How do you think it being a "de facto ethnostate" changes things? Please be specific.
You said "Different people, values, principles, ethics, concerns; all of which echo in life choices"
Isn't crime mostly connected to economic situations? Doesn't Finland have more social services than the US. Doesn't UBI help people who might otherwise turn to crime
If someone is raped and has to live with that mental scar is that a loss?
You're assuming taxes on income are the only way to lose money. We all pay for the effects of crime. We pay for the police, we pay higher health insurance for others injuries, etc
Considering Finland is the highest ranked country for happiness, has a low crime rate, social nets, and universal health care I think copying them is a smart move even to try it.
The main problem is the traitor evangelicals who wield power here while they use the government for money and contributing little the economy. They're are filth that we need to clean up first before we can improve this country
You didn't answer the question.
The majority decided that paying higher taxes is worth the benefits.
Why did they decide that and why do they trust the receipts of those benefits to use them appropriately?
Like it or not, the overwhelming majority of human history and culture is ethnocentric. It should not be a surprise that the ethnic values, ethics, and ways of living continue to be the dominant force in an area that has remained the same demographically for centuries.
That's not to say the culture, values, and ethics are inextricably bound to the ethnicity, but it is without a doubt a vehicle for sustainment and major factor in policy success or failure.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish-speaking_population_...