By Simon Hedlin
Monday, June 06, 2016
Bernie Sanders’s bid for the White House is all but over.
Hillary Clinton has won 3 million more votes and more than 250 more pledged
delegates than Sanders. But at this stage of the race, the Vermont senator’s
ideas arguably pose a greater threat to Clinton than his candidacy.
Sanders is trying to make Clinton pick a progressive
running mate. He is planning to organize his legions of supporters at the
Democratic National Convention in July to push the former secretary of state to
adopt as many of his leftist proposals as possible. And he has already spurred
a down-ballot movement; at least 30 congressional candidates are running under
his banner in this electoral cycle.
Many Clinton backers worry that Sanders is moving the
party too far to the left, making the Democratic nominee less electable. But
aside from electoral politics, another problem is that much of Sanders’ policy
agenda, in an attempt to turn the U.S. into a Northern European welfare state,
is ill-informed and would put America at great risk, if ever implemented.
Considering all the praise that Sanders, a
self-proclaimed democratic socialist, and his supporters have heaped on the
leftist countries of Scandinavia in particular, they should look to Sweden for
critical policy lessons. Sweden has already tried numerous of Sanders’ ideas,
and unfortunately many of the senator’s proposals overlook the country’s
successes and repeat its failures.
Start with the minimum wage. Sanders has proposed more
than doubling the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. Sweden does not have a
national minimum wage, but collective bargaining has resulted in notoriously
high entry-level wages that have contributed to an unemployment rate of 7.4%,
which is above the OECD average and also two percentage points higher than in
America.
In the U.S., the youth are among those at greatest risk
of losing out from Sanders’ blanket pay hike since their primary competitive
advantage is lower reservation wages. Today nearly half of all workers paid at
or below the federal minimum wage are under age 25. While doubling their pay
would increase living standards for some of them, others would risk losing
their jobs, bringing America’s youth unemployment at 11.6% closer to Sweden’s
at 20.3%.
Another enchanting idea put forward by the Vermont
senator is a financial transaction tax. The objectives, to reduce excessive
risk-taking and raise tax revenues, have an obvious appeal. But supporting
evidence is scant. Sweden tried a financial transaction tax in the 1980s, but
poorly performing and highly unpopular, it was abolished within a decade.
One study found that the Swedish tax did not reduce
volatility, but instead caused a drop in equity prices. Moreover, some 60% of
the volume of the 11 most-traded Swedish stocks migrated abroad. In the end,
the fall in capital gains taxes did entirely offset the new revenue from the
financial transaction tax, which illustrates the perils of introducing a
similar tax in America.
Sanders has also proposed making public colleges and
universities tuition-free. The purpose is to relieve students of debt and make
higher education more accessible. However, Swedish student outcomes suggest
that free education would likely under-deliver. Although eliminating tuition
would reduce loan needs for some students, the expected impact on debt burden
should not be overestimated. Room, board and travel are a few of the many
expenses that the typical college student faces. This helps explain how it is
possible that in Sweden, where college is tuition-free, many graduates leave
school under surprisingly poor conditions. One report, for instance, estimated
that some 85% of Swedish students graduate with debt, compared with only 50% in
the U.S.
Tuition, if used correctly, redistributes resources from
the wealthiest families to the poorest students, who are in need full-ride
scholarships (that cover all expenses) and who would not be able to enroll even
in the absence of teaching fees. Perhaps it should therefore not be surprising
that tertiary enrollment, in fact, is lower in Sweden than in America. Sanders’
plan is costly, would likely have a limited effect on student debt and risks
reducing access to higher education for the neediest students.
Not only has Sanders adopted some of Sweden’s worst
policies, but he has also ignored some of its best.
Take free trade. The Vermont senator seeks to reverse
trade agreements such as NAFTA and CAFTA based on the claim that free trade
pushes down wages and ships jobs overseas. But Sweden, one of the leading
voices for free trade in the post-war era, proves that trade liberalization is
compatible with high wages and job growth. In addition, Scandinavia’s largest
country exemplifies how freer trade boosts living standards by offering people
access to much cheaper goods and services.
Of course, a few of Sanders’ Scandinavian-style policies
are sound. Major investments in American infrastructure are long overdue. A
federal paid parental leave scheme would bring the U.S. closer to parity with
other wealthy countries. Providing universal healthcare is also a lofty goal.
But getting things done is a different story.
This points to a recurring problem with the Sanders
platform: his most progressive positions tend to either be poorly informed or
unlikely to be realized. Sanders supporters would be wise to learn from Sweden:
abandon enchanting ideas that have not worked, and be bold enough to adopt
those that have been successful.
No comments:
Post a Comment