Well, the spending has to come from somewhere. But you'd be right to point out that in addition to taxes, we also have to consider government borrowing (which the full publication does to some extent).
Also, the article isn't claiming that Sweden is not a "welfare state". I calls it so in the title. It's claiming that they are paying for it with a higher tax burden on the middle-class.
They were not "doxxed". There is no expectation of privacy when signing an open letter and using your affiliation to boost it.
Also, I don't think they deserve much sympathy. These are the same people who will put your name in a hundred lists and advocate for your firing if you say anything significantly in contradiction to their ideology.
The the reason corporations care about DEI in the first place has to do with civil rights laws, they mostly don't really think that "diversity" is their strength. To learn more about that, you should read Richard Hanania's recent book The Origins of Woke.
Since there has been a backslash against the results of the civil rights laws, they probably have more leeway to act as "rational" economic agents, but at least the formalities still must be observed.
France essentially has inquisition courts, which for example Houellebecq [1] (a prominent author) and Zemmour [2] (a former presidential candidate) had to suffer through.
> Do you really think this recipient isn’t deserving?
Yes. What is the concrete achievement being celebrated here? Especially regarding to doing "the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses"? [1]
> I think you’ll find that the peace prize has been political for a very long time.
> The giving of it to Kissinger is going to be hard to beat.
I broadly agree with both of your points here. Perhaps in an ideal word, nobody would have cared about the prize. But at least we can try to shame them for making ridiculous choices.
> It would be nice if instead of everyone hating on the prize, we could take a moment and reflect.
Nice can also mean silly and ignorant, as any well-aged dictionary would tell you. [0] We are reflecting, on the corruption and politicization of our institutions.
> Think of what this woman and many other women trapped in these regimes are going through, the sacrifices they've made, and the bravery they show to try to make things better.
Essentially the same Bush-era "plight of the Afghan women" kind of appeal to emotion to justify corruption, interventionism, and war [1].
Also, I'm pretty sure you don't really know much about the political situation in Iran. Mohammadi belongs to a political faction called the Reformists [2], which is filled with regime apologists and charlatans. More specifically, she belongs to a particular branch which is sometimes called Neo-Shariatism [3]. Shariati himself was the "ideologue of the Islamic Revolution" [4], and a full-fledged charlatan who used to falsely claim to have a PhD in sociology from Sorbonne [5].
Mohammadi is currently a political prisoner, but that obviously isn't something which merits a Peace Prize. I'm sure that there isn't a shortage of political prisoners in the Islamic Republic.
I'd be curious to know how much the real wages have changed since then though. It seems that in the US as whole, it hasn't changed much in the last 50 years or so. [1] However, the data doesn't go back to 1937, and it's for the entire US (not California in particular).
Also, the article isn't claiming that Sweden is not a "welfare state". I calls it so in the title. It's claiming that they are paying for it with a higher tax burden on the middle-class.