in both a political and economicall crisis) revolted ultimately leading bolcheviks into power.
Now let's examine the state of the 2 soon to be superpowers, USA had a very strong and industrialized modern economy (thanks to all the profits it made by selling stuff to europe during the war) and was already the first economic power of the world. Russia on the other end was broke, had still a mostly agricultural economy and even after the war with germany ended still faced a civil war (heavily funded by capitalistic countries) that lasted for 5 years until the whites were defeated.
15 years later, the country had to face WW2 and suffered the most during the conflict with germany (well, it's debatable that china or polland suffered more but they were not big powers at the time). Still by pure economic prowess and sheer numbers, USSR (granted they were helped by US funds) managed to defeat Germany who was the most powerful country in europe.

So if you just look at those 2 situations, it is amazing that Russia actually managed to rival the US during 50 years while having a smaller population, an incredible initial economic deficit and a very difficult relationship with all the big powers of its time (USA, UK, Germany, France and all of western europe). If socialism was such a bad economic system, it wouldn't have been possible at all and USSR would have fallen short during WW2 or even before. I would even argue that it was a better economic system for Russia at the time it adopted it as it allowed an economic growth that wasn't matched in the western nations.

And thirdly what every capitalist biggot seems to fail to see is that capitalism is defending itself, meaning when a nation is trying an other economic approach, it always result in civil war because rich people don't want to abandon their suppremacy. And that civil war is always constantly helped by foreign capitalistic countries (not necessarily the USA btw, the whites were mostly supported by France and the UK for example) so to make it out to a socialist system, a country would have to be stronger than its own olligarchy but also its close capitalist neighbours (and when you are close to the USA, you are doomed to fail).

So in the end you are right, it will fail, but not really for the reasons you think it will, and it could probably work (though it's not a certainty either, but it seems way more stable that capitalism is anyway) in a different world (one that hasn't been locked down by capitalism). When I say different world, I'm not necessarily talking about an other dimension kind of thing, it could be in the future as well (there are reasons to think that our current system is coming to an end soon, and with it so will the lock that capitalism has placed upon us).

PS : This is off topic. I don't know if you know about collapsology (I promise this is not a religion :p), but we have a lot of reasons to think that all capitalistic countries will fail (HARD - actually the longer it takes for the system to collapse, the harder the fall will be, worst case scenario may result in the disparition of almost all life on the planet) in the next 30 years or so, definitely making capitalism a worst economic system than socialism (by chance though, as socialism is a productivist ideology that would probably have failed the same way capitalism will - though probably slowly as it would not have burned all our energy resources at the rate capitalism is currenty going)

@Edhellas Yes gurl, socialism did nothing wrong.

Try to tell that to my venezuelan friends that fled from their country or even better, to the ones that can't afford leaving.

@Edhellas

What people forget is that Socialism/Marxism was not a blueprint but a prediction of the future when both the factories and farms became automated to the point where a small fraction of the population could do all the work needed to give people more basic necessities than they could possibly use. Marx believed at this point, the workers would take over, a few people do all the work (and receive !more! goods in return), and everyone else would be free to do whatever they wanted such as art, research, etc. But this required that the society was incredibly industrialized and automated to the point where a tiny fraction of the population could indeed do all the work. The Communists of the world, including Maduro and Chavez as well as Lenin and Mao, ignored the whole critical piece about being industrialized and just tried to skip ahead to the hypothetical utopia. It... didn't work.

Also, it's not what happened. Instead, governments of the world added all sorts of bureaucratic bullshit to provide jobs for accountants and attorneys and other intelligent but essentially worthless middle men. Why they decided to make things needlessly complicated instead of levying taxes and employing these brilliant minds as scientists? Honestly, I'm really not sure.

@Edhellas
It's a typical argument I see all the time from right-wingers and it's complete bullshit. The right-wing never acknowledge that Venezuela relies too much on oil as a commodity and this happened long before Chavez came to power.

Back in the 1970s Venezuela was the richest country in South America, the oil crisis of 1973 certainly helped them, but in the 1980s the price of oil fallen and they went through similar problems to what they're going through today. The only difference this time is that the United States has sanctions on Venezuela.

At the end of the day it's just typical right-wing strawmanning.

@Edhellas
The way I look at it, any polity that denies its citizens a reliable reward for their success, (that is, that swoops in and takes from those who become successful, possibly leaving them worse off than before,) will see a downward trend in their economy. That doesn't mean that there can't be any taxes, but those taxes need to be consistent. Predictable. Something that can be planned for. Why even try when success just means you die poor, and tired, (and possibly premature)? Further, any country that lives in a bubble, hiding the economic truth of itself from itself, will have issues, the same way that a driver, blindfolded and with his ears covered, can't keep a car on the road. Feedback, accurate feedback, is crucial to making good decisions.
Finally, one hundred thousand unskilled morons are smarter at economics than one exceptionally bright, well-trained economist. While most will sink in their endeavors, some, by pure dumb luck, will find the most efficient available path to success, and soon most of the rest will imitate that one, and improve further upon it. This, is the real "invisible hand" of capitalism and why capitalism works better than command economies. Mind you, the invisible hand is a sociopath, but at least it's not an idiot, and a half-blind idiot at that.

Now, capitalism-communism? Wrong argument. Capitalism is an economic model while communism is a government one. It's like saying you can't have both purple (a color) and wood, (a material). That said, the implementation of the government model does strongly effect the effectiveness, and the available range, of any economic model.
Personally, I find the Nolan chart a good fit, and the one cooked up by the JenniferGovernment guy a better one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NationStates#/media/File:Updated_NS_Graph.svg

That said, I, personally, prefer the least necessary amount of government possible, and want it available, somewhere, if not where I am. The more variety of political and economic environments available, the more those one hundred thousand idiots can stumble their way toward prosperity, the more possible it is to evaluate the true benefits, and costs, of the different systems. That way, the command economy guys can't stick their head in the sand, say "this is good, there can be no better, you'd sink for sure if it weren't for me", when the evidence of the opposite is blaring across the border on the airwaves and internet packets, proving them wrong.

Also, don't take this as a challenge to what you said. It's not. I find no fault in what you said. But any tiny cabal trying to run all elements of an economy will fail. Be it one guy, whose credentials are he's bloodthirsty and had the backing of the last guy, or a mixed team of senators and economists from the best schools.

I have served my country proudly. The bombs of terrorists, the crack of a rifle from an unseen sniper and the knowledge that any moment might be my last, are all easier to bare then knowing that the party of Reagan and Lincoln is dead. It's corpse having been skinned and worn by these... things... that disguise themselves as the savors to American's poor.

Trump, you had fooled me, twisting me to your sides with your mountain of lies, I was a damned fool to follow you. Trump you are fooling my parents, my brothers in both blood and arms, and my home.

I say this not as a 'left wing paid protester' you always ramble on about. But as a Soldier, a Brother and a Ex-Republican. But damn you. When you enter Saint Peter's Hall you will face the crimes you have committed, with no lawyers to appeal, no judges to deal, and where the verdict is eternal and there will be no escape.

I would call you a liar, but that would be harsh to those who lie to protect themselves or their families and to those planning a surprise for a loved one.

You lock children in cages who entered our country lawfully. Some as young as nine. Molested women and bragged about it, destroyed a global economy that took centuries to form and sell out our allies one twisted lie at a time

You attack my fallen brothers then pledge yourself to my side.

I despise you. But I can't even come up with the words to throw at you.

I would call you racist. But that much is evident based on how much you salivate over your beloved wall.

I would call you misogynistic. But I have a feeling you much prefer women to men, after all men don't have the orifices you like to grab.

I would call you traitor. But as my Commander in Chief, that would be treason on my part.

I would call you fascist. But I can't believe you would give enough effort to even sign Martial Law. After they mailed it your gold courses.

Trump you have done what ISIS, the Russians, the Chinese, and so many other threats you don't even know of because we send you our reports in a blasted bullet-point format on a document two pages long, per your request, have only dreamed of doing.

You are breaking America, you are breaking my home, you are breaking my family. And you broke me.

May God bless America. May God bless Muller and his probe. And may God bless you and the cell you will call home.

@Blaze837 Be loyal to your ideals, not a political party.

@Blaze837 when I was growing up, America was the land of dreams. You guys had everything. At least that's what a young, impressionable kid from a small island in the North-Atlantic ocean got from all your movies and TV-shows. And that didn't just happen by accident. America became so great because of people like you who cared enough to lay your life on the line to make progress. That is something that history preserves. So no matter how much Trump acts like a child in order to destroy the US, he's no match to all of the honorable men and women of the great America, such as yourself and your family, that built the land I saw as a kid. And because of that, he's not going to destroy centuries worth of progress. America is just going through a rough time.

@Blaze837 *stands and applauds*

@Blaze837 #9785916

I'm sorry this is happening. It hurts me too.

@Blaze837 wall of fecking text. Too long didnt read.

@Lidonious Then move on. Your comment isn't helpful at all, it isn't going to solve anything except make you look immature.

@Blaze837 Your comment is beautifully written. I feel like it is an admittance from someone who fears retribution from the people around them if they were honest about how they felt. However, I will downvote your comment because I am honestly becoming less and less capable of understanding why and how it has taken this long for some ex-trump voters to see how bad the current u.s. president is. You voted for him, I assume mainly to raise employment and local economies, but then you were willing to sacrifice other things such as health care, education, and international relationships, which he made CLEAR he knows little about, or he was/is inconsistent on? All you had to do to get a good reading on him was look at his behaviour in the past, and from there you track how much he has changed if at all. I apologize if I come off as condescending, i don't mean to. the people who cried at the beginning "wait and see, give him a chance" don't help anything. We SEE how bad he is already, that is what a campaign is for, we don't need to give him a chance - bad campaign = bad leader - that is how it works. Now those same people say "we didnt know how bad it was going to be at the time". Is this a joke? I am trying to stay calm right now, but coming up against people who express remorse this far into the game after voting for him really step on my patience. I am Canadian and now because of trump voters who did not see the glaring warning signs we have to contend with a dangerous and stupid leader next door. You will not be getting my sympathies.

@yeti245 Well, it's not that easy. People essentially don't think rationnaly. We have beliefs about the world that are forged by our past experience and it takes an incredibly strong experience to make us abandon our beliefs. So basically our brain just reads the world as confirmation for what he already takes as the truth (this is called confirmation bias) unless something inconceivable for its current belief happens and shatter the belief.

For example, I was raised in a socialist culture and while I don't think socialism is necessarily a good economic system, I never had the belief that capitalism was a good one. So for me it's pretty obvious that this system is in fact pretty bad (maybe the worst humanity ever invented, at least in its current form). It produces
monstruous inequalities, is very unstable, doesn't have any consideration for non-renewable resources, doesn't grant social value to work... etc (I can't sumarize all the problems as it would take too much time...) The system has also almost no redeeming quality, it's supposed to induce innovation, but at some point the blatant inequalities and the short-term mind that seem to have taken control over the world (2 things that were induced by that same system) just reduced that to a non-factor too.
So in a way i'm just like you, wondering in awe why everybody still seem to be thinking that "yeah, capitalism is the way to go guys, problems are just going to solve themselves" when it's so obvious that it's not and that they won't. If you are part of those people that believe in capitalism, market economies and all that jazz, then feel free to apply your words to yourself (Well maybe you are part of that small fraction of people that can see clearly about capitalism, so my example is lost on you... But I think you can get my point : while it's easy to see that a belief is wrong when you don't believe, it's REALLY hard to see clearly when you do believe).

I would argue that there is more merit in getting to the truth while starting with a wrong belief than just being handed the right answer from the start... SO props to blaze

@Blaze837 Wow, you got me man. Those were really heartbreaking words.

Fox News logic

Americans starting cupcake cafes -- Fair, reasonable, a shining example of small business entrepreneurs and America's free market at its finest

Danes starting cupcake cafes -- ridiculous, laughable, a horrid example of how Europeans are soft and America is all around better at everything

@YuKaraya Unfortunately, Americans can strengthen their own negative stereotypes like this. Not many notices anything good when there's something bad like what Trish said.

@MB-Bergholtz I wouldn't care too much about it if I was you. Fox News and their audience have obviously decided to make Denmark into a negative straw man argument so there is nothing we can say to convince them otherwise. It have nothing to do with the real Denmark.

@YuKaraya Why must they ruin frosted desserts for us.

Fox HR person at job interview: I see you've got the fake hair and fake nails and enough to look at to keep our viewers from immediate suicide. Good, good. Can you make that snarky, know it all face that you made in high school, but also pretend you're constipated?
Interviewee: like this?!
Interviewer: you're hired!!

Trish who?

@gamerlen
My thoughts exactly.
Who is this Trish person? Is she someone of relevance?

@gamerlen Takanawa comes to mind.

It's fake news!! Ooops.. Fox news..

@Zuperkrunch Faux News.

@TuxedoCartman

The funniest thing there is that, even were she right about the cupcake cafe thing, doesn't that mean that Danish students are all aspiring small business owners? I don't see the problem.

@OneOfThemOregonians Yeah totally! I was like, ‘Isn’t that exactly what you people ramble about all the time? Creating jobs?’

@OneOfThemOregonians That's true...you'd think Fox "News" would be all over this and commending young people for wanting to be business owners.

Cupcakes? I'd rather bake some banana bread instead.

@North-Sea-Empire Same

i am truly sorry for all the ignorant bigots in my country

@NorwegianFairytale

And I'm sorry for the one's in mine.
But don't worry - we don't hold those idiots against all the decent Americans we all know exist.
We who are decent are still in the majority, and we shouldn't let the idiots define our nations for us or fall for their lies about being the majority.
Because they aren't - they're just a loud-mouthed hateful minority of bigots and racists and as long as we stand up to them, they'll never be anything else.

So don't despair but organize against those hateful forces, and when your time comes - vote in every election to show you will never accept them or their hateful rhetoric.

@Nisse_Hult Beautifully said, but a country is only as strong as their weakest citizen.

@ProudHetalian29

Thank you for your kind words!
Viewed that way all nations are equally weak - because all nations contain weak people.
And that's true no matter how you define weakness.

But in this case it seemed to me you're a bit to defeatist.

Yes sure - there are bigots, racists and idiots everywhere.
But there are also thoughtful, empathic and intelligent people everywhere.
Which is one of the basic proofs that racism is such an idiotic idea.

Because the content of a persons character isn't defined by their skin colour or gender or sexuality or religion or ethnicity or cultural background or anything else.
Anyone who's actually met different people knows this!

There are good and bad people everywhere and you simply can't make an honest or rational assessment of a collective of people like racists do - you always have to judge each and every person individually, because that's what we are - individuals!

And even if there seems to be unusually many citizens of the US willing to support a clearly terrible human being as president, I still refuse to let them and their actions define all of the US.

I - like many people over the world - are critical against a lot of US policies and many of the actions your nation has taken through the years, yes.
But I can also appreciate the good US policy has done, and see the nuances between your different administrations.

Trump is historically awful and incompetent of course, and will go down as the worst US president ever, hands down.
But unless he unleashes a nuclear winter he won't be the last president and history won't end with him.
There is still hope for the US to chose a better path - and eventually I think you will.
Because the path you're on now is frankly not benefiting the majority of your own citizens, so it can't last forever.