Scan barcode
rujein's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
- American policies are skewed to create relationships of dependency between different parties: spouses of a couple, employer-employee
- Women are dependent on men because family policies are weak, women who are taking care of their children must depend on their husbands
- Employees must work excessively because they depend on their employers for healthcare. Don’t find this convincing: many countries offer public healthcare but employees still work excessively.
- Swedish theory of love: authentic love and friendship are possible only between individuals who are independent and equal. —> Nordic nations make policies towards a single goal: to ensure independence, freedom, and opportunity for every member of society
- Author dismisses the argument that such policies work only in Nordic countries because they are homogenous, arguing that such policies may have emerged in a specific context but can still address challenges of other nations.
- Good quality of life, worker satisfaction and health, economic dynamism, and political freedom and stability are all interconnected.
- From the perspective of implementing the Nordic theory of love, focusing on the family is a mistake. A family will not function well as a team unless it is first composed of strong, self-sufficient individuals
- American family policies means more “supermoms” with high positions, but overall lower female labour force participation after age 25
- Various studies show that the ideal arrangement for women’s careers seems to be paid parental leaves that are generous but not too generous (less than two years or maybe even less than a year), sharing of parental leave and reductions of working hours with men
- Education can be addressed by a demand approach or a supply approach. Demand approach treats education like any other good, and parents will send their kids to school when the benefits are higher than the cost. The problem with this approach is that the party who reaps the benefit (child) is not the same party who bears the cost and makes the decision (parent), which makes the child dependent upon the parent
- Writer says high level of education for all is good, but Goodman says (in his book head hand heart) that the payoff of tertiary education for individuals is decreasing and it’s also not what society needs.
- Nordic kindergartens do not educate. They are of uniformly high quality, and teachers are highly educated.
- “School readiness” means that the school has to prepare for the students, rather than the other way around. Teacher selection and training are rigorous. Countries that perform best in PISA are those who invest most in their teachers. As a result, schools can be given more autonomy.
- Schools give extra support to students who need it, circumventing the inequality that arises with private tutoring.
- Healthcare insurance system based on employers greatly increases employees’ dependency on employers and cause them to stay with jobs that they don’t like, and causes spouses to be dependent on the working spouse.
- Section on healthcare seems to be criticism of America’s system more than anything and, given that it’s an easy target, not clear how the nordics are outstanding. Things like public healthcare and regulating drug prices are things that most countries already do.
bookgoblin83's review against another edition
4.0
I think as a Canadian I am the ideal audience for this book. I understand the American system well enough to be outraged on their behalf but enjoy some of those benefits that Nordic countries boast like free healthcare, good vacation and parental leave. Although even I was almost booking a one way ticket by the end of the book!
arfog's review
informative
slow-paced
4.0
Very informative read. Detailed and important information for American's specifically to read.
kristala's review
4.0
Informative and a great read, albeit slightly repetitive. Loved the balance between facts and personal views!
svreads's review against another edition
1.0
The premise of this book is a good one: Dear America, you're not as great as you think you are, and here's proof that Scandinavian countries do it better when it comes to healthcare and education systems (not that many Americans needed a book to tell them that).
For me, it's not the overall argument of the book I have a problem with. In fact, I was impressed with the well-researched evidence in support of national healthcare. I'm also not someone who thinks America is hands-down the best country in the world - I'm generally glad to live here, but I know we have a lot of problems, so, for a few pages anyway, I was "into" the book.
The problem for me begins when the author rambles on about her perceived notions of American life, and in particular, the experiences of American women - of which she is not. I wish I had bookmarked the exact page - I know it's towards the front of the book - when the author says that it makes total sense why women in America would constantly be seeking a well-paid spouse over a legitimately good life partner in light of the fact that healthcare costs are so high and maternity leave is only two weeks long. *Crickets* What? I don't know about every American woman, but I myself certainly didn't seek out the highest paid partner just because we have a messed up healthcare system, so I'm slightly miffed by that, but I can understand why someone may have that view if their only exposure to American women is New York City, where upward mobility is a part of every aspect of life, not just soulmate seeking. But what really gets my goat - to use a beloved Southern American colloquial phrase - is that the author seems to think that women in America are poor, anxious, depressed, embittered souls who would much rather live in a country like Finland where they can pursue every creative passion, rather than one like America, where we're expected to get married and raise children. I wouldn't say that's the case, by any means. I left my corporate job to start my own creative business because I value my creative passions. I'm in a committed relationship, and we have chosen to delay marriage and children because we would like to experience what life has to offer before choosing to make big life changes. We would most definitely like to have children, but we're not under any pressure to. I feel like author doesn't really understand the modern perspective or experience of a woman in America - many of these stereotypes seemed straight from the 1950s (women expected to stay home and take care of the children, etc.).
At the end of the day, I just couldn't get past these pages of stereotypes to enjoy the chapters providing practical examples of how America could take steps to reform it's healthcare and education systems. If you're going to go to the trouble to research decades worth of information from several countries on the impact of various programs, at least don't include stereotypes in the majority of the first 50 pages. It felt more like a Finnish woman wanting to prove that her country is indeed superior to America than a journalist who set out to find out more about a particular subject who wants to share her findings.
For me, it's not the overall argument of the book I have a problem with. In fact, I was impressed with the well-researched evidence in support of national healthcare. I'm also not someone who thinks America is hands-down the best country in the world - I'm generally glad to live here, but I know we have a lot of problems, so, for a few pages anyway, I was "into" the book.
The problem for me begins when the author rambles on about her perceived notions of American life, and in particular, the experiences of American women - of which she is not. I wish I had bookmarked the exact page - I know it's towards the front of the book - when the author says that it makes total sense why women in America would constantly be seeking a well-paid spouse over a legitimately good life partner in light of the fact that healthcare costs are so high and maternity leave is only two weeks long. *Crickets* What? I don't know about every American woman, but I myself certainly didn't seek out the highest paid partner just because we have a messed up healthcare system, so I'm slightly miffed by that, but I can understand why someone may have that view if their only exposure to American women is New York City, where upward mobility is a part of every aspect of life, not just soulmate seeking. But what really gets my goat - to use a beloved Southern American colloquial phrase - is that the author seems to think that women in America are poor, anxious, depressed, embittered souls who would much rather live in a country like Finland where they can pursue every creative passion, rather than one like America, where we're expected to get married and raise children. I wouldn't say that's the case, by any means. I left my corporate job to start my own creative business because I value my creative passions. I'm in a committed relationship, and we have chosen to delay marriage and children because we would like to experience what life has to offer before choosing to make big life changes. We would most definitely like to have children, but we're not under any pressure to. I feel like author doesn't really understand the modern perspective or experience of a woman in America - many of these stereotypes seemed straight from the 1950s (women expected to stay home and take care of the children, etc.).
At the end of the day, I just couldn't get past these pages of stereotypes to enjoy the chapters providing practical examples of how America could take steps to reform it's healthcare and education systems. If you're going to go to the trouble to research decades worth of information from several countries on the impact of various programs, at least don't include stereotypes in the majority of the first 50 pages. It felt more like a Finnish woman wanting to prove that her country is indeed superior to America than a journalist who set out to find out more about a particular subject who wants to share her findings.
stacy_wilson's review
4.0
A succinct and accessible explanation of the advantages of the Nordic countries over the United States.
darcyhendershott's review against another edition
3.0
This book was informative and showed a very unique perspective. I loved the ideas and think everyone should hear them and be open to them. However, a more appropriate title would have been "a comparison between the US and Finland." The complaints were valid, but at many times, it seemed as though it was a bit out of touch. Also, I really wasn't expecting this to be so political and dense with statistics and numbers.