<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Swedish &#8220;Socialism&#8221;</title>
	<link>http://www.jeffmcbride.net/2008/07/19/swedish-socialism/</link>
	<description>Bandwidth to Burn!</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 13:41:33 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Becky</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffmcbride.net/2008/07/19/swedish-socialism/#comment-40</link>
		<author>Becky</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Aug 2008 20:33:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.jeffmcbride.net/2008/07/19/swedish-socialism/#comment-40</guid>
		<description>I agree with your 2 points. On NPR a week or so ago they were discussing health care in Sweden, I believe, or maybe France, and when the interviewer asked the question "Does it bother you to pay for health care for fellow countrymen?", (all are required to pay for basic care, like a tax) The interviewee replied that that was an American question. That we are all so individualistic, to a fault here in the US. That in their country they belong to each other and it is to the benefit of all to care for each other. I think that is true in all respects, but particularly with our most vulnerable citizens (the young, the infirm and elderly, and the poor) I would not mind paying a higher tax if someone were to benefit from it. It makes sense to me. Our health care system and education system are outdated and dysfunctional.  Sorry for the soap box.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with your 2 points. On NPR a week or so ago they were discussing health care in Sweden, I believe, or maybe France, and when the interviewer asked the question &#8220;Does it bother you to pay for health care for fellow countrymen?&#8221;, (all are required to pay for basic care, like a tax) The interviewee replied that that was an American question. That we are all so individualistic, to a fault here in the US. That in their country they belong to each other and it is to the benefit of all to care for each other. I think that is true in all respects, but particularly with our most vulnerable citizens (the young, the infirm and elderly, and the poor) I would not mind paying a higher tax if someone were to benefit from it. It makes sense to me. Our health care system and education system are outdated and dysfunctional.  Sorry for the soap box.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffmcbride.net/2008/07/19/swedish-socialism/#comment-36</link>
		<author>Jeff</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:02:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.jeffmcbride.net/2008/07/19/swedish-socialism/#comment-36</guid>
		<description>It is worth noting that, according to the BBC article, only 6% of children are in private schools even though it is a free switch.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is worth noting that, according to the BBC article, only 6% of children are in private schools even though it is a free switch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dustin</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffmcbride.net/2008/07/19/swedish-socialism/#comment-35</link>
		<author>Dustin</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:08:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.jeffmcbride.net/2008/07/19/swedish-socialism/#comment-35</guid>
		<description>Maintaining price signals is really the crucial point, and the school voucher system hits the nail on the head there. I cannot really wrap my head around why people are so opposed to it here (though it does seem to be gaining more and more support). I think, at least in the case of children, we can almost all agree that welfare is a good thing. Purely public education however has proven itself highly ineffective at leveling the field though, so why cling to it when other countries have already proven the effectiveness of vouchers?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maintaining price signals is really the crucial point, and the school voucher system hits the nail on the head there. I cannot really wrap my head around why people are so opposed to it here (though it does seem to be gaining more and more support). I think, at least in the case of children, we can almost all agree that welfare is a good thing. Purely public education however has proven itself highly ineffective at leveling the field though, so why cling to it when other countries have already proven the effectiveness of vouchers?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
