Why Sweden is doomed

The thoughts that people are responsible for their own lives and that parents are responsible for their children are unthinkable in Sweden. Swedes cannot think such thoughts.

Sweden has had a good run, but one thing, on its own, will destroy it. Unfortunately, the mere thought of doing something about it cannot be thought. This mental blockage is a recent phenomenon, but there is no realistic way out.

In 1850, Sweden was one of the poorest countries in Europe. Then, after reforms, in particular in the 1860s, Sweden turned to laissez-faire economics, with a tax pressure of around 5–6 percent of GDP, secure property rights, and very few regulations. The economy took off like a rocket, and already in 1920, Sweden was one of the wealthiest countries in the world. The salary of an industrial worker was 3 ½ times higher in the late 1930s compared to at the beginning of the 1860s, in spite of a massive reduction in working hours.

Unfortunately, beginning in 1887, Conservatives, Social Liberals (think John Rawls and Woodrow Wilson), and Social Democrats began gradually taxing and regulating the economy. By 1970, Sweden had a full-on welfare state and an economy with sluggish growth rates, a situation that has continued for about 55 years.

My paternal grandmother was born in the house in the picture in 1888. Her brother added the section to the right of the porch in the 1930s. Eight siblings lived with their parents in a house that was about 40 square meters, with an outdoor toilet and a well for water.

At the time, people behaved as Homo sapiens have behaved since we emerged as a species. First, young people work hard to develop skills and prove themselves, which is particularly important for young men. Only then do a man and a woman form a family, marry, and have children. Their material welfare is their responsibility, although relatives might chip in. Their children are also their responsibility, although relatives might again chip in.

As Sweden grew wealthier, the Social Democrats taxed us harder and handed us more benefits. Around 1970, the tax pressure reached 50 percent of GDP, and a new mindset took hold: the idea that everyone should be guaranteed a “decent standard of living”. In particular, “we”—society, that is, the never-mentioned taxpayer—should take care of children.

Out of approximately 10.5 million inhabitants, in 2023, there were 701,953 adults living on benefits in full-time equivalents.

What is meant by a “decent standard of living”? In the minds of Swedes, this means that a person should have the living standard of a full-time low-income earner. If the individual or couple has children, each child should have their own room, and the family should receive additional benefits.

This means that the effective tax rate of a low-income earner is, at all times, about 100 percent. That is, the difference between working and not working is non-existent.

For about 50 years, the thought that parents should take care of themselves and their children has been unthinkable. Virtually no Swedes can think that thought.

A few days ago, a 1,900-page-long report from an official public enquiry was presented. It suggests capping benefits in an arcane way so that “it pays to work”. Benefits for a single person without children should be capped at about 80 percent of a low-income earner. To that, of course, there are the children, and their needs, that “society” should provide for. Even though the changes are minimal and irrelevant to the problem at hand, the opposition howls in disagreement. The current situation is depicted in the picture below for a single person with two children to the left, a couple with two children to the right. Green is income; the other colors represent benefits. One Swedish krona is worth about 10 US cents.

If you have many children, the total benefits may reach 2 ½ times what is depicted. A Sudanese friend of mine stopped going to the mosque in disgust. Somali men boast about divorcing their wives according to secular laws; they remain married according to Muslim law. That way, social services give them a second apartment since they have dependent children. They then rent this apartment out on the black market. Apparently, these kinds of scams have been going on since around 1990.

Since the middle of the 18^th century, and until recently, the Swedish population was fully literate. Today, after almost 40 years of mass immigration from third-world countries, we have almost 800,000 people between 16 and 65 who are illiterate in Sweden, and we are heading for one million.

On the face of it, Sweden’s immigration and integration problems seem easy to solve, virtually trivial. First, the minimum standard of living should be set at sleeping in barracks, three meals per day, and nothing for children, as they are the responsibility of their parents.

Then, say, cut benefits by 20-25 percentage points every six months. Cut taxes on work and savings by the full amount. Maybe a million people would leave Sweden for their home countries, although the number is, of course, uncertain. However, getting “free stuff” in Sweden has been and remains the most important pull factor for immigration through asylum claims.

Many who “cannot find a job” today would indeed find one and become upstanding and gradually integrating citizens.

Is sleeping in barracks too drastic? It would be a living standard much superior to what most Swedes had 150 years ago. In any case, regardless of the number of children, for incentives to work, the difference in the standard of living between working and receiving benefits must be massive. Twice the living standard is not enough because working is hard; it is work. For starters, it takes ten hours out of your day when commutes are included. A factor of three difference is likely the minimum to aim for.

Again, these thoughts are unthinkable in Sweden. Everyone has to have a decent standard of living. And what about the poor children? “Society” must take care of them.

Instead of such reforms, what will happen is that Sweden receives an additional few million asylum seekers from third-world countries, many of whom are illiterate in their mother tongue. Those who arrive and those already here will have many more children than the native population. For starters, if you are unqualified, through the benefits that I have discussed, the Swedish government pays you to have children, the more the better, the higher your standard of living.