Does Swedish-style socialism end poverty?

I admit it. I'm a geek. I will look up information just to look it up, for my own knowledge and benefit.

This morning, I was pondering socialism. Is it truly better? Conservatives point to the largest models of socialism as we know it...China, Russia, and Cuba. Liberals point to successful models, such as in Sweden.

Since I already knew about the socialist models of China, Russia, and Cuba, and the decrepid situation their poor live in, I decided to study up on the Swedish model.

I came across two things...first, I came across people who insisted that everyone in Sweden was middle class due its socialist model, and how wonderful it was because there were also wealthy people in Sweden.

Then I came across the actual statistics. Poverty STILL PERSISTS in Sweden. In fact, so much so that they keep decrying it and keep trying to do something about it. And the percentage of those in poverty hasn't changed since before they went socialist. While the poor might get better health care and education, there is also a lot less upward mobility than in the United States. In another set of statistics, the Swedish poor live about the same as the American poor in terms of "stuff". I think the most disparaging number was those who owned a clothes dryer...very few people of poverty status in Sweden own a dryer as compared to American poor (although a near equal number own a clothes washer...I guess more people in Sweden line dry).

Of course, it also helps to know someone who lives in Sweden. A friend of mine, born here in the United States, followed his lady love over there. Today, they have two children, and we keep in touch via SKYPE.

The truth is...he doesn't live any better over there than he did over here, except now he has a wife who works and is a good cook. They don't eat out very often because its too expensive, even during economic upswings. His kids had never been to Pizza Hut until the DH took them when all the guys went to visit. Their home is heated by wood because the other alternatives are just too expensive. And recently, some friends moved in with them. Times there are just too tough, as it is here.

Socialism does not make everyone equally poor except in the poorest of countries...so conservatives are wrong on that theory. And in the richest of countries, it doesn't make everyone middle class, so liberals are wrong on that theory, too.

Its a sweet sentiment that Swedish style socialists in the United States want everyone to be middle class. But the truth is, poverty still exists there as it does here. Their lives aren't any better than ours. And the American government has a worse track record of handling our money than the Swedish government.

Sorry, but that's the truth.

So...what model worked the best at reducing poverty? Oddly enough, it was the British-owned Hong Kong style of capitalism. There was the occasional poverty-stricken person, but taxes were low, incomes were high, and it was easy to either find a job or start up your own business. Of course, Hong Kong is now owned by China....and every since China re-took possession of it, the entire country has turned to a limited form of capitalism...and now more people in China can afford to purchase a car, a home, Western-style fashions....odd, isn't it? Capitalism works...if you let it.