Vad säger du om det där Stefan Löfven?

Ja, men jag håller inte riktigt med för att det, det är ändå, jag tyckte det var mycket bra sossig politik i, i det som partiet la fram.

Hela välfärdssatsningen, den står ju inte högern alls för.

De är långt, långt därifrån.

Så att för det första täppa till det hålet som Sveriges kommuner och regioner säger finns på en, jag tror tolv, tretton miljarder.

Och sen dessutom inflationsskyddat statsbidrag.

Det är faktiskt en revolution.

Hur, hur lyckas man liksom att komma överens med partier med så vitt skilda politiska program?

but there's always change, and to be a participant in change and beneficiary of change?

Yeah.

So, so first, make use of the companies.

And I, and I still, uh, criticize business leaders, and I tell them, "Hey, uh, although we have quite a good of co-determination, uh, Swedish enterprises, I think you make use of, let's say, 50% of the, of the knowledge that people have.

So you can improve a lot." But, but relatively more than, than many countries, uh, and when I was active in the trade union, I could see w- traveling to England or to Germany or other, Japan, I could see there are more layers between the CEO and the worker, individual workers.

So let's say it was six, seven.

In Sweden, we have perhaps three, and that makes, uh, the workers more, um...

Oh, yeah

And, you know, on that point of balancing kind of national interests with the kind of global good and collective good, Stefan, as you sort of survey the international system, what both strengths and deficiencies do you see that would enable the creation of effective systems of global governance to confront these global catastrophic threats that we're discussing?

We have to get over this purely nationalistic thinking, and we're in a time when we need a global cooperation more than ever, I would say, not least because of these very serious risks that are presented in this report.

But at the same time, it seems as if leaders think that the best message they can bring to the population is that, "I'm thinking only about this country, and we are the center of the world.

We just have to be very selfish.

That's how we get along." And that has been successful in winning elections.

But what we need to do, what we must do, is to present both the real risks.

That's bad enough, but not only pollution and loss of biodiversity, but also the economic losses that we will suffer because we need to tell people if we will reach a warming about, say, three, four degrees, well, that will be the real cost.

Like, what did you learn about our systems of global governance to confront some of these global catastrophic threats and how they might be themselves revised and strengthened?