A really interesting article appeared nationwide in Cal Thomas'
syndicated column on June 2, 1993.  I will paraphrase below.
--
Clinton has been claiming he is a "New Democrat" for a very long time
now.  During the campaign he claimed he would have a middle-class tax cut and
make government more efficient.  But many liberal Democrats speak of
Marxist rhetoric, "From each according to his abilities, to each
according to his needs."
--
The United States under Clinton is headed in the wrong direction.  The
May  24, 1993 issue of FORBES magazine shows how Sweden had problems with
socialism and is now trying to break free.  Swedish citizens struggled with high
taxes, and supposedly "free" unemployment and welfare payments, government
monopoly schools, and other socialist ideological positions.  But unemployment
was rising due to all the socialism, at over 12 percent.  Industrial
production slowed down.  Budget deficits grew.  The currency "sunk faster than the
U.S. dollar."
--
But all that is changing.  A new political party, New Democracy Party,
is headed by Ian Wachtmeister, who believes "people are sick of the Big
Brother-type of state."  Sweden's welfare state has nearly destroyed the
country's work ethic.  The absentee rate in Swedish industry reached 25%
before cutbacks on welfare encouraged people to work more.
--
"By becoming every Swede's rich grandfater, the state has destroyed most
people's incentive to save" writes Paul Klebnikov in Forbes.  People
didn't save money because they thought government would take care of their
every  need.  They became the indentured servants of employers and politicians.
--
In 1991 a new prime minister, Bildt, was elected to clean up the mess
which was created by the socialists.  Government spending was sharply
cut.  Welfare paytments were cut.  Inflation was put under control.
Vouchers for public schools were introduced.  Taxes are decreasing.
--
This isn't just a lesson about Sweden, notes Klebnikov.  "It's about any
country where politicians believe in the infinite ability of the private
sector to fund an ambitious social agenda, be it thru taxes, mandates,
regulation, or other forms of state intervention."
--