[JoshBB]

With all the facts and examples out there, I'm really surprised people still use the same dressed-up phrases without actually forming ones' own opinions on it. We aren't discussing dictatorships such as USSR or North Korea here, I mean countries like the nordic ones where democratic socialism has made their economies very strong while also protecting the poorest.

Let's use Norway for example here, arguably the most socialist of the Scandinavian countries. They have the 1st highest Human Development Index (HDI) in the world.. of 0.944. The UK has the 14th highest HDI (of 0.907). Not an awful lot of difference, but it goes to show that socialism does not crush aspiration here, you could argue from these statistics that encourages it moreso than the capitalist model.

A pretty big difference though, is the inequality in income. Continuing with Norway as an example, they have the 1st lowest level in the world - a Gini coefficient of just 23.5 - this is classed as a 'low' level of inequality. The UK however has a Gini Coefficient of 31.6, only 33rd in the world. We are classed as a 'medium' level of inequality.

And as a last indicator of economic 'strength', we'll look at budget surplus and deficits. Norway has the highest surplus in the world - of 16.6%. The UK, however, has a deficit of 4% (please correct me if this is wrong). The main reason for this is the higher levels of taxation in Norway - the taxation that supposedly drives away big business and makes you end up with bigger deficits overall.. myth busted here, I guess.

So why do people still say Socialism is 'economically illiterate'?