Amerikaner som läser om det svenska pensionssystemet i New York Times får en något annan version än de europeiska läsarna av samma artikel i International Herald Tribune:

International Herald Tribune: "The orange envelope contains a statement of her benefits under a five-year-old restructuring of this country's generous state pension plan that, like the changes that President George W. Bush wants to introduce in the U.S. Social Security system, includes a personal investment account. The question is: Will she get by on what the envelope offers?		New York Times: "The orange envelope she expects to receive within the next few weeks will contain a statement of her rights under a five-year-old restructuring of this country's still-generous state pension program that - like the changes President Bush wants to introduce in Social Security - includes a personal investment account. The question is, will she be able to get by on what the envelope offers or not?
As in other countries where private accounts have been introduced in various forms, the answer seems to be ambiguous.		As in other lands where private accounts have been introduced in various forms, the answer seems ambiguous. For all the uncertainty over such accounts, what may be most surprising to Americans is that Sweden, long known for its cradle-to-grave welfare state, has already embraced a system that partly resembles the White House proposals.
'I felt everything was going to be simple. This is Sweden!,' Graveleij said ..." Swedish lesson on privatizing pensions		'I felt everything was going to be simple; this is Sweden,' Ms. Graveleij said ..." Sweden's Take on Private Pensions

Ingen stor sak - men vad betyder det att NY Times framhålller schablonen om the nanny state?

Egentligen borde artikeln fungera som en nyansering. Men frågan är om man ändå inte bara förstärker bilden. Christer Elmehagen på AMF faller i artikeln in i kören - fast något mer tvetydigt formulerat: "In the United States, you have a history of taking responsibility. We are educated in a completely different landscape where the government has been our big brother."

Big brother, Storebror, är ju egentligen den grymme diktatorn som ser allt (från George Orwells roman 1984). Men nog verkar det som Elmehagen mer syftar på en "nanny" eller förnumstig storebrorsa som vill ordna det för en.

Ändå framgår det ju av artikeln att en majoritet - 3 av 5 miljoner - verkligen gjort egna val i pensionssystemet. Hur "styrda" är vi då?

Vil man få sig en tankeställare om synen på svensken som en slav under kollektivet kan man titta på World values survey - en global undersökning av vilka värden som präglar medborgarna i olika länder.

På "The Ingelhart map" (i frames på sajten - direktlänk här) är svenskar världens mest individualistiska folk. Vi ligger absolut längst ut på skalan över "emphasis on subjective well-being, self-expression" - i kontrast mot värden som framhåller sammanhållning kring samhälle, släkt eller familj.


Permalänk | Andra som länkat hit (0)