Our Prime Minster, Matti Vanhanen, is in California dreaming of winter days back home in snowy rainy Finland. While there, he’s rubbing elbows with the Governator himself, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Of the topics being discussed…

Schwarzenegger expressed interest particularly in Finland’s car tax reform which is to favour low-emission models. The Governor said that he is interested in following the impact of the reform on the consumers’ behaviour.

Vanhanen promised to keep him informed of the potential effects of the emission-based car tax in Finland.

Yes, I’m sure Californians will leap at the opportunity to copy Finland, by paying nearly double-the-market-price for their automobile purchases. Right!

I suspect that either, Arnold has taken the American talent for meaningless small talk to an extreme level…or maybe he’s smoking something that he should really share with the rest of us.

“He [Schwarzenegger] praised Finland’s ability to make its own solutions and decisions”, Vanhanen noted.

Keep dreaming. Holiday is almost over LOL!

Few people know that Finland—Helsinki, in particular—is probably the gothiest place on Earth. One might ask, did Finland’s Goths arrive centuries-ago seeking refuge from Attila? Or did they move directly from Gotland? Nobody really knows their origins, but Saturday nights downtown can be a real costume party.

Sadly, the inventor and inspiration of this macabre fashion statement, the goddess of gothic garb herself, died recently in Hollywood. Maila Nurmi, the former TV personality known as Vampira, was 85.

Her real name was Maila Elizabeth Syrjaniemi (later changed to Maila Nurmi) and she was born in Petsamo, Finland (now Pechenga, Russia) on Dec. 11, 1922. At age 2, she and her family emigrated to Ohio, in search of a better life.

RIP, Vampira.

…but he’s also wrong about a few things.

The Minister of Finance, Jyrki Katainen, is sparring righteously with opposition members in Parliament over a review of the European Union’s stability program for Finland. On his mind are pressing issues, such as the aging population, quality of schools and funding of general healthcare. In Katainen’s words:

Väestön ikääntymisen myötä laadukkaiden ja kattavien hyvinvointipalveluiden – päiväkotien, koulujen ja terveydenhuollon – järjestäminen on jatkossa entistä haasteellisempaa.

A challenge indeed. To ensure future viability, Katainen addresses a problem that has plagued Finland since time eternal: Investment capital leaves for foreign shores or becomes diluted internally. In the past, it was due to plunderings by Sweden and Imperial Russia. In current times, it is due to falsely conceived ideologies.

An obvious step in the right direction has already been taken by eliminating the unpopular wealth tax. Now Katainen aims to chop the equally unpopular inheritance tax. Each of these have been major incentives for keeping money out of Finland. At this point in the economic cycle, it is extremely important that investment capital stays intact, and in the country. Otherwise it will only cause the impending economic decline to become worse, and employment to soar.

Unfortunately, the usual band of opposition naysayers only offers scathing criticisms. The SDP’s Jukka Gustafsson, Eero Heinäluoma and Kari Rajamäki, along with the Left Alliance’s Martti Korhonen, see fit to continue diluting Finland’s dwindled wealth. In all fairness though, they probably believe it to be helping the lower strata of society.

However, taking one person’s wealth is not going to make another person less poor in the long-run—in fact, the opposite is more likely to be true. That’s why I’m surprised to read that the Greens’ Anne Sinnemäki, one of my favorite parliamentarians with whom I wouldn’t mind a short romp if the lighting were right, unexpectedly broke ranks with Katainen:

Heinäluoma is right in saying that the combination in which there is no wealth tax, and in which the aim is to lift the inheritance tax on corporate wealth, is a bad one.

Upon first reading, my impression was: Apparently she’s been brainwashed by comrad Heinäluoma, a student from the marxist school of class envy. But after thinking about it, I now see where Jyrki Katainen is completely wrong. What I didn’t tell you above—and to what Anni alludes—is that he favors eliminating the inheritance tax on “corporate assets and farm and forest land.”

I’ll admit that it’s a logical approach. After all, nobody benefits if Finnish corporations are divested by their owners and assets delivered offshore to avoid the tax; jobs get lost that way. And paying subsidies to farmers just so they can pay their inheritance taxes also makes no sense; Finland doesn’t really need to continue that Ponzi game.

But to really make things right and convince us that he’s not just a tool for the upper crust of society, he should seek to eliminate inheritance taxes for EVERYONE. Not just for those who can afford to restructure their holdings to avoid them. So Jyrki, if you want to attain god-status among the Finland for Thought crowd, then koita uudestaan!

I don’t get this sport at all, but it’s existed for hundreds- and possibly even thousands- of-years, so maybe I shouldn’t be surprised that it still goes on. I’ve read that everyone from LA gangs to rednecks in the southern United States involve themselves in this activity. Earlier this year, some NFL football players were convicted of running a major dogfighting operation on a large, secluded tract of land bought specially for their bloody venture. And now four-people from southern Finland are to be charged in an unrelated case:

Finnish police launched an investigation and quickly made arrests after the British Broadcasting Corporation informed them in July that an undercover reported had witnessed a dogfight in Finland.

I like dogs…little friendly ones that are sort of smart. And despite not being gay yet, I even like poodles! —but perhaps not of the boisterous and snappy variety. Big friendly dogs are ok too, I suppose. However, I could never warm-up to an aggressive attack dog that might suffer from a momentary lapse of reason and chew my nose off while I’m sleeping. There’s a fine line between feed and feeder, you know.

Unfortunately, I had two-negative encounters with dogs this year. In both cases, the owners let their not-so-little monsters roam untethered; and suddenly I became the object of their aggressions. Luckily, in both cases, administering a few hard kicks saved me from serious bacterial infections. The best defense is a good offense in such a case. I’m just glad I never encountered a pack of trained fighting dogs after digging their way out of the kennel to go on a people-eating rampage.

Any thoughts from dog-people out there? Has anyone’s poodle been eaten by a pit bull? Or visa versa? Has anyone been eaten by a pit bull? Or visa versa?

Finland’s 15-year-olds are incredible! They are really some of the smartest teenagers in the world, and by my observations they are much more open and worldly than their parents who lived under difficult ideology-shaped conditions in the shadow of the Soviet Union. So what makes these kids such academic high achievers?

Having been born Finnish, I like to attribute it to genetics…but when reality descends upon my momentary loftiness, I realize that maybe the cold climate and boring lifestyle is more to credit. It makes studying so much easier than anywhere else. The lack of distractions is actually one of my own favorite reasons for spending time in Finland; I can really get some work done!

Even Finland’s recent mass murderer in Jokela was a studious sort. By now we all know that his readings included Nietzsche, Kant, Huxley… I won’t delve into any dangerous psychological analysis here—some short exposure to Pavlov many-years-ago, and my mouth still waters every time I hear a bell ring.

However, I do find it interesting that another one of his favorites was Plato. In those rare moments when Plato wasn’t pegging young boys in the ass, he was busy arranging the ‘state’ into three discernible parts: philosopher-kings, soldiers and merchants. Generally, philosopher-kings rule, soldiers protect, and merchants ensure the economic viability of the state.

You can find Finland’s philosopher-kings in places like Espoo. They are the ruling elite who vacation in sunny locations around the globe (many rule corporations, not the state itself; I don’t think Plato had enough foresight to envision corporations as an extension of the state) and naturally there are plenty of soldiers everywhere, too. But where is the merchant class in Finland?

Of course it exists, but its membership is small. The post-war years saw a rise in collectivist thinking, punishingly-high taxation and socialist economic structures, leading to an environment of discrimination—and possibly even human rights abuses which plague the country to this day. Generally speaking, anyone who aspired to become successful sought safer abode for himself abroad.

It’s a tragedy, because these are precisely the people who would invest their time and talents into productive enterprises, and thereby provide jobs for everyone else. Instead, Finland now has a lackluster and overpriced domestic economy, and is highly dependent on foreign employers. It’s too bad for today’s PISA conquerors. Despite their hard work, when considering purchasing power, they can look forward to being among the lowest-paid smart people in Europe.

I can’t believe hockey player Jere Karalahti is still in jail on drug charges. I’m not convinced that he’s guilty of anything, and it gets me thinking about drug policy in the Nordics.

What I don’t understand is that professional sports stars, like ones who compete in ice hockey, rugby, football, auto racing, boxing and even ski jumping, can have multiple concussions and other devastating head injuries; yet it’s so natural to think, “It’s OK because those injuries were suffered while playing sports. Carry on fearless warrior!” Nevermind that some of them will no longer be among the sharper pencils in the drawer…not that all of them were to begin with.

Whereas I don’t know anything specific about Jere’s case, when an average Pekka Jääkiekko wants to relax with his buddies and snuffle a few lines of white powder on a Saturday night, many of us are programmed to think, “Oh no, we can’t have THAT!” But sports head injuries are OK.

Of course, I’m being facetious by even remotely suggesting that the normal outcome of playing sports or using drugs results in permanent brain injuries. In either case, the chance is remote. Most sportsmen recover from their injuries, and the vast majority of recreational drug users never have problems in the first place. But why is there such a double standard?

We in Europe can learn from the follies of the United States, which has been using anti-drug propaganda for several decades now to justify its War on Drugs, a sustained effort to fund the prison industry. There are more people in US jails than in Russia and China combined. It’s a real human rights mess. That’s not to say we don’t have our own embarrassing practices here—albeit unrelated to prisons and drugs—but at least we’re not on the verge of needing to colonize the moon to secure more prison real estate.
.
.

.
.
Most amazingly, American workers even prostitute themselves by offering bodily fluid samples for their corporate bosses to inspect. And the US sports industry is on the warpath with ridiculous testing regiments of its own for athletes. It’s such an embarrassing and unnecessary procedure for participants. The politically connected drug testing industry doesn’t seem to mind though.

Yet by all observations, these measures aren’t stopping anyone from doing illegal drugs. In fact, Americans love drugs more than ever! The passion spans all socio-economic strata, professions and age groups. It seems to abide well with the American work hard & play hard ethic. The sad part is that, whereas most people’s lives aren’t being harmed by the drugs themselves, they are instead impeded by the prison sentences, interrupted careers and other legal troubles associated with drug policies.

Now, none of this is meant to imply that drugs are wonderful. The above-mentioned powders have addiction rates and cause destructive illnesses just like alcohol; the chances of being afflicted are small but exist nonetheless. But let’s remember, there’s also a chance of suffering debilitating injuries while riding a bicycle—those little Styrofoam helmets might be concrete-resistant, but they’re not concrete-proof—or parachuting, hang gliding or cliff climbing for that matter. Life is full of risk choices.

The biggest danger that I see, aside from the legal troubles, is the possibility of ingesting a mixture containing something found in the cabinet under the kitchen sink. You just never know what some unscrupulous dealer might have used to dilute the product. Maybe he was short on baking flour, but too lazy to run to the store? Out comes the carpet cleanser. The chance of impurity is probably more harmful than the drug itself.

Given this pitfall, and the fact that keeping drugs illegal only raises profits and encourages more sales and usage (it’s probably the biggest business in America), why not follow the Swiss example of providing those with serious drug ‘desires’ a rationed assortment of whatever makes them happiest—after all, isn’t life about being happy? Surely it can’t only be about punishing each other for our differing preferences.

So to really seal our place in history as being part of the enlightened Nordics, let’s take the entire drug market away from greedy criminals and put it where it belongs: The government.

We can begin by opening a sister-monopoly to the famous Alko, Finland’s governmental alcohol pusher. The new enterprise can be named Narko; hence, together they’ll form the Alko-Narko Alliance. The new monopoly can have the same high prices, narrow selection and limited opening hours as its older sibling. Naturally, it will also have government workers who’ll occasionally strike for higher pay. Rest assured, we can even continue to enjoy the long cues before holidays.

And best yet: when the European Commission again censures Finland for its anti-competitive practices, we can defensively retort: “We need Narko to control drug addiction!” But this time, it might actually be an honest statement.

You said it Elvis!

Despite a recent gaffe regarding Finland’s gun legislation—law which has served Finland trouble-free for many decades—our Prime Minister who is the oft-proclaimed Sexiest Man in Finland(TM), might have accidentally hit it squarely this time when talking about the recent school shooting in Jokela:

According to Vanhanen, basic childrearing is the job of parents, but broad cooperation is needed to identify children who are alienated or have behavioural problems.

Ah yes, it is the “job of the parents.” How true and how obvious. It reminds me of recent years, when certain cultural and political forces—spearheaded by the decidedly ‘eccentric’ President of Finland—would have liked us to believe that non-traditional family settings should be encouraged using our tax monies. Parental leave for fathers of infants was a cornerstone of that campaign.

What the recent incident reminds us, is the time when fathers need to be around their children—boys in particular—is not during infancy; rather, they need to be there during the teen years. No amount of misguided social engineering is going to change that very basic rule of nature.

I’ll stop short of suggesting that the new government should begin issuing edicts concerning how everyone should live, since I’m sure people can figure that part out on their own. But I’m confident that I speak for many people in Finland, who believe that any policies which deviate from natural human behavior should be cast aside. There’s simply nothing that thousands-of-years of human evolution haven’t already taught us.

Before we discuss illegal police searches, here’s an interesting side note to introduce the topic: In Finland, the Names Act limits parents’ choices in naming their offspring; only names with historical and ethnic relevance are accepted as valid entries. In this case, parents were denied their preference, so they sued in the The European Court of Human Rights and won…

The European Court of Human Rights has delivered a judgement on a violation of Article 8 (the right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human rights, following the refusal of the Finnish authorities to register the forename Axl Mick for the applicants’ son.

I assume this is an amalgam of the names Axl Rose and Mick Jagger. But only the parents know for sure.

Whereas the Names Act has been eased somewhat since 1999 when this case was first brought to The Court, there might be reason to believe that Finland is in conflict with Article 8 on another, perhaps more serious ground. Therefore, I would like to direct your attention to Article 8 of The European Convention on Human Rights, to which Finland is a signatory:

ARTICLE 8

1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Imagine that you are stopped for suspicion of speeding, and the police demand to follow you home and rifle-through your personal files and data. Then, everything from pay records to investment and bank statements are used for determining the amount your fine should be.

In the United States, this would be considered “Illegal Search and Seizure” by police. The right to privacy is guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads:

Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Obviously, Finland is not the United States, so its residents can’t benefit from Fourth Amendment protections. But Finland did sign the aforementioned European Convention of Human Rights, which guarantees everyone “the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right…”

The wording of Article 8 seems remarkably similar to the Fourth Amendment and is apparently meant to span an even broader range of circumstances. After all, The European Court of Human Rights determined that the naming of a person’s child is covered under Article 8′s definition. So, perhaps it is no big stretch to assume that a person’s personal financial data is also covered.

But that’s not all. Let’s consider that Article 8 of the the European Convention of Human Rights is grounded in Article 12 of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Finland is also a signatory. It reads:

Article 12

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Of course, for the most part, this “interference with privacy” in Finland is done electronically; not via paper correspondence. Nonetheless, it’s an invasion of privacy. And in my opinion, the practice breaches both, Articles 8 & 12 of their respective conventions. It will be interesting to see if the newly elected Parliament addresses this impropriety or whether it’s yet another matter that needs to be tested by The European Court of Human Rights.

After all, if you’re an educated and talented professional who is considering a move to Finland, wouldn’t you expect to receive all the human rights protections granted to you by the European Union and United Nations?

And on a more personal level, would you want your private financial details closely examined by the average traffic cop? For a speeding ticket?

If you are interested in further reading, here is an excellent reference on this topic and more.

The issue of Finland’s unpopular TV fees keeps popping up. First YLE’s chairman of the board and several other officials get caught shirking on their payments. Now the Ministress of Communications, Suvi Lindén, is trying to convince us that people need to pay…

“It’s predicted that tens of thousands of households will opt not to renew their license fees once the nation’s analogue transmissions end.

If those people decide that they don’t want to watch television, that’s their decision, and we have to respect their decision making,[...]But if you are going to watch television through the Internet or through your mobile phone, then you should pay your television fee.“

So what’s the deal? Will it be mandatory or is this just an appeal for ‘honesty?’ How can they control it?

I get my news and important information though various sources on the Internet—I don’t even own a TV!—so these fees have never been a concern for me. And perhaps I should even see them as ‘fair’, considering that I don’t need to pay for something I don’t use. Of course, that same argument should apply to someone who watches non-Finnish channels on—e.g.—satellite TV…but that someone must pay, regardless.

When I look at the overall picture of how the high-tax Finnish system fleeces everyone and drags-down the economy, I have to wonder why any additional fees should even be necessary.

By the way, these fees are common throughout Europe; for example, Germany’s fee is roughly equal to Finland’s (ca. €200/yr). But let’s keep in mind that, despite the nominal equivalence, it’s actually affordable in Germany. Or at least relatively so.

Just for the record, I don’t have a TV there either (wink).

According to a new Europebarometer report, Helsinki’s public transit is voted best in Europe!

It comes as quite a shocker in the wake of a visit from my European acquaintances who commented about the long wait times and lack of sufficient nighttime service. Perhaps they’ll bring their walking shoes next time.

Of course we all know that there are alternatives to public transit. And not to worry, because taxis accept credit cards—it beats spending the rest of your evening hiking all the way home, right?

That’s not to say that the sunrise isn’t pretty in ultra-high-tax Finland. It most certainly is.

Anyway, I was almost taken-in by this new report. But then I read more closely…

Nine out of ten of local residents say they are satisfied or extremely satisfied with public transport in the capital.

Ah, now I understand. They asked residents, themselves, to rate the service—most of whose frame-of-reference is limited to the nearby (and considerably smaller) city of Tampere. Or maybe Turku at best.

So is this like the famous “Happiness Survey” wherein Finns were asked “Are you happy?” Finland emerged on-top in that survey, too.

Previously, we discussed how Finland’s overtaxed and over-regulated economy results in ultra-expensive car ownership and sparse public transit. Now we fill-in the missing vertex of Finland’s tripartite transportation snowjob by examining taxi fares…

For example, the start charge on the meter at the beginning of a journey on weekdays will go up from the present 4.50 euros to 4.70 euros, while the start charge nights, Sundays and holidays will increase from 7.00 to 7.20 euros.

Daytime rates are almost bearable, but with an evening start charge of €7.20 (plus km-charges), getting around is not cheap. If you want to save money, then it’s necessary to resist joining the minions who, on a single weekend night, squander the discretionary portions (or more) of their tiny salaries on taxi fares to reach overpriced dining destinations.

So maybe it’s best to stay home with a bottle of Suomi Viina and drink yourself into oblivion whilst thinking warm thoughts about suicide. Otherwise, hopping across town to your favorite nightspot will cost you about €15 one-way—or €30 round-trip. Dining and drinks are extra.

Fortunately, not all of Europe is so expensive—or we’d all be killing ourselves! For example, here’s Munich’s taxi rate schedule…

There is a fixed basic charge of €2.50 to which a graded fare per kilometre is added, as listed below.

Price per kilometre:
0 to 5 km: €1.45 per kilometre
5 to 10 km: €1.30 per kilometre
10 km or more: €1.20 per kilometre

Ok fine, they charge €0.50 extra for animals. But if everyone behaves themselves, then even this fee can be avoided.

Given that the Munich taxi driver enjoys a higher standard-of-living than his Finnish counterpart—e.g. he can buy a personal car for about half-the-Finnish-price, and consumer prices in general are much lower in Germany—one might ask:

Why all the layers of protectionist, state-run schemes? And why doesn’t Finland just assimilate its economy to the directives of the European Union, so that people in Finland can enjoy the same benefits as everyone else? Isn’t it time for a higher-standard-of-living in this icy Nordic nation?

Not so long ago, we talked about how Finland has some of the highest prices for medicine in the EU. Now, apparently some anti-trust action is being taken…

The newspaper Helsingin Sanomat reports that the Competition Authority suspects the drug firms of paying excessive amounts for advertisements in pharmacies. In return, the pharmacies offer customers primarily products of the company paying for the advertisements.

Generally, there are two ‘schools of thought’ regarding anti-trust:

One describes anti-trust laws as a public service aimed at protecting consumers from monopolies. Without anti-trust laws, companies would either charge the highest prices possible (because they’d secure a position of power that’d enable them) or they might even charge the lowest prices and thereby create a barrier for new market entrants. In either case, the consumer is denied choice. And let’s face it, we know all about being denied choice here in Finland.

The other side contends that in a truly free marketplace, sans over-taxation and over-regulation, no such anti-trust laws are needed. Whereas monopolies might exist temporarily, they will eventually become unseated by new market entrants. Anti-trust only serves as a tool for selective enforcement, doing exactly the opposite of what it intends by granting advantage to those who currently hold political power.

So, do you think Finland’s high-priced pharmaceutical products result from an economy that is over-taxed and over-regulated, or is there simply not enough enforcement of laws to prevent cartels and collusion? Or is it a combination of both? And since Finland’s low-purchasing power has been reported lately, can we make any inferences concerning high-prices in other industries—or the economy, in general?

Having witnessed relatives spend their last years in Finland’s elderly care facilities, reading news stories like this confirms my suspicions that things aren’t quite optimal…

In only a few years, the number of complaints aimed at elderly care has risen two-fold in southern Finland.
[...]
Mainly, county administrative boards are forced to address the lack of nursing staff, as many municipalities do not come close to reaching minimum staffing standards.

I won’t say that Finland’s elderly care system is the worst in the world—after all, Finland’s economy approaches those of western Europe, where standards are comparatively higher—but it does highlight some of the economic difficulties this Nordic nation is facing.

While receiving accolades for things like being among the “most competitive” and “happiest” countries in the world (according to surveys and questionnaires), the country has difficulty nourishing and retaining talented professionals and entrepreneurs—precisely those who would help fund the care of its aging population.

Things we often mention, like exorbitant levels of taxation, low purchasing power and invasions of privacy, all contribute in convincing the most dynamic players to seek greener pastures elsewhere. And Finland’s elderly get left in the lurch.

Estonians took gold and silver at the world wife-carrying championships in Finland, defying rain and exhaustion to stumble along a path with women clinging upside-down to their backs.

Estonian Madis Uusorg finished first, in a time of 61.7 seconds, despite having Inga Klauson on his back upside-down with her legs around his neck.

Congratulations!

A line from one of my favorite ’80′s synthpop bands, appropriately named Talk Talk.

In my many years of living-in and traveling-through eastern Europe, one thing I noticed is that people who’d lived in Socialism don’t talk, talk. Language is used sparingly and in the most low-context form imaginable. That means, when people actually say something, it’s to-the-point, and you won’t need to consider ambiguities like what their raised eyebrow means—in relation to what they said, of course.

My Swedish family, who recently visited the US, remarked about the friendly and open demeanor of Americans. Conversations seemed to materialize during otherwise mundane activities like riding the escalator. They compared it with Sweden, where, according to them, people just stand around like sad horses—you know, with long faces.

Actually, all of my Finnish family members have visited the US, and they conclude the same. So maybe there’s some truth to it. But, having been raised in a Finnish family, I find the efficient, Finnish form of non-communication very familiar and easy to interpret; I even find it comforting. But, according to some researchers, there’s a downside…

The workplace is probably the only place where talk isn’t cheap. A study at the University of Jyväskylä suggests that talkative, outgoing people capable of taking initiative get paid more than those who are considered quiet or shy.

This all makes me wonder: The author of the study discusses individuals in the workplace. But do you think there’s a correlation between the amount of talkativeness and outgoingness in society and salaries in the general economy? But even more fundamentally, do you think there’s a correlation between the amount of talkativeness/outgoingness and the economic system of a country?