I see many (MANY!) people denouncing 'welfare states' and social programs as inherently flawed, and, I admit, some programs are...but what I don't see (and I've asked quite a few times) is people discussing the Nordic Model...these countries run what is technically a welfare state, and are thriving with their systems in place...economies are good, people are healthy and happy, educations are world class, etc...why the opposition to trying to emulate some of their successful practices?
The Nordic model refers to the economic and social models of the Nordic countries (Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Finland). This particular adaptation of the mixed market economy is characterised by a large degree of free market and deregulation policies along side "universalist" welfare states (relative to other developed countries), which are aimed specifically at enhancing individual autonomy, ensuring the universal provision of basic human rights and stabilising the economy. It is distinguished from other welfare states with similar goals by its emphasis on maximising labour force participation, promoting gender equality, egalitarian and extensive benefit levels, large magnitude of redistribution, and liberal use of expansionary fiscal policy. The Nordic Model however is not a single model with specific components or rules; each of the Nordic countries has its own economic and social models, sometimes with large differences from its neighbours.