Titlebook: Democracy and the Economy in Finland and Sweden since 1960; A Nordic Perspective Ilkka K?rryl? Book 2021 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and

溝通

Angioplasty

,Fünfter Teil: Thesen der Arbeit,entatives appealed strongly to economic efficiency and the national economic interest that would be jeopardized by wrong kinds of enterprise democracy. After protracted debates in Finland and Sweden, the eventual reforms were based on employers’ obligation to negotiate on major changes, while employ

BATE

,Tabus —das passiert bei uns nicht,ion funds. Instead of economic democracy, they were legitimized as means of capital formation for the benefit of the national economy. In Finland, the Social Democrats’ stance on wage-earner funds became even more careful, as they wanted to avoid a conflict similar to that which had broken out in Sw

禮節(jié)

botany

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-96565-4ing investments democratically or transforming capitalism into a more stable and equitable system. The goal was instead generating assets for wage-earners to support their adaptation to rapid economic and social changes. Concepts like ‘working life reform’ and ‘participation systems’ replaced the co

重疊

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-97704-5emocracy and the economy, but more often discarded them altogether. For the right, it did not seem necessary to argue that free markets were a form of democracy; they were rather a precondition to democracy. The left, in turn, was struggling to modify its ideational constellations to fit the new wor

Muscularis

GILD

Economic Democracy as a Contested Concept,icipation and consultation on the grassroots level of workplaces. Conservatives also put forward the concept of ‘people’s capitalism’ as a form of economic democracy. It meant dispersing private ownership more evenly amongst citizens. A major problem for social democratic ideas of economic democracy

Irksome

,Enterprise Democracy: Employee Power or?Consultative Cooperation?,entatives appealed strongly to economic efficiency and the national economic interest that would be jeopardized by wrong kinds of enterprise democracy. After protracted debates in Finland and Sweden, the eventual reforms were based on employers’ obligation to negotiate on major changes, while employ

ESO

Collective Ownership as a Form of Economic Democracy,ion funds. Instead of economic democracy, they were legitimized as means of capital formation for the benefit of the national economy. In Finland, the Social Democrats’ stance on wage-earner funds became even more careful, as they wanted to avoid a conflict similar to that which had broken out in Sw