Sweden's Experiment with Economic Democracy

xxxiaoyin
SWEDEN_2018-9.pptx

Introduction to the Swedish Economy – Barry Clark

THE THIRD WAY

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Abraham Maslow – (1908 – 1970)

Higher needs generally won’t be pursued until lower needs are met.

Current Statistics

Sweden’s small, open, and competitive economy has been thriving and Sweden has achieved an enviable standard of living with its combination of free-market capitalism and extensive welfare benefits. Sweden remains outside the euro zone largely out of concern that joining the European Economic and Monetary Union would diminish the country’s sovereignty over its welfare system.

Timber, hydropower, and iron ore constitute the resource base of a manufacturing economy that relies heavily on foreign trade. Exports, including engines and other machines, motor vehicles, and telecommunications equipment, account for more than 44% of GDP. Sweden enjoys a current account surplus of about 5% of GDP, which is one of the highest margins in Europe.

GDP IN COMPARISON – 2017

household consumption: 44.1% - 68% 39.1%

government consumption: 26% 17.3% 14.5%

investment in fixed capital: 24.9% 17.2% 42.7%

investment in inventories: 0.8% 0.1% 1.7%

exports of goods and service s: 45.3% 12.1% 20.4%

imports of goods and services: -41.1% -15% -18.4%

SWEDEN UNITED STATES CHINA

Basic Domestic Macroeconomic Relationships

Y

C

S I

T G

INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION GROWTH RATE - 2017

SWEDEN – 4.1%

UNITED STATES - 2.3%

CHINA - 6.1%

TAXES AND OTHER REVENUE RECEIVED BY THE GOVERNMENT – AS A % OF GDP

SWEDEN – 50.6%

UNITED STATES – 17.0%

CHINA - 21.3%

Total taxes and other revenues received by the national

personal and corporate income taxes

value added taxes

excise taxes

tariffs

Other revenues include social contributions - such as payments for social security and hospital insurance - grants, and net revenues from public enterprises.

EDUCATION EXPENDITURES - 2017

SWEDEN - 7.7% OF GDP

UNITED STATES - 5% OF GDP

CHINA - NA

BRIEF ECONOMIC HISTORY ORGANIZED CAPITALISM: 1870 - 1932

19th century

No feudal past

Communal cooperation in agricultural villages

Industrialization – 1870-1930’s

Export demand for Swedish iron ore & timber  Demand for Swedish industrial labor

Privatization of agricultural lands  Supply of labor - migration of farm labor to cities

HOWEVER

Supply of labor > Demand for labor

Industrial wages DROPPED below poverty levels

Mass emigration (25% of population) to United States

Creation of Swedish cooperative societies to address widespread Swedish poverty

1899 = Consumer Cooperative Union – national organization that operated retail stores and offered insurance policies – farmers’ coops and food coops

Cooperative (Co-op)

A business that is owned and democratically governed by its members, the people who use its products or services, or are employed by the business. 

PURPOSE: not to accumulate profit for investors, but to meet the goals and aspirations of its members. 

Any surplus generated by a co-op is reinvested in the business or returned to the members based on their use of its services. 

Membership in the co-op is obtained through the purchase of a member share in the business, which does not change in value (in contrast to publicly traded corporations) and entitles the member to one vote in matters that come before the members.

World War I  Boom / Bust Cycle and Even More Deterioration of Swedish Economy

1899 – Swedish Social Democratic Party (SAP) founded

promotes socialism

Won first parliamentary election

From its founding in 1889, the SAP has been committed to the creation of an egalitarian society. It has led Sweden’s government for most of the period since 1932.

The party suffered a split in 1917, when some members left and eventually formed the Left (Communist) Party.

From 1932 to 1976 (except for a brief period in 1936), the SAP held power continuously, sometimes in coalition with various groups on the left. By the time it left office in 1976, it had transformed Swedish society.

Implementing Ithe policy of folkhemmet (“people’s home”), the idea that society should provide a place of safety for the people, the SAP created one of the world’s most comprehensive systems of welfare.

Measures included allowances for children and for housing, health insurance, pensions, and a reform and expansion of the educational system.

This was largely the work of two SAP leaders—Per Albin Hansson, who served four terms as prime minister between 1932 and 1946, and Tage Erlander, who served as prime minister from 1946 to 1969.

Olof Palme, head of the SAP from 1969 to 1986 and twice prime minister (1969–76, 1982–86), worked to preserve the policies of his predecessors until he was assassinated in 1986, a crime that shocked the country

Rehn-Meidner Model

Sweden’s postwar welfare state had been built around a model designed economists Rudolf Meidner (1916-1996) and Gösta Rehn (1914-2005).

The model stressed

Keynesian fiscal policies,

centralized collective bargaining between unions and employers,

low inflation,

push for wage equalization through a “solidarity in wages” policy.

BACKGROUND TO REHN-MEIDNER MODEL

Primary argument:

The US/European KEYNESIAN strategy for fighting inflation in an economy approaching full employment is ineffective

WHY?

Profit margins are high when economy is a full employment and high AD

Soaring profits are a threat to price stability because HIGH EXPECTED PROFITS CREATES EXPECTATIONS OF CONTINUED GROWTHWAGES RISE (WAGE DRIFT) in manufacturing bubble economy

Incomes policy cannot prevent wage drift

Conflicts would develop between trade unions representing manufacturing workers vs. those in more competitive sectors

Secondary argument: An economy that is dependent on export earnings must maintain low and stable prices and wages.

How?

Wage solidarism and active labor management policies managed and implemented by the government

19

Solution to profit-wage-inflation cycle

Wage Solidarity: Active Labor Management Policies

Occupational retraining

Training to avoid being laid off

Relief work

Youth terams

Recruitment support

Cradle-to-grave welfare state programs

Universal health insurance system (1955)

Universal Public pension system (1959)

5 weeks paid holidays (1989)

3 month maternity leave (1945) expanded to 18-month general parental leave at 90% pay (1991)

90% of salary for unlimited sick leave

How to pay for the welfare programs:

Sweden has highest % GDP devoted to government spending, including transfer payments of any market economy

The rising trend of government transfers paid for by increased taxes or financed by cutbacks in other areas of government spending, notably infrastructure investment

Country Spending 2014 (includes defense, infrastructure, social programs) Transfers 2014
Sweden 51.5 27.1
Denmark 55.0 29.0
Norway 45.8 22.4
France 57.3 31.9
Italy 51.0 29.0
Germany 44.1 24.8
Canada 41.9 16.8
Finland 58.1 30.2
United Kingdom 43.8 21.9
United States 38.0 18.8
Japan 42.1 23.1

In order to raise a lot of income tax revenue, income tax rates in Scandinavian countries are rather high except for in Norway. Denmark’s top marginal effective income tax rate is 60.4 percent. Sweden’s is 56.4 percent. Norway’s top marginal tax rate is 39 percent.

Taxes in comparison

Scandinavian income taxes raise a lot of revenue because they are actually rather flat. In other words, they tax most people at these high rates, not just high-income taxpayers.

The top marginal tax rate of 56.9 percent in Sweden applies to all income over 1.5 times the average income in Sweden

From the American perspective, this means that all income over $75,000 (1.5 times the average income of about $50,000 in the United States) would be taxed at 60 percent.

Compare this to The United States. The top marginal tax rate of 46.8 percent (state average and federal combined rates) kicks in at 8.5 times the average U.S. income (around $400,000). Comparatively, few taxpayers in the United States face the top marginal rate.

High Value-Added Taxes

In addition to the high payroll and income taxes, all Scandinavian countries collect a significant amount of revenue from Value-added taxes (VATs). Value-added taxes are equivalent to sales taxes, but levied on businesses throughout the production process.

Denmark collects about 9.6 percent of GDP through the VAT, Norway collects about 7.8 percent, and Sweden collections about 9 percent of GDP. All three countries have VAT rates of 25 percent. The United States does not have a national sales tax or VAT. Instead, states levy sales taxes. The average rate across the country is about 7 percent.

The much lower rate only collects about 2 percent of U.S. GDP in revenue.

Corporate Taxes

Distribution of household net wealth

Swedish Wage Earner Funds (part of the Rehn-Meidner plan)

 to counteract the concentration of ownership which, from a general equality perspective, must be regarded as unacceptable;

to increase wage earners’ influence in economic life through ownership of capital;

and to facilitate the continuation of the solidaristic wage policy by a mechanism to deal with excess profits (which could also be seen as an element in lessening the concentration of capital).

Purpose of Wage Earner Funds

Workers as a united whole would collective own the investment funds

It would give all Swedish working people a share in the stock holdings of the country and a right to vote their shares of stock in determining the boards of directors of Swedish firms

It would allow representation of Swedish working people on corporate boards

It would make economic democracy possible

Financing the Wage Earner Funds

Tax of 20% on pre-tax profits exceeding one million SEK (about $150,000) or 6% of a firm's total payroll costs, whichever was higher, after appropriate allowance was made for inflation and other appropriations.

Paid by all Swedish and foreign companies

Tax of 0.2% on total payroll costs of all corporations, private and public.

Each of the WEFs got one-fifth of the revenues generated from these two sources, although an inflation- adjusted ceiling (set at 400 million SEK [about $60 million] for 1984) was imposed on each fund.

34