• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Norway Elects a Conservative as Its Premier

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,860
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Lower taxes and privatization? In Scandinavia? The hallmark location used by social progressives to explain how great it could be here?

Now, the article linked below is from the NY Times, so it tries real hard to focus on another issue; the massacre 2 years ago. But even the Times had to at least state the portion I quote below:

The campaign had been centered largely on economic issues, like extending already generous welfare payments (Labor) versus cutting taxes and privatizing hospitals (Conservatives). But the massacre on the island of Utoya, where Anders Behring Breivik attacked youth members of the Labor Party on July 22, 2011, was never far from the surface.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/world/europe/norway-elects-a-conservative-as-its-premier.html?_r=0

What does this say about the progressive movement in Scandinavia? Or anywhere for that matter, in these economic times?
 

upsideguy

Pragmatic Idealist
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
17,371
Reaction score
10,253
Location
Rocky Mtn. High
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Lower taxes and privatization? In Scandinavia? The hallmark location used by social progressives to explain how great it could be here?

Now, the article linked below is from the NY Times, so it tries real hard to focus on another issue; the massacre 2 years ago. But even the Times had to at least state the portion I quote below:



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/world/europe/norway-elects-a-conservative-as-its-premier.html?_r=0

What does this say about the progressive movement in Scandinavia? Or anywhere for that matter, in these economic times?
I hope you understand that a "conservative" in Europe or Canada sits to the left of an American Democrat. Meanwhile, Norway sits on top of the Prosperity Index, as it has for years.

The 2012 Legatum Prosperity Index
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,860
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I hope you understand that a "conservative" in Europe or Canada sits to the left of an American Democrat. Meanwhile, Norway sits on top of the Prosperity Index, as it has for years.

The 2012 Legatum Prosperity Index
The party that won did so by promising tax cuts and privatization of hospitals, as well as other not so "progressive" actions.

I'm not comparing US Democrats to European leaders. I'm not trying to make this a (R) versus (D) thread.

I mentioned Social Progressives which are similar regardless. There are Progressives that are both R's and D's in the US.
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I hope you understand that a "conservative" in Europe or Canada sits to the left of an American Democrat. Meanwhile, Norway sits on top of the Prosperity Index, as it has for years.

The 2012 Legatum Prosperity Index
I hope you realize that conservatives in the US sit to the left of the current democrat in chief as well.
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,860
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Here's how Reuters is reporting it (see if we can determine what's different about this report versus the NY Times report in the OP / the banner waiver for the Progressive movement in the US):

(Reuters) - Norway's opposition Conservatives, promising tax cuts and better healthcare, won elections in a landslide on Monday but faced tough coalition talks with a populist party that wants to spend more of the accumulated oil riches and curb immigration.

Led by Erna Solberg, a former girl scout leader who has overcome dyslexia, the Conservatives promise to diversify the economy away from oil, privatize state firms, and reduce some of the world's highest taxes rates to give the private sector more breathing room.

Solberg, 52, will become Norway's second female prime minister, as well as its first Conservative prime minister since 1990. At least the top two cabinet posts - and possibly the top three - are likely to be filled by women.

"Today voters have given a historically strong victory for the center-right," said a tearful Solberg, nicknamed "Iron Erna" for her tough stances when she served in cabinet between 2001 and 2005. "We will give this country a new government."

...
Conservative leader Solberg sweeps into power in Norwegian election | Reuters
 

Carjosse

Sit Nomine Digna
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2012
Messages
14,435
Reaction score
6,184
Location
Montreal, QC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Norway is weird it;s problem is it has too much money and the Labour Party lost even though it has the most successful economy in the world, from what I have read they won because Norwegians wanted a change of pace. Even the Conservatives are not that Conservative. The Conservatives want to spend more money not cut things.
 

Rainman05

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
10,032
Reaction score
4,964
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Norway is weird it;s problem is it has too much money and the Labour Party lost even though it has the most successful economy in the world, from what I have read they won because Norwegians wanted a change of pace. Even the Conservatives are not that Conservative. The Conservatives want to spend more money not cut things.
European conservative means something different than american conservative. Just like European liberal means something different than american liberal or european socialist means something when there is no such thing as american socialist party.

The Norwegians conservatives want to spend money because they breezed over the recession with little problems and because the party before them didn't take advantage of the position Norway was in Europe. Economically sound and prosperous. Socially stable. Exporting country since its currency is worth 10x less than the euro and is one of the world leaders in emerging technology and emerging industries.
 

Grand Mal

Question authority
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
35,884
Reaction score
18,349
Location
on an island off the left coast of Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I hope you understand that a "conservative" in Europe or Canada sits to the left of an American Democrat. Meanwhile, Norway sits on top of the Prosperity Index, as it has for years.

The 2012 Legatum Prosperity Index
The guy here in Canada now, Stephen Harper, is about as conservative as you can be and still win an election here, but he probably wouldn't be offered a cigar by Rush Limbaugh. He's had a couple majority governments and, outside of his contempt for the democratic process, he hasn't outraged anyone too badly yet.
 

Camlon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
2,854
Reaction score
567
Location
Oslo, Norway
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Norway is weird it;s problem is it has too much money and the Labour Party lost even though it has the most successful economy in the world, from what I have read they won because Norwegians wanted a change of pace. Even the Conservatives are not that Conservative. The Conservatives want to spend more money not cut things.
What characterizes successful countries is leadership change. In fact the countries who never change leaders such as Venezuela, and Zimbabwe suck really badly. I also don't think China could have been where it is right now, if they didn't change leadership every 5 years.

I also want to challenge the view that Norway is particularly left wing. In terms of economic freedom, Norway is far ahead of France, and the whole southern Europe. The left in America talks about banksters robbing us, there is no such talk in Norway. The left in France implemented a 75% income tax. Anyone advocating for that in Norway would be called a radical. The right wing government in Sweden is fanatically in favour of liberal asylum laws. Both conservatives and progress party are in favour of tougher asylum laws. And in Stockholm and New York they have rent control. There is no talk about implementing rent control in Oslo.

But what about the cuts? The conservative government are in favour of cuts, they will probably cut in
- Media support
- Sickness benefits
- Disability benefits
- Labour union support
- Public Administration (Disctrict reform)
- Culture budget

And if you think about it. How much did the Bush administration cut from his budgets. What about Reagan?
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,248
Reaction score
12,116
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Lower taxes and privatization? In Scandinavia? The hallmark location used by social progressives to explain how great it could be here?

Now, the article linked below is from the NY Times, so it tries real hard to focus on another issue; the massacre 2 years ago. But even the Times had to at least state the portion I quote below:



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/world/europe/norway-elects-a-conservative-as-its-premier.html?_r=0

What does this say about the progressive movement in Scandinavia? Or anywhere for that matter, in these economic times?
What it says is that it is politics as usual in Norway. Norway has never had a government last longer than 8 years.. the present government has been in power for.. 8 years. This is quite normal switch in politics in Norway.

Plus nothing is sure just yet, since no one got absolute majority and the biggest winner was the far right Peoples Party.. the party of Brevik. In fact Stoltenberg actually still got over 30% of the vote, more than anyone else.

The problem is that for the right to govern, then they need to include the Peoples Party.. and that aint popular anywhere. I would not be surprised if left wing to centre parties .. hell even the Labour party, went into a coalition government with Solberg just to keep the Peoples Party out of any influence.
 
Last edited:

Camlon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
2,854
Reaction score
567
Location
Oslo, Norway
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Plus nothing is sure just yet, since no one got absolute majority and the biggest winner was the far right Peoples Party.. the party of Brevik. In fact Stoltenberg actually won more votes than last time...
Are you comparing with 2011. That is the local election, and the Progress Party always does worse in those elections. The progress party has lost 6.6% sice 2009. They were still happy of course, because they have improved since 2011 and its their first chance of governance.

The biggest winner was the conservative party who increased their vote share by 9.6% and got 26,8% of the vote.

BTW: It's called progress party, not people's party, and it is not the party of Breivik. He joined the party in his young days when the progress party was more radical and he was less radical. People in the party did not like him too much, and he left the party because he didn't think it was radical enough.

The problem is that for the right to govern, then they need to include the Peoples Party.. and that aint popular anywhere. I would not be surprised if left wing to centre parties .. hell even the Labour party, went into a coalition government with Solberg just to keep the Peoples Party out of any influence.
That will never happen, and you know nothing about Norwegian politics if you think that is a likely scenario. We are not Sweden. If Conservatives even tried to do that, then they would be below 10% by next year.

First off the conservative party has no big problems with the progress party. They agree on most issues. It is the liberal and christian party that has trouble dealing with the progress party. In the unlikely scenario that they can't come to an agreement, then we will end up with a minority labour government. But that is not likely to happen, because it will lead to a massive defeat in 2017. The liberal party tried to stop the progress party last election and ended up below the 4% limit. This time they are more cooperative.
 
Last edited:

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,248
Reaction score
12,116
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Are you comparing with 2011. That is the local election, and the Progress Party always does worse in those elections. The progress party has lost 6.6% sice 2009. They were still happy of course, because they have improved since 2011 and its their first chance of governance.

The biggest winner was the conservative party who increased their vote share by 9.6% and got 26,8% of the vote.

BTW: It's called progress party, not people's party, and it is not the party of Breivik. He joined the party in his young days when the progress party was more radical and he was less radical. People in the party did not like him too much, and he left the party because he didn't think it was radical enough.
Still the party of Brevik.. and that stink will never go away.

That will never happen, and you know nothing about Norwegian politics if you think that is a likely scenario. We are not Sweden. If Conservatives even tried to do that, then they would be below 10% by next year.

First off the conservative party has no big problems with the progress party. They agree on most issues. It is the liberal and christian party that has trouble dealing with the progress party. In the unlikely scenario that they can't come to an agreement, then we will end up with a minority labour government. But that is not likely to happen, because it will lead to a massive defeat in 2017. The liberal party tried to stop the progress party last election and ended up below the 4% limit. This time they are more cooperative.
Things change... Fremskirtspartiet have never been the king maker, they are now.. Without them, the right wont stay in power and that is a fact. That means that Solberg either has to get into bed with a bunch of racists and Brevik supporters, or find alternative backers, which include Arbeiderpartiet. I agree that there is a small chance, but there is a chance.. the more likely scenario is talking to some of Arbeiderpartiet's allies in the centre and run a minority government if needed and take each issue on its own merit.
 

Camlon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
2,854
Reaction score
567
Location
Oslo, Norway
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Still the party of Brevik.. and that stink will never go away.
Maybe not among far lefties abroad, but in Norway no one accuses the progress party to be the party of Breivik. If you say that in Norway, then no one will take you seriously.

Also, before the incident the progress party had 19%. of the vote. Their election result was 16.4%. It really didn't impact them that much. If people really thought there was a connection between breivik and Progress party, then they would have been below. 10%

Things change... Fremskirtspartiet have never been the king maker, they are now.. Without them, the right wont stay in power and that is a fact. That means that Solberg either has to get into bed with a bunch of racists and Brevik supporters, or find alternative backers, which include Arbeiderpartiet. I agree that there is a small chance, but there is a chance.. the more likely scenario is talking to some of Arbeiderpartiet's allies in the centre and run a minority government if needed and take each issue on its own merit.
You obviously don't know much about the progress party. No one in the progress party supported Breivik. They hated him. You said thry are a bunch of Breivik supporters. So I will make it easy for you, find anyone in the Progress Party who has said he is a supporter of Breivik.

And no there is no chance of conservatives forming a coalition with the labour party what so ever. Anyone who say something like that have absolutly no clue about Norwegian politics.
 
Last edited:

Sanddune

Active member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
354
Reaction score
128
Location
Germany
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Everything is going well, it's just getting a bit boring with the same guy in office all the time. So let's get some new faces and - just because it would otherwise be boring - find new ways of managing the huge daunting surplus. King Harald is probably also looking forward to having dinner with someone else for a change.

Gotta love those Norwegians ;)
 

Carjosse

Sit Nomine Digna
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2012
Messages
14,435
Reaction score
6,184
Location
Montreal, QC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
European conservative means something different than american conservative. Just like European liberal means something different than american liberal or european socialist means something when there is no such thing as american socialist party.

The Norwegians conservatives want to spend money because they breezed over the recession with little problems and because the party before them didn't take advantage of the position Norway was in Europe. Economically sound and prosperous. Socially stable. Exporting country since its currency is worth 10x less than the euro and is one of the world leaders in emerging technology and emerging industries.
In Canada we follow the same position the Europeans do just we replace the Socialists with the NDP. Our Conservatives are still left of American democrats here but they still want to manage spending and debt. Quebec is the closet your are going to get to Norway in North America with it's high taxes and large amount of social services which Quebec adopted form France. Unlike France though Quebec is doing pretty good financial wise. They haven't even touched the natural resource sector in the province yet.
 

Carjosse

Sit Nomine Digna
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2012
Messages
14,435
Reaction score
6,184
Location
Montreal, QC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The guy here in Canada now, Stephen Harper, is about as conservative as you can be and still win an election here, but he probably wouldn't be offered a cigar by Rush Limbaugh. He's had a couple majority governments and, outside of his contempt for the democratic process, he hasn't outraged anyone too badly yet.
Well he has managed to outrage everyone in the government including the budget watchdog, the Auditor General, Statistics Canada, the RCMP, CBC, etc. His big misstep coming back to bite him in the ass is lowering the GST, if he didn't lower it we could have fairly large budget surpluses but instead he cut it to look good. He would probably have a minority at least if Liberals could pick someone decent as leader.
 

Carjosse

Sit Nomine Digna
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2012
Messages
14,435
Reaction score
6,184
Location
Montreal, QC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
What characterizes successful countries is leadership change. In fact the countries who never change leaders such as Venezuela, and Zimbabwe suck really badly. I also don't think China could have been where it is right now, if they didn't change leadership every 5 years.

I also want to challenge the view that Norway is particularly left wing. In terms of economic freedom, Norway is far ahead of France, and the whole southern Europe. The left in America talks about banksters robbing us, there is no such talk in Norway. The left in France implemented a 75% income tax. Anyone advocating for that in Norway would be called a radical. The right wing government in Sweden is fanatically in favour of liberal asylum laws. Both conservatives and progress party are in favour of tougher asylum laws. And in Stockholm and New York they have rent control. There is no talk about implementing rent control in Oslo.

But what about the cuts? The conservative government are in favour of cuts, they will probably cut in
- Media support
- Sickness benefits
- Disability benefits
- Labour union support
- Public Administration (Disctrict reform)
- Culture budget

And if you think about it. How much did the Bush administration cut from his budgets. What about Reagan?
We have had Harper for almost 7 years now and have gone through I think three elections and he is only the 7th longest prime minster. In Canada long leadership has led to success. 70 out of the last 100 years have been governed by the Liberals here.
 

Sanddune

Active member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
354
Reaction score
128
Location
Germany
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Still the party of Brevik.. and that stink will never go away.
Fremskrittspartiet was already well hated as a bunch of more or less open racists before Breivik, wasn't it? I kind of hate to think of them as part of a government.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,248
Reaction score
12,116
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Fremskrittspartiet was already well hated as a bunch of more or less open racists before Breivik, wasn't it?
Yes as are their sister parties in Denmark and Sweden. But they have become more and more mainstream over the last decade... which has resulted that in Denmark they were the basis for a right of centre minority government for years. Now it is this that I could possible see happening.. that they become the basis for a centre right minority government but on immigration policies the right and left get together to avoid that they get far too much influence.
 

Sanddune

Active member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
354
Reaction score
128
Location
Germany
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Yes as are their sister parties in Denmark and Sweden. But they have become more and more mainstream over the last decade... which has resulted that in Denmark they were the basis for a right of centre minority government for years. Now it is this that I could possible see happening.. that they become the basis for a centre right minority government but on immigration policies the right and left get together to avoid that they get far too much influence.
So Erna Solberg is going to be something of a female Franz von Papen...

just kidding ;)
 

upsideguy

Pragmatic Idealist
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
17,371
Reaction score
10,253
Location
Rocky Mtn. High
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
The party that won did so by promising tax cuts and privatization of hospitals, as well as other not so "progressive" actions.

I'm not comparing US Democrats to European leaders. I'm not trying to make this a (R) versus (D) thread.

I mentioned Social Progressives which are similar regardless. There are Progressives that are both R's and D's in the US.
What "R's" are progressives in your mind? Last I checked, Jake Javitis, Nelson Rockefeller, Charles Percy, Mark Hatfield, William Scranton and especially Teddy Roosevelt were all dead (and therefore no longer qualified to serve).
 
Last edited:

keith

Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
231
Reaction score
114
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
... and that is relevant for what reason?
Different demographic groups tend to have wide disparities in income and more homogenous societies, all other things being equal, tend to be wealthier.


Let's look at the problems a more diverse Norway faces, from:

Immigration and the Nordic Welfare State Model
By Kaiyang Huang



As Harvard political scientist Torben Iversen states, since many jobs in these Nordic countries require specific skills only attainable from these vocational institutions, immigrants with general or no skills have difficulty finding jobs. This constitutes a one-two punch that threatens to knock out generous welfare regimes – not only are these immigrants unable to pay taxes and contribute to the economy, by being unemployed and drawing welfare benefits they add to the country’s fiscal burden. To use the parlance of political scientists, there is thus an “institutional incompatibility” between the specificity of skills which accompanies Nordic welfare states and immigration.

Two solutions are possible: cut back heavily on immigration, or reform the welfare system. A combination of both seems like a possible response to this problem. Given that there seems to be a lower limit on how low immigration can be reduced, more attention will have to be paid to welfare reform. In particular, Nordic countries could implement a multi-tiered welfare system to replace the existing universal model. This would mean reduced benefits for non-citizens, including long-term residents. This scenario, however, seems highly unlikely. Gosta Esping-Andersen, a Danish sociologist, describes the Nordic welfare state’s goal as one of “decommodification”, and one which breeds a strong sense of egalitarianism that transcends class boundaries. By bringing the welfare state closer to the means-tested model of the United States and the United Kingdom, welfare reform thus threatens to undermine the egalitarianism that is the hallmark and pride of the Nordic welfare state.

The generous and all-encompassing Nordic welfare model has worked well in the past, especially from the 1950s to the mid-1970s. But to the extent that Nordic countries want to continue accepting immigrants, they will have to reform their welfare system to reduce large fiscal strain. This will prompt many questions about the principle of universalism that underpins the Nordic welfare system. From Norway to Finland, the intense soul-searching will have to continue.
 
Last edited:

Camlon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
2,854
Reaction score
567
Location
Oslo, Norway
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
We have had Harper for almost 7 years now and have gone through I think three elections and he is only the 7th longest prime minster. In Canada long leadership has led to success. 70 out of the last 100 years have been governed by the Liberals here.
7 years is not a long time and Harper is very likely to lose in 2015. The Norwegian labour party was in power for 8 years. 8 years ago they had lots of ideas for the country, and they achieved many of their goals. Now there is no vision, and no inspiration. The only thing they did was fearmongering. That we change government after 8 years, show that Norway is a healthy democracy.

In Venezuela socialists have been in government for 15 years, they are not losing power anytime soon and democracy is eroding. In Zimbabwe Mugabe has been in power for 26 years and he has in practice abolished democracy. We need leadership change, because we need fresh ideas, and they need to feel som pressure to perform. The problem with being in power too long is that power corrupts people.

When a leader is in power for too long, and doesn't even get voted out when the economy crashes, it often leads to problems.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom