University that is funded from public

[Somewhere_]

Finland.

According to Cato Institute, which measured the economic (and personal) freedom indexes of every country, Finland actually has an economic freedom rating of 7.84 while the US has an economic freedom rating of 7.81. Finland is actually more economically free than the US. Finland is not a socialist country.

 

[Kanzler]

According to Cato Institute, which measured the economic (and personal) freedom indexes of every country, Finland actually has an economic freedom rating of 7.84 while the US has an economic freedom rating of 7.81. Finland is actually more economically free than the US. Finland is not a socialist country.

Socialism =/= economic slavery. The Economic Freedom Index uses the following five major criteria: size of government, legal system and property rights, sound money, freedom to trade internationally, and regulation. Finland might have a bigger government, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did all the remaining things better than the United States.

 

[Somewhere_]

Socialism =/= economic slavery. The Economic Freedom Index uses the following five major criteria: size of government, legal system and property rights, sound money, freedom to trade internationally, and regulation. Finland might have a bigger government, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did all the remaining things better than the United States.

That was not my argument. The economic freedom index measures how little or how much government interferes in the economy and those criterion you listed there. I know measure economic freedom makes socialism sound like economic slavery, but that was not the intention... the measurement is literally called the economic freedom index lol

My point still stands: Finland is more economically free than the United States, and therefore cannot be socialist.

 

[gimmepie]

That was not my argument. The economic freedom index measures how little or how much government interferes in the economy and those criterion you listed there. I know measure economic freedom makes socialism sound like economic slavery, but that was not the intention... the measurement is literally called the economic freedom index lol

My point still stands: Finland is more economically free than the United States, and therefore cannot be socialist.

The Nordic Model is basically Democratic Socialism. There's a few differences but not enough that I think it matters overly much.

Cuba has (had?) a 99% literacy rate though if you want something more in line with the traditional idea.

 

[killer-curry]

But without the government involved?
Not thanks. That just sounds like private education by another name.

Private universities rely on the community's contributions to function, and in return, provide the community an education. Technically private universities are owned by individuals, but they have to listen to what their students and whomever is paying them/donating to them want.

Our university is totally independent from Government financial support but it still known as a private university because public university can only owned by Government, for Malaysia.

In my opinion, even though the University is mainly funded by public, but rules and regulations are needed to be followed by the Government and also global organization. Also, the university is a non-profit organisation, they received funds from public and give back contribution to the community.

Yes for the second quote as well, our university is priorities student for giving the courses even some with less amount of students intake. The university also aims for better education achievements and rankings and help students to prepare and suit up for becoming a more potential and better youth to contribute back to society such as village projects, surveys, student exchange, university collaborations and also competitions.

Basically when I scrolled down the page , the argument went on with different type of social culture and types of government. For me, it is hard to make university to be funded by the public just to provide more affordable education and more potential future young generations, because it requires a huge amount of money to invest but it depends on the people like us who have the believe to make a university that is for people themselves.

 

[Somewhere_]

The Nordic Model is basically Democratic Socialism. There's a few differences but not enough that I think it matters overly much.

Cuba has (had?) a 99% literacy rate though if you want something more in line with the traditional idea.

They have massive welfare states and higher income taxes, so I suppose it counts as Democratic Socialism. But the US has really high corporate tax rates and massive portions of mandatory spending going towards social welfare programs (and a lower EFI rating), but apparently the US is not Democratic Socialist?

What I'm saying is- welfare states and higher taxes in a certain area make up such little criterion for Democratic Socialism that the ideology is redundant. What are the other criterion that define Democratic Socialism?

 

[gimmepie]

They have massive welfare states and higher income taxes, so I suppose it counts as Democratic Socialism. But the US has really high corporate tax rates and massive portions of mandatory spending going towards social welfare programs (and a lower EFI rating), but apparently the US is not Democratic Socialist?

What I'm saying is- welfare states and higher taxes in a certain area make up such little criterion for Democratic Socialism that the ideology is redundant. What are the other criterion that define Democratic Socialism?

-Democratic Government (obviously)
-Socialised welfare
-Socialised healthcare/emergency services
-Nationalisation of key industries/resources

Those are some fairly key ones.
I don't want to get too off topic here though, remember we're talking about education as described by the OP above all else.

 

[Kanzler]

That was not my argument. The economic freedom index measures how little or how much government interferes in the economy and those criterion you listed there. I know measure economic freedom makes socialism sound like economic slavery, but that was not the intention... the measurement is literally called the economic freedom index lol

My point still stands: Finland is more economically free than the United States, and therefore cannot be socialist.

My point was that socialism =/= not economically free ~ economic slavery. I just used the term slavery to stand in for "not free" but I guess that was overkill, although I'm still not sure what the appropriate word for the opposite of freedom would be. In any case, just because there's an extensive welfare state and public ownership doesn't mean that the economy is automatically unfree. Socialism does not equal not having economic freedom, it has much more to do with having a strong public sector. I'm sure conservatives would have you believe that socialism = not having economic freedoms, but there's nothing in the definition of socialism that would suggest that there can't be economic freedom.

I feel as if you're biased to the point of having to use the no true scotsman argument - Finland has more economic freedom (is a better economy) than the US so it couldn't possibly be socialist, perhaps because that would suggest that a socialist system could somehow do better than a more pure capitalist system? My takeaway wouldn't be that Finland couldn't be socialist, but that Finland does socialism AND capitalism better than the US.

 

[Somewhere_]

My point was that socialism =/= not economically free ~ economic slavery. I just used the term slavery to stand in for "not free" but I guess that was overkill, although I'm still not sure what the appropriate word for the opposite of freedom would be. In any case, just because there's an extensive welfare state and public ownership doesn't mean that the economy is automatically unfree. Socialism does not equal not having economic freedom, it has much more to do with having a strong public sector. I'm sure conservatives would have you believe that socialism = not having economic freedoms, but there's nothing in the definition of socialism that would suggest that there can't be economic freedom.

I feel as if you're biased to the point of having to use the no true scotsman argument - Finland has more economic freedom (is a better economy) than the US so it couldn't possibly be socialist, perhaps because that would suggest that a socialist system could somehow do better than a more pure capitalist system? My takeaway wouldn't be that Finland couldn't be socialist, but that Finland does socialism AND capitalism better than the US.

The index does not define having a better economy with economic freedom. It measures economic freedom (lack of government intervention, sound property rights, etc). Finland is not socialist, regardless of how its economy is preforming.