Immigration Crisis or an Economic Opportunity?

[iceaura]

Let's just reiterate what the solution to this problem is: 100% total elimination of the Welfare State.

Beginning by cutting taxes for rich people - the solution for all problems. Or am I guessing wrong?

IMO, Progressive Socialist "Paradise" Sweden is going to end up just like us in the USA, and for the exact same reasons.

Well if it's for the same reasons it can't be from being a welfare State - the US isn't anywhere near Sweden in that respect, and never has been. Not even back in the prosperity times, before Reagan and the SS boost and "welfare reform", was the US ever a Sweden.

Meanwhile, it's too late to use Sweden as a warning example in your crusade here. They've already demonstrated the benefits and prosperity available via decent government, and any screwups from here on cannot erase the history.

Meanwhile, socialism has no more to do with foolish immigration policy than the capitalism that the Swedish economy is built on (and probably much less). Why would you blame the one and not the other?

After all, the primary driver of bad immigration policy in most countries - such as the US - is the influence of corporate capitalism. Are you sure Sweden is some kind of wild exception?

 

[Michael]

It's too late. They've already demonstrated the benefits and prosperity available, and any screwups from here on cannot erase the history.

LOL

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei
The United Socialist Party of Venezuela

Yup, history is repeat with various examples of socialism (and other forms of Authoritarianism the Nation State has taken). Oh, but that's right, in your opinion there are No True Scotsmen.

 

[Michael]

Incidentally......

..... Progressive Socialism, destroying society through oxymoron, so you don't have to.....

 

[iceaura]

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei
The United Socialist Party of Venezuela

Yup, history is repeat with various examples of socialism (and other forms of Authoritarianism the Nation State has taken).

So you have three examples of countries that did not follow Sweden's model, and came to grief (probably - jury still out on Venezuela, which is in the early stages of whatever it's going to be). What's your point?

None of those are Sweden. Sweden is fundamentally capitalist, like the Nazis, and a relatively small country that has mostly avoided war, like Venezuela, and has a cold northern climate, like the Soviet Union, but other than that the similarities are not obvious - what exactly were you trying to suggest?

Sweden's example is 150 years of prosperity. That would be worth attaining, one would think.

 

[Michael]

None of those are Sweden. Sweden is fundamentally capitalist, like the Nazis, and a relatively small country that has mostly avoided war, like Venezuela, and has a cold northern climate, like the Soviet Union, but other than that the similarities are not obvious - what exactly were you trying to suggest?

Sweden's example is 150 years of prosperity. That would be worth attaining, one would think.

During those 150 years, prosperity was attained during the times when Sweden had the freest markets. But this is the thing, freedom leads to inequality. Thus the oscillation back towards authoritarianism (never you mind WWI and WWII). Which, I suppose, worked out well enough, when Sweden was a monoculture of honest hardworking individuals, with a relatively average to high general IQ (for whatever reasons). That Sweden no longer lives here.

We'll see where neo-Sweden ends up. The Age of Oil Sweden. Progressive Socialist Sweden. Unicorn rainbow barfing Sweden. Yes, let's see what becomes of this new Sweden.

Good old fashion Empiricism.
Oh oh oh.... and mental note: Sweden didn't have Ronald Reagan. Something to think about. Nor a D. Trump. Not even a War Harpy.


See, not only is there the problem with Socialism being inherently immoral, but worse than that - is the massive distortion in the price mechanism. Which is insane. Perhaps the most important human invention. Oh well, bye bye Sweden. Nice knowing you.


How ironic, the only thing that can save Sweden now, is ending the Welfare State. Like a final balancing of some hitherto then unknown mystical mathematical equation
LOL
My guess is, reality will balance it for the Swedes and then, the Welfare State will come to an end, just not in the fashion one would have hoped. Oh, and us to. There's only so many refugees to go around. Didn't you know? In the future, Americans will be screaming for their fair share of refugees!

LOL

 

[Michael]

You can live well for a time, just steal.
It's not sustainable though.
-- Generation Baby

 

[Michael]

An aside.

Obviously the assassinations of 5+ police officers in Dallas is all over the news (and I don't even watch TV). Now, let's stop and recall that a 17 year unarmed white kid (technically a child) was gunned down by Police, just two weeks ago. Not a peep in the news. You know, because: Narrative. Now an innocent black man was shot in his car in front of his wife and child. In somewhat similar fashion.

What did the News do? Well, that would require backing up to what was coming out in the News at the time. Crooked Hillary was found to have violated several laws - some of which have landed other mere peons in prison (or escaped to Russia - how ironic is that). How coincidental, the News starts running stories of White on Black crime, riles up the public to the point of mass hysteria - never mentions the fact the police also gunned down a White kid a week earlier, and Wa-La, an incident so heinous just happens to occur (one could even say instigated) and just that like magic, War Harpy and her crimes are completely erased from the consciousness of Grade 6 reading level America's (if you even want to call it that).

You know what's the craziest thing, to be required a State Drivers Licence to drive on public roads is unconstitutional. What's even more so? The calls for even more police state. Just watch. This is not a lose-lose. It's a win-lose. Some are very happy this incident occurred and will be happen when copy cats follow.


So, as this plays out, lets just remember: Government is the only group of humans in society with the legal ability to initiate violence against morally innocent humans. Socialism (Progressive or otherwise) is a form of State Authoritarianism which inherently relies on the use of this Monopoly on Violence for the supposed "social good". This is an oxymoron.

In a monoculture of hard working like minded honest moderate to high IQ people - sure, it'll create a good level of prosperity. Inequality. Collapse for a while. Cause horrendous wars. Recover and continue to generate some level of continuing prosperity. This is how we've lurched forward for centuries. It doesn't work so well in multicultreal societies. Because at the root of Socialism sits violence and a hatred of others who are perceived as having more. Such as black Americans maybe resenting white Americans. Or, as I have personally seen in Australia, white Australians who resented Asian Australians. Even calling to restrict them from University programs. You know, because its not fair!? Of course, this is never said in public. Or some Germans who resented other Germans - who were perceived as have more prosperity, oh and they just happened to have a measurably higher average IQ and where Jewish.


When this incident is long forgotten about - remember this: You Sweden, will end up just like us in the USA, and for the same reasons. It didn't have to be this way. We CAN work with one another without relying on initiating violence against morally innocent humans. It is possible. The technology is here. I'd suggest, begin by peacefully parenting. Make sure that your children understand, the lessons regarding: don't hit, don't steal, don't lie, are meant for life.

 

[iceaura]

During those 150 years, prosperity was attained during the times when Sweden had the freest markets

About the same as now. The prosperity started growing with the government takeover of the central banking functions, and the growth has lasted until now.

We'll see where neo-Sweden ends up. The Age of Oil Sweden. Progressive Socialist Sweden.

Sweden's economy is mostly capitalist. Sweden produces very little oil, and is less affected by the oil and its politics than almost any other modern industrial economy. They are working hard to reduce their use of oil even more - they think having to import it harms them, and of course global warming is already obvious and significant in the Arctic.

How coincidental, the News starts running stories of White on Black crime, riles up the public to the point of mass hysteria - never mentions the fact the police also gunned down a White kid a week earlier, and Wa-La, an incident so heinous just happens to occur (one could even say instigated) and just that like magic, War Harpy and her crimes
- - -
You know what's the craziest thing, to be required a State Drivers Licence to drive on public roads is unconstitutional.
- - -
Because at the root of Socialism sits violence and a hatred of others who are perceived as having more. Such as black Americans maybe resenting white Americans

Ok, this has left your normal beach of sandcastle wingnuttery and is entering the ocean of real derangement. Take your meds, turn the radio to classical music, get some sleep.

 

[Michael]

About the same as now. The prosperity started growing with the government takeover of the central banking functions, and the growth has lasted until now.

I see you've ventured off into Unicorn Land again, here's some actual analysis: How Modern Sweden Profits from the Success of Its Free-Market History.

The fact is, Progressives gave us Central Banking. Progressives also gave us Income Tax, supposedly to 'help' the worker by 'redistributing' wealth from the rich bankers to the poor workers, in reality, it is used to tax labor in order to redistribute to the Government itself, with a little trickling back to the poor and a lot used to bail out the rich.

The fact is, Central Banking destroyed the German economy.
The fact is, our Central Bankers destroyed our economy, leading to the Great Depression and culminating in World War II.
The fact is, our Central Bankers did it again, and are destroying our economy as we speak. Probably leading us into a Greater Depression and possibly World War III. Or something akin to never-ending-war, which we're already engaged in.

What you see as 'prosperity' is no different than the roaring-20s. It's a Central Banking/Central Planned bubble. Sometimes these bubbles take awhile to play out. Particularly when pigging backing off the industrial revolution and oil exploitation. And while they are playing out, it may seem as if society is becoming prosperous. Progressive rag Salon.com wrote this in 2013: Hugo Chavez’s economic miracle. One big Progressive unicorn rainbow barf about how "Socialism" (which is to say Statist Authoritarianism) is so wuuuunderful for the 'economy'. You know, because employing violence against morally innocent "Citizens" is 'good for the economy' - or so it then seemed. Business Insider writes this in 2016: Venezuela is on the brink of a 'political and economic meltdown'.


But, don't you worry, we have an experiment in progress as we speak. Progressive Poster-Child Sweden. That Socialist Mecca in the North. Part of the "Scandinavian Miracle". Oh.... but they ran out of children to sell debt obligations on now didn't they? Gee, what's a Socialistic Mecca going to do? I mean, it takes a lot of work to pay for all the Free-Shit the Progressive politicians promised everyone. Kind of hard to raise a family when you have taxes to pay / free-shit to repay. Ohhhhh.... I know, let's import a bunch of workers. It's sort of a win-win (for business, slum-lords and government, sucks if you're a young Swede looking for a job or a place to rent). But that's okay, because: Free-Shit.

Let's see if we aren't reading an article with a title that reads something along the lines of this: Sweden is on the brink of a 'political and economic meltdown'. And there you'll be, claiming Sweden isn't a "Real" Socialistic country. Nope, no True Scotsmen around there here parts....

LOL

 

[iceaura]

"About the same as now. The prosperity started growing with the government takeover of the central banking functions, and the growth has lasted until now."
I see you've ventured off into Unicorn Land again, here's some actual analysis:
How Modern Sweden Profits from the Success of Its Free-Market History.

Your link there agrees completely with my statement, and it also provides you with whatever facts you might have needed to recognize the accuracy of my earlier point: Sweden's economy is and has been for 150 years now built largely on free market capitalism. This free market capitalism flourished, and produced enviable prosperity, beginning with the establishment of a government run central bank and operating under close regulation of the financial industry, high income taxes, government mediated trade relationships with foreign countries, and so forth. It is not primarily a socialist economy. It is - or has been, anyway, for 150 years - a well-governed capitalist economy. And it's the well-governed part, not the capitalist part, that's currently under threat.

Did you read it? It's your link.

Furthermore: You regard recent events in Sweden as providing a test of recent economic developments, so your link is also useful in providing us with a brief reference to what those developments are. Here is the quote:

In recent years, Swedish lawmakers have begun slowly privatizing chunks of their socialized sectors such as healthcare, social security, and education. Last year, Reason magazine pointed out that private health insurance has exploded in a country where cancer patients may wait up to a year for treatment in the state-run system. This trend has grown. Sweden, furthermore, has begun outsourcing education to private providers

So we will see how this recent privatization of certain government functions affects 150 years of uninterrupted prosperity. Or as you put it:

But, don't you worry, we have an experiment in progress as we speak. Progressive Poster-Child Sweden.

But if events don't seem to match your predictions for the wonderful improvements to be had via privatizing the education of children etc, you have a fallback position: your link you relied on appears to contain a fair amount of error and bs, and you can always say you were misled by it. For example, we have this more or less intentionally deceptive paragraph, designed to sucker the rubes:

In 2007, Professor Mark J. Perry from George Mason University pointed out that if Sweden were to be admitted as a 51st state to the Union, it would be the poorest state in terms of unemployment and median household income. Yes, even poorer than Mississippi. In fact Sweden’s current welfare state suppresses household incomes so effectively for Swedes that a 2012 IEA studyfound that American Swedes have roughly the same unemployment rate as Swedes in Sweden yet earn, on average, 53 percent more annually.

You don't have to admit you were dumb enough to fall for that - you can always claim you were skimming, not really paying attention, and just missed what those guys were up to.

Or you could approach the whole thing from the standard moral and ethical position of the fair choice: you can choose which of the two you want to live in, Mississippi or Sweden, and your worst enemy will assign you your demographic role and identity.

Which would you choose, for yourself and your family?

 

[Michael]

Your link there agrees completely with my statement, and it also provides you with whatever facts you might have needed to recognize the accuracy of my earlier point: Sweden's economy is and has been for 150 years now built largely on free market capitalism. This free market capitalism flourished, and produced enviable prosperity, beginning with the establishment of a government run central bank and operating under close regulation of the financial industry, high income taxes, government mediated trade relationships with foreign countries, and so forth. It is not primarily a socialist economy. It is - or has been, anyway, for 150 years - a well-governed capitalist economy. And it's the well-governed part, not the capitalist part, that's currently under threat.

Did you read it? It's your link.

Furthermore: You regard recent events in Sweden as providing a test of recent economic developments, so your link is also useful in providing us with a brief reference to what those developments are. Here is the quote: So we will see how this recent privatization of certain government functions affects 150 years of uninterrupted prosperity. Or as you put it:
But if events don't seem to match your predictions for the wonderful improvements to be had via privatizing the education of children etc, you have a fallback position: your link you relied on appears to contain a fair amount of error and bs, and you can always say you were misled by it. For example, we have this more or less intentionally deceptive paragraph, designed to sucker the rubes: You don't have to admit you were dumb enough to fall for that - you can always claim you were skimming, not really paying attention, and just missed what those guys were up to.

Or you could approach the whole thing from the standard moral and ethical position of the fair choice: you can choose which of the two you want to live in, Mississippi or Sweden, and your worst enemy will assign you your demographic role and identity.

Which would you choose, for yourself and your family?

Which part of oscillating back and forth did you miss? Sweden historically oscillates back and forth from a freer market, that generates wealth, and then back towards socialism, which redistributes it. This obviously works well enough in a monoculture that has an ethnicity based on honesty, hard work, rewarding those both financially and socially - as well as an average IQ of at least 100. Believe it or not, but many societies have cultures built on lying, cheating, stealing. Where hard work is for suckers. Where taking as much as you can get your hands on is rewarded. Oh, and many have IQs that average around 65 - 85, with 85 being the ideal predator human. Intelligent and motivated enough to steal, too stupid to care about the long term consequences.

As for modern day Progressive Sweden. Many of the problems seen today, started in the 1970s. Yes, as Sweden goes broke, they are attempting to revert back towards privatization and a more freer form of capitalism, either implicitly understanding that the needed efficiency will better allocated limited resources, or just plain going broke/not enough tax money. Either way, this is the pattern Sweden has followed for quite some time.

So, sorry, but Sweden (and Germany) will retain their status as Progressive Socialists and we will watch to see how the so-called Scandinavian Miracle Economies plays out.


Empiricism, sometimes a bitch.
-- Generation X




Note: Least you forget, our Central Bank is a Progressive public institution. It caused the Great Depression. In Germany, it destroyed their economy and ushered in WWII. Culminating in the nuclear obliteration of two Japanese cities as well as the extermination of countless humans. Likewise, the USSR, Communist China, Cuba, Vietnam, North Korea and countless other centrally planned socialistic countries (with Central Banks) destroyed their economies and starved millions of humans to death.

Sweden is a mixed economy - unfortunately for them, the illusion of prosperity created by pumping cheap energy out of the ground (in Russia and the ME) allowed their politicians to lie their society far to far towards the progressive socialistic Left, and today they are paying the price for their forefathers immorality. Let's see if their Progressive ideas of importing human labor will work for them - my guess is, no.

 

[iceaura]

Which part of oscillating back and forth did you miss? Sweden historically oscillates back and forth from a freer market, that generates wealth, and then back towards socialism, which redistributes it.

This is my statement: "The prosperity started growing with the government takeover of the central banking functions, and the growth has lasted until now." It was completely correct, according to your link.

So, sorry, but Sweden (and Germany) will retain their status as Progressive Socialists and we will watch to see how the so-called Scandinavian Miracle Economies plays out.

They've already played out, for 150 and 65 years, respectively. Nothing that happens now can change that.

Note: Least you forget, our Central Bank is a Progressive public institution. It caused the Great Depression

No, it didn't.

Sweden is a mixed economy - unfortunately for them, the illusion of prosperity created by pumping cheap energy out of the ground (in Russia and the ME)

It wasn't an illusion. It was (and is) prosperity. And it was built on free market capitalism, competently governed starting 150 years ago with the establishment of a well-regulated central bank.
If you are looking for a modern economy that has not involved at least some exploitation of crude oil and its many products, you can give up - there aren't any. Some created prosperity, some didn't. Sweden's did.

Let's see if their Progressive ideas of importing human labor will work for them - my guess is, no.

That's free market corporate capitalism in action, and the question is whether it's being governed well. If you don't regulate such corporate capitalist behavior, it will do great harm - no doubt about that.

Believe it or not, but many societies have cultures built on lying, cheating, stealing. Where hard work is for suckers. Where taking as much as you can get your hands on is rewarded.

Nothing brings prosperity to such societies. So?

 

[Michael]

This is my statement: "The prosperity started growing with the government takeover of the central banking functions, and the growth has lasted until now." It was completely correct, according to your link.

Prosperity did not start growing with the government takeover and centralization of banking. Which we've also previously posted. In fact, private banking was often preferred because of the utter incompetence in central banking. We're already went through this.


Fact: Progressive Socialists gave us Central Banking in the USA, which artificially expanded the monetary base, generating the roaring 20s and culminating in the Great Depression. You have a knack for noticing the roaring 20s, but ignoring the massive Great Depressions that follow.

So? We agree the Central Banks are "Progressive" Institutions.

Fact: Progressives gave us Progressive Income Tax. Of course they did. How else could they make their 'fiat' currency worth anything? Why go out and make and honest living when you can steal. Or in this case, force your Tax Chattel to pay a tax to the State for the privilege of working. This has a nice little added bonus for the Government - as it can then sell bonds on the labor of future unborn Tax Chattel to buy votes today. But, there comes a day, when the Chattel are worked to the point of not being able to pay, well, that's okay: Refugees will do! It's a Win-Win for the State and Big Business. See, it takes a lot of personal attention, time and effort (and money) to grow new Tax Chattel from the ground up. But a Refugee is almost like magic .... *POOF* right there, a new labor cog, both to drive down low-end labor-hours (which is happening) and also to generate Tax for the State.


Let's watch as Progressive Socialism finally plays out in its final act in Sweden. It's my guess, Progressive Paradise Sweden will be the first European Nation State to collapse.


There's only one reasonable and peaceful solution now: End the welfare State.

 

[Michael]

That's free market corporate capitalism in action,

LOL

Except all Western markets are highly regulated by the State and we don't use capital, we use debt-based fiat currency.

 

[iceaura]

Prosperity did not start growing with the government takeover and centralization of banking.

Sweden's did. You posted the time and link yourself, remember?

Fact: Progressive Socialists gave us Central Banking in the USA,

No, Michael, private bankers and financiers are not socialists. They are capitalists. By definition. Words do have meanings.

When a consortium of private bankers and financiers pushed the US government into setting up the current central bank, it wasn't even owned by the US government. It still isn't. The US government does not own the US central bank. Private, capitalist, for-profit investors own it. When capital investment for private profit establishes ownership, the term used is "capitalism". That's what the word means.

The only State owned central bank in the US is the State bank of North Dakota. That is also the bank that suffered the least in the crash of '08, because it was competently State managed and therefore hadn't participated in the Wall Street derivative bubble - thereby protecting some of the State's economy and saving the residents of North Dakota considerable misery to this day.

Except all Western markets are highly regulated by the State

The Wall Street derivative markets in the US from 2000 until 2008 were hardly regulated by the State at all. The financial regulations imposed after the lessons of the Great Depression, which oversaw two full generations of financial stability and the greatest growth in prosperity the world had ever seen, had been repealed in stages beginning in the 1980s (marked by the S&L crash) and culminating in 1999 and 2000, and the enforcement of what thin oversight rules remained had been largely suspended under pressure by the private capitalist interests involved.

 

[Michael]

Sweden's did. You posted the time and link yourself, remember?

Free Banking in Sweden 1830–1903: Experience and Debate.

No, Michael, private bankers and financiers are not socialists. They are capitalists. By definition. Words do have meanings.

Capitalists requite capital, which requires a money, not a fiat currency.

When a consortium of private bankers and financiers pushed the US government into setting up the current central bank, it wasn't even owned by the US government. It still isn't. The US government does not own the US central bank. Private, capitalist, for-profit investors own it. When capital investment for private profit establishes ownership, the term used is "capitalism". That's what the word means.

The USD is not a free market derived money. It's a fiat currency. Fiat means by decry. Or another way to put it is: by the Government's special legal right to initiate violence against it's morally innocent Citizens. The US Government forces it's property / Citizens to pay a tax on their income (including labor, which in effect is a form of Slavery) using this currency. Being forced to pay a tax in toilet paper will make toilet paper into a fiat currency - but not a store of value, not capital, and not money. See: Zimbabwe.

You can thank the Progressives of the late 1800s and early 1900s. They gave us our Central Bank, and with it the Great Depression. In Germany they destroyed their economy which directly led to Fascism. It should be noted, our current for of Government is really no different than Fascistism. All we need is Dear Leader. And, my guess, we'll get one - for the very same reasons the Germans got theirs, or the Communists. It's an inevitability of basing society on the use of violence against morally innocent humans, for the so-called common good and/or other nonsensical abstractions.

Oh, by the way, you can refer to the Dear Leader as a Progressive or a Reactionary, an adjective doesn't change what the thing is.

 

[iceaura]

Free Banking in Sweden 1830–1903: Experience and Debate.

The Swedish government took over Sweden's central bank about 150 years ago, and Sweden's prosperity growth began then and continues to this day. That is historical fact. You linked it yourself.

Capitalists requite capital, which requires a money, not a fiat currency.

The medium of exchange by which the capital is denominated or measured is irrelevant. You can use bitcoin denominated baseball cards to float your IPO if you want to, it's still capitalism. See your dictionary, or any decent introductory economics textbook.

The USD is not a free market derived money. It's a fiat currency. Fiat means by decry.

All money - as money - is fiat derived; anything exchanged for its intrinsic value is a commodity, and the exchange is a barter.

You can thank the Progressives of the late 1800s and early 1900s. They gave us our Central Bank, and with it the Great Depression

The wealthy and conservative capitalist bankers and financiers who pushed the US into forming the current privately owned US central bank succeeded well before before WWI. The Great Depression came more than a decade after WWI.

Oh, by the way, you can refer to the Dear Leader as a Progressive or a Reactionary, an adjective doesn't change what the thing is

1) That's "noun", not "adjective". You are naming a category.
2) It changes what you can say. It's hard to make sense when your terms don't mean anything.

 

[Michael]

The only State owned central bank in the US is the State bank of North Dakota. That is also the bank that suffered the least in the crash of '08, because it was competently State managed and therefore hadn't participated in the Wall Street derivative bubble - thereby protecting some of the State's economy and saving the residents of North Dakota considerable misery to this day.

A good lesson as to why we do better when the Federal Government is limited. We do even better when there's competition in currency. If we had numerous competing currencies, then we also wouldn't have had the problems we face - which were caused by central planners at our central bank artificially creating a bubble.

The Wall Street derivative markets in the US from 2000 until 2008 were hardly regulated by the State at all. The financial regulations imposed after the lessons of the Great Depression, which oversaw two full generations of financial stability and the greatest growth in prosperity the world had ever seen, had been repealed in stages beginning in the 1980s (marked by the S&L crash) and culminating in 1999 and 2000, and the enforcement of what thin oversight rules remained had been largely suspended under pressure by the private capitalist interests involved.

Forbes: The Financial Deregulation That Never Was.
Reason: The Myth of Financial Deregulation.
WSJ: Another 'Deregulation' Myth.

Oh, but let me guess, the Ghost of Reagan did it. To the Japanese too. Yes, I seem to recall Reagan was their PM at one point. Never mind that at the heart of our hyper-regulated financial system sits a Central Bank, and a whole lot of military, internal and external, to enforce it's fiat currency.

 

[Michael]

iceaura,

Well, this is why we have empiricism. So that we can actually propose a hypothesis, gather empirical data, analyze the data and draw a conclusion. I hypothesize that Progressive "Democratic" Socialistic Paradise Post-Child Sweden, will be one of the first Western nations to economically collapse.

Now, let's see what happens to their economy.


In the mean time, I'll update this thread with some evidence.

 

[Michael]

1) That's "noun", not "adjective". You are naming a category.

I agree. Progressive Socialism is a category within another category called: Statist Authoritarianism.

See? We can agree

Want to form a little syllogism?

All Progressive Socialism is Statist Authoritarianism.
Sweden's Government is a Progressive Socialism.
Therefor, Sweden is Statist Authoritarianism.

If I recall correctly this is a: AII-1, unconditionally valid argument