Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:22:33.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How Socialist is Solidaristic Social Policy? Swedish Postwar Reform as a Case in Point

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

Peter Baldwin
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The postwar welfare state, as epitomized by Beveridge's Plan, seemed to mark a major departure from social policy's traditional Bismarckian ambition to ameliorate and preserve existing social circumstances. Many have found the reason for this turnabout in the power that parties of the Left achieved in the immediate postwar years, in Britain and especially in Scandinavia where reform was most pronounced. The article questions this political pedigree by examining the origins of postwar reforms, in this case in Sweden, in the ambitions and interests of the bourgeois parties and by analyzing the initial reluctance of the Social Democrats to follow the new reforming initiatives coming from the parties of the middle classes.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Review of Social History , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , August 1988 , pp. 121 - 147
Copyright
Copyright © Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis 1988

References

1 C.A.R. Crosland, “The Transition from Capitalism”, and Crossman, R.H.S., “Towards a Philosophy of Socialism”, in Crossman, et al., New Fabian Essays (London, 1952), pp. 25, 60.Google Scholar Retrospective reevaluations in Anthony, Crosland, “Socialism Now”, in his Socialism Nowand Other Essays (London, 1974)Google Scholar and Crossman, , “The Lessons of 1945”, in his Planning for Freedom (London, 1965).Google Scholar

2 Miguel, Garcia Cruz, “The Concept of Social Security in American Countries”, Bulletin of the ISSA, IV, 6 (06 1951).Google Scholar

3 On the concept of social security: Felix, Schmid, Sozialrecht und Recht der sozialen Sicherheit: Die Begriffsbildung in Deutschland, Frankreich und der Schweiz (Berlin, 1981), pp. 43–52;Google Scholar Hans, Günter Hockerts, “Die Entwicklung vom Zweiten Weltkrieg bis zur Gegenwart”, in Peter, A. Köhler and Hans, F. Zacher (eds), Beiträge zu Geschichte und aktueller Situation der Sozialversicherung (Berlin, 1983), pp. 141–47;Google Scholar Franz-Xaver, Kaufmann, Sicherheit als soziologisches und sozialpolitisches Problem: Untersuchungen zu einer Wertidee hochdifferen. zierter Gesellschaften (Stuttgart, 1970),Google Scholar ch. 3. On the history and various uses of the term “welfare state”, Donner, A.M., Over de term ‘Welvaartsstaat (Amsterdam, 1957);Google Scholar Stein, Kuhnle, Velferdsstatens utvikling(Bergen, 1983), pp. 21–31,Google Scholar and, for France, Appendix 1 in Pierre, Rosanvallon, La crise de l’état providence (Paris, 1981).Google Scholar

4 Georges, Gurvitch, The Bill of Social Rights (New York, 1946);Google Scholar Pierre, Laroque in Notes documentaires et études, 450 (25 10 1946).Google Scholar See the magisterial analysis of the world- historical significance of the welfare state in François, Ewald, L's;état providence (Paris, 1986), especially pp. 395–405.Google Scholar

5 Janet, Beveidge, Beveridge and his Plan (London, 1954), pp. 7, 168.Google Scholar A more “organic” concept of the state, whatever that may mean, according to some: Birch, R.C., The Shaping of the Welfare State(London, 1974), p. 52.Google Scholar

6 Guy, Perrin, “Pour une théorié sociologique de Ia Sécurité sociale dans les sociétés industrielles”, Revue française de sociologie, VIII, 3 (07–09 1967), p. 313.Google Scholar

7 That the predominance of workers in British society was the social cause of the success of postwar reforms is the argument of Wolfgang, Abenroth, “Soziale Sicherheit nach dem zweiten Weltkrieg: Die sozialgeschichtlichen Ursachen der Extension der sozialen Sicherheit”, in Frank, Benseler (ed.), Festschrift zum achtzigsten Geburtstag von Georg Lukacs (Neuwied.1965);Google Scholar Jean-Jacques, Ribas, “Sécurité sociale et classes sociales in France”, Droit social, XV, 7(07–08 1952), p. 479;Google Scholar Perrin, , “Théorie sociologique”, p. 317.Google Scholar

8 Most extreme: Beveridge and Attlee's reforms were the essence of Socialism and even the Conservatives in this period were Socialist without knowing or admitting it. Peter, Calvocoressi, The British Experience 1945–1975 (London, 1978), p. 37.Google Scholar

9 Peacock, A.T. and Wiseman, J.V., The Growth of Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom (2nd ed., London, 1967);Google Scholar Henry, Roseveare, The Treasury: The Evolution of a British Institution (London, 1969), p. 278.Google Scholar

10 Richard, M. Titmuss, Problems of Social Policy (London, 1950), pp. 506–507; “War and Social Policy”, in his Essays on ‘The Welfare State’ (2nd ed., London, 1963).Google Scholar Qualified support for Titmuss in José, Harris, “Some Aspects of Social Policy in Britain during the Second World War”, in Mommsen, W.J. (ed), The Emergence of the Welfare State in Britain and Germany (London, 1981),Google Scholar and Arthur, Marwick, Class: Image and Reality in Britain, France and the USA since 1930 (New York, 1980),Google Scholar ch. 11. Restatement with a slightly different angle in Robert, E. Goodin and John, Dryzek, “Risk-Sharing and Social Justice: The Motivational Foundations of the Post-War Welfare State”, in Goodin, and Julian, Le Grand (eds), Not Only the Poor: The Middle Classes and the Welfare State (London, 1987).Google Scholar

11 On the first, Nigel, Harris, Competition and the Corporate Society: British Conservatives, the State and Industry 1945–1964 (London, 1972),Google Scholar part II. On the second, John, Selim Saloma III, “British Conservatism and the Welfare State: An Analysis of the Policy Process within the British Conservative Party”, (PhD, Harvard, 1961), ch. 2.Google Scholar

12 Andrew, Vincent and Raymond, Plant, Philosophy, Politics and Citizenship: The Life and Thought of the British Idealists (Oxford, 1984);Google Scholar Bill, Jordan, Freedom and the Welfare State (London, 1976),Google Scholar ch. 15; John, Stevenson, British Society 1914–1945 (London, 1984), pp. 322–29.Google Scholar

13 An evolution detailed in Kent, Zetterberg, Liberalism i kris (Stockholm, 1975).Google Scholar

14 Bertil Ohlins memoarer, 1940–1951 (Stockholm, 1975), pp. 79–80.Google Scholar

15 Scepticism on Titmuss' thesis in Kevin, Jefferys, “British Politics and Social Policy during the Second World War”, Historical Journal, XXX, 1(1987).Google Scholar socialpolitiken: Utvecklingslinjerochframtidsmál (Stockholm, 1944);Google Scholar Hans, Achinger, Sozialer Sicherheit: Eine historisch-soziologische Untersuchung neuer Hilfsmethoden (Stuttgart, 1953), pp. 14–15.Google Scholar

16 Alva, Myrdal, “Internationell och svensk socialpolitik” in Ett genombrott: Den svenska socialpolitiken: Utveclingslinjer och framitidsmål (Stockholm, 1944);Google Scholar Hans, Achinger, Sozialer Sicherheit: Eine historisch-soziologische Untersuchung neuer Hifsmethoden (Stuttgart, 1953), pp. 14–15.Google Scholar

17 The theme of Harold, J. Laski,Reflections on the Revolution of our Time (New York, 1943).Google Scholar

18 Walter, Korpi, “Social Policy and Distributional Conflict in the Capitalist Democracies: A Preliminary Comparative Framework”, West European Politics, III, 3 (10 1980), pp.304–305Google Scholar and The Democratic Class Struggle (London, 1983),Google Scholar ch. 9; Gösta, Rehn, “The Wages of Success”, in Stephen, R. Graubard (ed), Norden: The Passion for Equality (Oslo, 1986), p.148;Google Scholar Gøsta, Esping-Andersen, Politics Against Markets: The Social Democratic Road to Power (Princeton, 1985), pp. 30–36 and passim.Google Scholar

19 Kathi, V. Friedman, Legitimation of Social Rights and the Western Welfare State (Chapel Hill, 1981), pp. 5–24.Google Scholar

20 On universalism as a key characteristic of the Social Democratic/Labour welfare state: In Scandinavia: Erikson, Robert et al. , (eds), The Scandinavian Model: Welfare States and Welfare Research (Armonk, 1987), pp. vii–viii, 41–43;Google Scholar Korpi, , “Social Policy and Distributional Conflict in the Capitalist Democracies”, p. 303.Google Scholar In Britain: Arthur, Marwick, Britain in the Century of Total War (Boston, 1968), p. 343Google Scholar and British Society Since 1945 (London, 1982), pp. 50–51;Google Scholar Alan, Sked and Chris, Cook, Post-War Britain: A Political History (2nd ed., Harmondsworth, 1984), pp. 38–39;Google Scholar Eric, Shragge, Pensions Policy in Britain: A Socialist Analysis (London,1984), p. 42;Google Scholar Pat, Thane, Foundations of the Welfare State (London, 1982), p. 267.Google Scholar In more general terms: Anne-Lise, Seip, Om velferdsstatens framvekst (Oslo, 1981);Google Scholar Julia, Parker, Social Policy and Citizenship (London, 1975), pp. 4–5, 9–15, 40–41, 61–62, 145;Google Scholar Jens, Alber, Vom Armenhaus zum Wohlfahrtsstaat (Frankfurt, 1982), p.48.Google Scholar The only recognition that I have found that universalism was far from being a working class or trade union demand is in Göran Therborn, “Neo-Marxist, Pluralist, Corporatist, Statist Theories and the Welfare State”, in Kazancigil, Ali (ed.), The State in Global Perspective (Paris, 1986), p. 224Google Scholar and “The Working Class and the Welfare State”, in Kettunen Kettunen, Pauli (ed), Det nordiska i den nordiska arbetarrörelsen (Helsinki, 1986), p. 13.Google Scholar

21 Sara, A. Rosenberry, “Social Insurance, Distributive Criteria and the Welfare Backlash: A Comparative Analysis”, British Journal of Political Science, XII, 4 (10 1982).Google Scholar A similar sort of analysis in Harold, L. Wilensky, The Welfare State and Equality (Berkeley, 1975), pp. 37–42, 54–59.Google Scholar

22 The distinction between vertical and lateral universalism is not normally drawn, although there is a hint of the latter concept in Jean-Jacques Dupeyroux, Evolution et tendances des systemes de Sécurité sociale des pays membres des communautés européennes et de Ia GrandeBretagne (Luxemburg, 1966), pp. 160–61.Google Scholar

23 On Sweden's career as an ideal type, Arne Ruth, “The Second New Nation: The Mythology of Modern Sweden”, in Graubard, Norden.

24 While Sweden had paid great attention to developments in Denmark from the nineteenth century through the 1930s, by the Second World War she had pulled ahead in social policy and Denmark no longer played an important role in the Swedish debate. åke, Elmér, “Danmark i den svenska folkpensionsdebatten”, Festskrift til Frederik Zeuthen (Copenhagen, 1958), pp.55–65.Google Scholar

25 Gustav, Möller, Från Farzighus-Sverige till Social-Sverige (Stockholm, 1948), p. 13.Google Scholar Impetus and inspiration from Britain played little role in Sweden. Claims for the broad influence of the Beveridge Plan in Scandinavia seem to be without foundation. Examples: Hockerts, H.G., “Die Entwicklung vom Zweiten Weltkrieg bis zur Gegenwart”, in Peter, A. Köhler and Hans, F. Zacher (eds), Beiträge zu Geschichte und aktueller Situation der Sozialversicherung (Berlin, 1983);Google Scholar Dupeyroux, Evolution et tendances, pp. 160–61,Google Scholar “L'évolution des systèmes et Ia théorie générale de Ia sécurité sociale”, Droit social, XXVIII, 2 (02 1966), p. 113.Google Scholar Norway, perhaps because of the exile government in London, may be the exception: Stein, Kuhnle, Velferdsstatens utvikling: Norge i komparativt perspektiv (Bergen, 1983), p. 155.Google Scholar

26 The standard work on the topic is åke, Elmér, Folkpensionering I Sverige: Med särskild hänsyn tili äiderspensionering (Lund, 1960).Google Scholar A competent general narrative is in Rolf, Broberg, Sá formades tryggheten: Socialförsakrings historia, 1946–1972 (np., 1973). Broberg was Se- cretary to the Social Welfare Committee and to the First Special Standing Committee in Parliament that dealt with the 1946 pension law.Google Scholar

27 The claim is in Karl, J. Höjer, Svensk socialpolitisk historia (Stockholm, 1952), pp. 26465.Google Scholar

28 Utredning och förslag angående lag om folkpensionering (SOU 1945:1946), pp. 138–39.Google Scholar

29 Riksarkivet [hereafter RA], Stockholm, 1185/3, Socialvårdskommittén [hereafter SVK]minutes, 2 October 1944, Eriksson, östlind, Höjer.

30 Bernhard, Eriksson, Vår framtida socialvård (Stockholm, 1943), PP. 5–6.Google Scholar

31 RA, Moderata Samlingspartiets Deposition, AII:1, Representantskapet, minutes, 1 November 1943 and Bilag 5.

32 RA, Moderata, AI:2, Högerns Riksstämma, minutes, 16 June 1944, Sjöquist and Arrhén; minutes, 17 June 1944, Stjernlöf, Magnusson, Bagge; “Programuttalande”.

33 Background in Elisabeth Sandlund, Svenska Dagblades historia (np., 1984), vol. III, pp.126–28, 204–07.Google Scholar

34 RA, Moderata, AIV:2, överstyrelsen, minutes, 8 December 1944, Bilag 2, Motion no. 2. RA, Moderata, Partiledarna, Fritjof Domä/4, ms. for speech, 9 December 1944.

35 RA, Moderata, Partilederna, Domö/5, ms. of a speech to Hogernklubben, Stockholm, 3 October 1945.

36 RA, Igor Holmstedts Samling om Högerpartiet, 2, “Mål och medel mom socialpolitiken: En diskussionspromemoria”.

37 RA, Moderata, AI:3, Högerns extra Riksstämma, 1–2 February 1946, Hjalmarsso' speech, appended to the minutes.

38 RA, Holmstedts Samling, 1, HägernsProgramkommitté, preliminary draft of the program, Section 8. The manuscripts in Holmstedts Samling are the sources for the commentary to the new Conservative program published by the party: Högerns, Riksorganisation, Frihet och frarnsteg: Kommentar till Högerns handlingsprogram (Stockholm, 1946), especially pp. 110–202. In the social policy part of this, the party advocated a universal, compulsory health insurance, universal national pensions without means tests, a reformed system of public assistance, now to be called social assistance rather than poor relief, and extension of accident insurance to the self-employed.Google Scholar

39 RA, Holmstedts Samling, 2, “Mål och medel mom socialpolitiken”.

40 For example, that someone who had saved up a small sum of capital had to use this to pay the expenses of his retirement home while those who had nothing received this gratis from the state. RA, Holmstedts Samling, 2, P.Hj. Fagerhoim, “Några synpunkter på inkomst- och behovsprövning mom socialvården.”

41 RA, Moderata, AI:3, Högerns extra Riksstämma, 1–2 February 1946. Hjalmarsson's speech, appended to the minutes.

42 The two issues over which means tests were being discussed at the time were pensions and school meals. The party was unanimous about eliminating them for pensions (by far the more important of the two), but only radicals pressed the second issue as well. RA, Moderata, AIV:2, överstyrelsen, minutes, 31 January 1946, Järte, Wistrand, Falla, Nylander, Ohlsson, Hjalmarsson; AI:3, Högerns extra Riksstämma, minutes, 1–2 February 1946, Högerns Riksstämma, minutes, 17–18 June 1946.

43 Quoted in Dag, W. Scharp (ed), Frihet och framsteg: En krönika om Högerpartiet (Nyköping, 1959), p.452. A copy of the program is in RA, Moderata, AI:3.Google Scholar

44 E.g. Frihet ochfrarnsteg, p. 112.Google Scholar There is a continuity here with family policy reform in the 1930s that also appealed to eugenic and natalist concerns on all sides of the political spectrum. Lisbeth, Rausing, “The Population Question: The Debate of [sic] Family Welfare Reforms in Sweden, 1930–1938”, Europäische Zeitschrifr für Politische ökonomie, II, 4 (1986).Google Scholar

45 Were it not for the unexamined assumption that solidaristic social policy must have been the brainchild of Socialists, there would be no cause for the surprise sometimes expressed that the bourgeois parties, normally opposed to expensive social reform, seemed now to have turned coats to support the most extravagant of the proposals. Elmér, , Folkpensionering, p. 85,Google Scholar for example, thinks the Right's attitude to these reforms the most difficult to explain. Similarly, Esping-Andersen's surprise that the bourgeois parties proved “amazingly willing to embrace universal, non-contributory plans whenever popular opinion seemed to favor them,” is understandable only given his assumption that universalism was an especially Socialist goal. Politics Against Markets, p. 157.Google Scholar More sophisticated (or unconcerned?) is the approach that admits that the universalist pensions proposed were the handiwork of the bourgeois parties, but then goes on to describe national pensions as one of the pillars of Möller's and the SAP's social policy edifice. Stig Hadenius et al., Sverige efter 1900 (Stockholm, 1967), pp. 194–195).Google Scholar The only one to get matters right is Therborn, “The Working Class and the Welfare State”, pp.52–55.

46 Sveriges Socialdemokratiska Arbetareparti [hereafter SAP], Protokoll, 1944, pp. 432–33.Google Scholar

47 Arbetarrörelsens Arkiv [hereafter ARA], SAP, Partistyrelsen, minutes, 16 January 1944.

48 SAP, , Protokoll, 1944, pp.435–37.Google Scholar

49 Arbetarrörelsens efterkrigsprogram (Stockholm, 1944).Google Scholar Nor was mention of national pensions made in the party's 1944 program, reprinted in Från, Palm till Palme: Den svenska socialdemokratins program, 1882 –1960 (Stockholm, 1972), pp. 160–68.Google Scholar The standard work on the subject interprets the Socialists’ supposed disinterest in universalist pension reform as evidence that such changes were the result not of party-political pressure, but were occasioned by the Social Welfare Committee's proposals. Elmér, , Folkpensionering. pp. 139–40. While true, the assumption that lies behind this analysis, that the SAP of course supported the reforms that eventually resulted and that the party's lack of initiative needs explaining, is not. The SAP had no reason to press for universalist reforms in 1944 that, first, had not yet been put forth in the Committee, and, second, had already been rejected within the party.Google Scholar

50 ARA, SAP, Partistyrelsen, minutes, 23 04 1944.Google Scholar

51 Bondeförbundets Medlemsblad, II (06 1946).Google Scholar RA, Bondeförbundet-Centerpartiets Arkiv, AI:4, Riksstämman, , minutes, 30 06–207 1946,Google Scholar Bilag 30, speech by Axel, Pehrsson Bramstorp, 30 06 1946.Google Scholar

52 Ernst, Wigforss, Minnen (Stockholm, 1950–1954), vol. III, p. 304.Google Scholar Riksdagens Protokoll, AK 1948:31, 3 07 1948, p. 58.Google Scholar The Conservatives took full credit for universal pensions in their account of the matter, Högerns Riksorganisation, Politisk valhandbok, 1946, pp. 150–53.Google Scholar Also, , Gösta Lindskog, Med Högern för Sverigesframtid (Stockholm, 1954), pp. 449–51.Google Scholar

53 ARA, SAP, Partistyrelsen, minutes, 9 December 1945. Tage, Erlander, 1940–1949 (Stockholm, 1973), pp. 147–48.Google Scholar

54 Riksdagens Protokoll, Prop 1946:220, pp. 65–99.Google Scholar

55 Demographers forecasted an ageing of the population in the postwar period and it was therefore considered important to encourage the elderly to continue working.

56 Earnings rules determined the amount of benefit forfeited when the recipient had other means.

57 Riksdagens Protokoll, AK 1946:27, 20 06 1946, p. 5.Google Scholar

58 His account in “Inkomstprövade pensioner?” in Gustav Maöller “Hågkomster”p, Arbetarrörelsens årsbok 1971, pp. 180–82.Google Scholar

59 For Erlander, see also, ARA, Erlanders Arkiv, BI:7, ms. for speech, Kaimar and Nybro, 3 February 1946, pp. 2–4, ms. speech, Stockholm, , 9 05 1946, “Barnkostnadernas fördelning”, pp. 14–16.Google Scholar

60 ARA, SAP, Riksdagsgruppen, minutes, 29 January 1946, 5 March 1946. ARA, Per Albin Hanssons Arkiv, Ib, Dögbocker och minnesanteckningar, 2 March 1946.

61 This corresponded to the Conservatives‘ willingness to have flat-rate benefits financed by premiums related to the ability to pay, where the affluent paid in premiums approximately the value of their benefits. RA, Holmstedts Samling, 2, Högerns Programmkommitté, ldquo;Några synpunkter på inkomst – och behovsprövning mom sociålvden”, and “Social trygghet”.

62 Riksdagens Protokoll, Prop 1946:220, pp. 107–22; 1SäU 1946:1, p. 32.Google Scholar

63 Riksdagens Protokoll, AK 1946:27, 20 June 1946, pp. 3–41.Google Scholar Erlander was disconcerted that the Socialists were deprived of the tactical advantages of passing pensions against bourgeois opposition. ARA, Erlanders Arkiv, BI:8, ms. speech, Torsby et al., 7 07 1946; “Valföredrag 1946”, pp. 5–6.Google Scholar The continuing ambivalence among Socialists over the virtues of abolishing means tests may be gauged by the manner in which the whole problem flared up once again within the party in 1948. Because national pensions were not cost of living indexed (Mäller had feared lowering benefits in case prices fell), postwar inflation raised the necessity of cost supplements that were either to be means-tested or not. Against Socialist wishes, non-means- tested supplements won in 1950. Gustaf, Jonasson, Per Edvin Sköld, 1946–1951 (Uppsala, 1976), pp. 57–61. “Dyrtidstillaggen”, in Arbetarrörelsens årsbok 1971, pp. 187–89.Google Scholar

64 The coincidence of wage earning and self-employed interests here was incorporated by Emil Liedstrand whose arguments advocating the abolition of means tests circulated among both of these groups. See Tjänstemannarörelsens Arkiv, Bergendal, 530/6, “Nacirc;gra erfarenheter rörande verkningarna av behovsprövningen inom socialförsäkringen”, 31 August 1945.“Behovsprövning mom folkpensioneringen”, Hantverk och Smdindustri, I (1946), pp. 19–20.Google Scholar “Behovsprovningen mom folkpensioneringen och närgransande delar av den svenska socialvården”, Nordisk Försäkringstidskrift, XXVI, 1(1 01 1946).Google Scholar

65 The Conservatives did not object to the extra taxes abolishing means tests would lead to because those adversely affected in this sense would be compensated by the extra pension benefits eventually received. Since the money, in this calculation, was the same in either case, the advantage of eliminating need as a condition of benefit must have been the psychological spur to savings and work thereby provided. RA, Holmstedts Samling, 2, “Några synpunkter på inkomst – och behovsprövning inom socialvården”.

66 Möller had to intervene to persuade the unions to put aside plans for legislative treatment of superannuation plans until his pension reform had been resolved. LO Archives, Stockholm, Landssekretariatet, minutes, 2 January 1945.

67 See my “The Scandinavian Origins of the Social Interpretation of the Welfare State”, Comparative Studies in Society and History, forthcoming.

68 When the issue was brought up in the Social Welfare Committee, Eriksson wondered aloud whether rural authorities dealt with applications for supplementation by the same standards used in the cities. Karl Johan Höjer defended the honor of rural groups, insisting that they had understood, in a way urban residents had not yet accepted, that all pension benefits, the means-tested ones as well, were the citizen's moral and legal right. RA, 1185/1, “Promemoria angâende folkpensionering”, 25 September 1940; Tilläggspromemoria till P.M. den 25 Sept. 1940; SVK, minutes, 23 October 1940, 28 February 1939, Dahlström.

69 Riksdagens Protokoll, FK 1946:25, 19 06 1946, pp. 98–100.Google Scholar

70 Already in the parliamentary treatment of the pension bill, affluent agrarians worried that the lenient tax treatment they enjoyed in common with their colleagues elsewhere in Europe would be a casualty of the new reforms. Proposals for a property tax were currently under examination in committee, a land owner in the upper house noted. Was it not cynical, he wished to know, to increase taxes for those who attempted to save in order to raise the funds required to give well-off wage earners the benefit of both statutory and private measures. Riksdagens Protokoll, FK 1946:25, 19 06 1946, pp. 106–08.Google Scholar

71 Nils, Elvander, Svensk skattepolitik, 1945–1970: En studie i partiers och organisationers funkrion (Stockholm, 1972), pp. 26–66.Google Scholar “That pensions were not conditional on means tests was largely the work of the Conservatives, M. Skoglund and A. Hagârd. This was just and right, but also expensive. A worried Conservative asked me if it was true that even Wallenberg would get a pension. ‘Absolutely,’ I answered. ‘He may need one if this tax policy continues’”. Ivar, Anderson, Från det nära förflurna: Männ, skor och händelser 1940–1955 (Stockholm, 1969), p. 197. This is a Swedish joke.Google Scholar

72 This logic is clearly mapped Out in Anna Hedborg andRudolf, Meidner, Folkhemsmodellen (np., 1984), pp. 184–87.Google Scholar