(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
The most commonly used phrase in Norwegian politics is "now someone must do something". This phrase often comes right after someone has pointed out that we are the "richest country in the world" and therefore a shortage is nothing short of a scandal. The fact that no one cares to say who is going to do something, or what they should really do, is probably symptomatic of a country where politicians basically do not need to prioritize anything. Everyone can get and everyone gets. The largest opposition party in Norway, a party that calls itself liberalist, also has as its main criticism of a social democratic state budget budget that not enough money is spent. Where else than in Norway would this happen? I do not think it is a goal for everyone to get public, and all politicians have a duty to keep budgets accountable and less than the current ones. As the public gets bigger, the private gets smaller. That is a problem in itself.
Firstly, the oil fund is really a pension fund. Although the number of seniors is now declining, in ten years there will be an explosive increase in the number of retirees, while the number in work will decrease. With the aging wave, not only is there a need for increased pension payments, but an older population also means an increased need in the health and care sector. The generational accounts simply do not go up, and fortunately the majority of Norwegian politicians have taken this into account. Therefore, most of the oil revenues are set aside for future pension obligations. But the oil fund is starting to get big, and 4 per cent of the return is getting a lot, at the latest NOK 92 billion. There is money used to maintain an artificially high public consumption over time. We have 700.000 people between the ages of 18 and 65 who do not work, but are passive recipients of various benefits provided by the state. The public sector is booming, and we have twice as many municipalities as Sweden, but half the population. Undoubtedly, huge sums go out of the budget for these items, without being further discussed in the political debate.
If someone proposes new welfare measures that cost an additional billions, the burden of proof is automatically shifted to those who oppose the measure, rather than those who propose to use more of the taxpayers' or future's pensions. As long as we have oil revenues and thousands of billions in the book, the pressure to constantly give more to everyone will only increase. An increasing number of politicians fall for the temptation of wasting a little more money than last year, and nobody likes to take the burden of saying no, or worse, cutting a budget line. The problem is that we only make the challenges of the future greater. The moment oil revenues fall drastically, a bloated welfare state will face major problems and, in the worst case, collapse. But if we handle this properly, the oil wealth can be the blessing it is, rather than a challenge for the future. Therefore, the time is ripe to tighten the rule of action and thus also the freedom of action of the politicians. Politics is about prioritizing. So let's do it once and for all.
