Easy. You Americans look to Nordic countries and are envious of them. These nations consistently top global rankings for happiness, healthcare, education, and work-life balance. They also have strong safety nets, universal healthcare, and progressive social policies.

You want to call them socialist because of deep-rooted ideological divides. For Americans, the word "socialism" is a red flag, evoking images of government control and loss of personal freedom. The term is always misused in America, because you are desperate to associate these countries with authoritarianism or totalitarianism when in reality, they have successful mixed economies that blend capitalism with social welfare programs. They combine market-driven growth with a strong social safety net.

America uses "Socialist!!" to scare people or delegitimize policies they disagree with. When Americans see the high taxes and extensive social programs in Nordic countries, it's easy to frame them as the opposite of the American dream, which is often defined by individualism and minimal government interference.

But the truth is, Nordic countries thrive by balancing individual freedom with collective well-being. Their model isn’t perfect, but their citizens have access to the things you Americans can only dream of, free healthcare, quality education, and a solid social safety net, to name a very few.

How bout you learn from Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Iceland? America would be so much better.

The political and economic structures of each of those countries are quite distinctive, so it does not make much sense to treat them as a homogenous entity.

I'll cut to the chase, as I anticipate what you really want to talk about. Norway, by some measures the richest and "happiest" nation state in the world, developed a state-directed model of capitalism to develop and exploit its share of North Sea mineral wealth from the 1960s onwards. It eschewed the unbridled pursuit of profit for future investment and wealth sharing. Today it has the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world and one of the most equal, egalitarian, and meritocratic societies.

The United Kingdom, which shared in the same source of that wealth, opted for a more liberal economic model in which private corporations received and kept most of the profit. Higher tax revenues from oil and gas were generally used to fund income tax breaks rather than invested by the state for the future. As a result the UK does not have a huge sovereign wealth fund and has a rather more unequal society than Norway, which is correlated to worse health outcomes and measures of social harmony.

It's strange that Denmark has very low unemployment, 2.5% and Sweden is almost 10%

I believe Denmark has a more restrictive immigration policy.

I agree.

Because "Socialism" has more than one definition. It's used as short hand for their safety net, and their economy is more mixed. Government has more of a hand in some sectors of the economy.

Some people like to use the term socialist in a derogatory sense, implying that the Nordic countries don't have freedom, or that taxes there are too high.

Right. Those nations have market based economies, with heavy taxes & social programs.

I hear Australia is nice, except for all the Kangaroo attacks. 🤣

Because any sort of social safety net implemented by the government is viewed as “socialist” in most western countries.

And they are the happiest countries in the world.

[media=https://youtu.be/EDUuj93CcwA]
[media=https://youtu.be/hdQZLOzxBEw]