Has anyone tried this?

we're going through a massive organised crime wave at the moment.

coincidentally we've also been dismantling our social systems since the 90s and put a shitload of immigrants in the same poor neighbourhoods away from everyone else.

i'm sure it's unrelated.

In Australia we created ghettos in the 80s and 90s. It wasn't great.
I'm sure someone will be along in a moment to remind us that these ghettos were just one link in the chain of shit things Europeans did to first Australians.
coincidentally we've also been dismantling our social systems since the 90s
80's. Like, 1980.
- I think that he's saying that the Nordic countries have been dismantling their social systems. 1980 was when it really picked steam in the US. But conservative politicians had been trying to dismantle them even before FDR was dead.
  
  Good point, sorry, just knee-jerk hating on Reagan. :)
  
  As one should. Carry on.

There's a reason that Toronto is labelled one of the top safest cities in the world as well.

Toronto is becoming unaffordable for the working class. High cost of living is what is breaking the US too. I don't really know why people want to seek asylum in the west. I guess if you're okay sharing the floor of a room with a few other people on sleeping pads then the rest of the world must be an event worse shithole. You have to work two hours just to afford lunch.
My daughter has a boyfriend who lives on the outskirts of London. He was shocked at the cost of things in fucking Cincinnati. Ohio is in the cheaper half of US states.
- For people seeking asylum, the choices are usually "kinda shitty conditions in a nice city" vs "abject poverty and life threatening conditions back home". It's not really a question which one is better. Toronto has issues, but the tap water won't give you cholera, nobody is going to stab you for your bag of rice, and that room you are sharing is not going to be bombed.
  There's a lot of work to be done to make it a city that's livable for everyone, but please don't fall for bullshit narratives.
  
  I get it. I grew up with a best friend who lived with 9 people in a one bedroom apartment, I played marbles with him and his brothers so many times in the early '80s. It was better than their homeland.
  The US is predatory in the healthcare industry, the housing industry, the food industry and the education industry, but that is a generalization. If there's a narrative, it's that the American dream is anything but a lottery at this point. At least it is safer than much of the world, for now. Outside of a dozen or so gang riddled cities, the murder rates are pretty low.

Iceland be much like this...

The only reason some people don’t like the Nordic model is because it has the word Nordic in it. If instead it was the Marxist model, I am sure they’d say it sprung forth from gods own asshole

Edit again, downvote brigade of Marxists butthurt on being called out, lol

well and they also don't like that the nordic countries are profiteers of neocolonialism. but still worlds better than the Anglophone model of profiteering from neocolonialism and the home country gets no benefit, just a small handful of rich people.
- wait, _neo_colonialism? we did do some minor superpower stuff in the 1700s together with the rest of europe, but what have we been doing recently?
  
  The "Global North" is largely de-industrialized and mainly functions by exporting industrial Capital to the "Global South." The US is chief among these Global North countries as world Hegemon, but the Nordics do it too, especially with regards to predatory debt traps through IMF loans. Hudson's Super-Imperialism goes over this, but is US-focused.
  
  the nordics are heavily industrialized though. our economies are mostly based on exporting metals, minerals and wood, as well as products made thereof, including heavy machinery, medical-grade steel, oil, and so on. yes the IMF sucks for having a destabilizing effect but that's not really something an area with half the population of canada can do much about. we don't have that much influence on the global stage.
  
  I think you should read these articles by The Guardian and Al Jazeera respectively. Norway, for example, has one of the largest Sovereign Wealth Funds. At a country-level, the Nordics heavily financially invest in and profit off of countries in the Global South, like investment bankers. This in turn expropriates large amounts of money, which are used to fund safety nets. The welfare in the Nordics is funded by the Global South.
  
  yes, norway is an insanely rich oil nation. the fund is called "oljefondet". it comes from oil sales.
  as for SDI, since it's normalised and based on development, the nordic countries falling is only natural, since emerging economies are doing the stuff we did in the 70s. it doesn't mean we're getting worse, it means they're rapidly getting better. ideally, SDI regresses to the mean.
  
  I'm not sure how you can understand that the Nordics act like investment bankers, without acknowledging that this means the Nordics essentially fund their safety nets off of unequal exchange and exploitation of the Global South. It isn't about influence, it's about parasitism.
  
  i am open to it but i've yet to see the numbers. so far it's been generalisations covering the entire northern hemisphere and semi-related articles. and i'm not really convinced of aljazeera's objectivity since they uncritically ran an article claiming the swedish state kidnaps children.
  fact is, i know where my tax money goes. our budgets are all public. those are the numbers i've seen.
- Countries have been dicks to each other for fucking ever. Get over it. Many other counties did and are now doing just fine. Look at India or China or Brazil. The fact is that many countries which cry about colonialism still use it to distract their poor people from the corruption of their governments and leaders. There’s near overlap between being most corrupt on a corruption index and receiving the most aid from other countries
  
  you need to read some history books about how those corrupt governments got into place. what you are describing is the shift in overt fuckery (Leopold chopping off hands) to covert fuckery (interfering in foreign elections to get favorable corrupt officials installed) associated with neocolonialism. the solution isn't to "get over it" which… wow what a fuckin' insensitive thing to say about slavery and the deaths of thousands or millions. it's to pay reparations and build a workable future instead of burning the world to the ground
  
  I am not being insensitive, I am saying that there are nations who suffered and are doing well now because their leaders know how to govern.
  A lot of the cry bully stuff Marxists do is to create guilt and make people in democratic nations hate their governments. They know that their corrupt leaders are not going to fix anything. If the leaders cared about their people, they’d figure out a way to work with the rest of the world, like the leaders in China, India, Brazil etc
  
  praising india? wildly corrupt government and worse monpolys than anywhere else
  
  i noticed that too. none of those three countries have a good long standing record for doing right by their citizens or the earth at large
  
  Why you are coming at Marxists and praising China in the same breath? You know Marxists want what China has? A government that responds to the interests of the working class instead of the capitalists, where rent can be as low as 300/mo for a 2bd, and new homes averaging ~50K/2bd in cities the size of NYC? And occasionally jails or executes a few of them just to keep them on their toes?
  
  I am intellectually honest about what China has achieved
  
  You know the Communist Party of China is Marxist right?
One reason to downvote is actually that Marxism doesn't have huge marketing buzz in favour of it. It's not a label that would increase popularity.
- Look, on the one hand I know they don’t have popular support. To me it’s less about supporting some hipster culture simply because it’s small, but more about getting annoyed by an idea being posited as inherently correct or morally superior