Maybe we should all move to Finland

After every presidential election, many people disappointed by the outcome threaten to move - to Canada. Really? Why? Canada has little to offer but cold weather, high prices, no cultural advantages, hardly any diversity and a country whose national sport is - wait for it - curling!

No wonder so few who talk about moving to Canada actually do so. Because Canada offers so little appeal, especially when there are such better alternatives, as we learned again this year.

Since 2002, the World Happiness Report has used Gallup polling data from more than 150 countries to determine what they call "the world's happiest countries." Their findings are based on six categories: gross domestic product per capita, social support, healthy life expectancy, freedom to make your own life choices, generosity of the general population, and perceptions of internal and external corruption levels.

And now the envelope, please. According to the 2026 World Happiness Report, the planet's happiest country is - for the ninth year in a row - FINLAND! Followed by Iceland and Denmark, #'s 2 and 3; Costa Rica, #4; and Sweden and Norway, #'s 5 and 6. By the way, the United States ranks #24, after Lithuania, Slovenia, the United Arab Emirates, Germany, and the UK.

Only someone as dumb as Donald Trump could miss the obvious lesson here: With the exception of Costa Rica, people who live in Nordic countries are the happiest people on earth. And what do they all have in common? They live in countries that follow the so-called "Nordic Model." You know, it's what Bernie Sanders talks about. Not socialism, but a related form of "democratic socialism," also known as a "capitalist democracy," whose main features are a stable government, robust economy, higher taxes and generous, universal social benefits.

Every one of the Nordic countries is celebrated for 10 key benefits. (1) Strong Social Safety Nets: universal healthcare; tuition-free or very low-cost universities; generous unemployment insurance; and robust public pensions. (2) Work-Life Balance: shorter workweeks; 5-6 weeks required vacation time; and flexible parental leave. (3) Dependable Government: transparency; little corruption; continuity in public policy; and trust in government. (4) Equality: low income inequality; strong gender equality; accessible childcare. (5) High-Quality Public Services: efficient public transit; modern infrastructure; well-maintained parks, libraries, and recreation centers.

Sound good? Wait, that's only half of it. (6) Clean Environment: abundant forests, lakes, mountains, and coastlines, all accessible; strong environmental regulations. (7) Safety: lowest crime rates in the world. (8) Social Trust: people tend to trust neighbors, institutions, even strangers. (9) Strong Education Systems: minimal standardized testing; highly-trained, well-paid, teachers. (10) Political Stability: stable political systems and consensus-driven policy making.

Compare that with the United States. The advantages are we pay lower taxes and, for much of the country, enjoy warmer weather. The disadvantages are we also have the highest health insurance costs and medical bills in the world, as well as the highest college tuition; limited parental leave; longer work weeks and no federally mandated paid vacation; expensive childcare; higher inequality; aging infrastructure; limited public transit outside major cities; higher violent crime rates; a top-sided economy that creates more and more billionaires, while leaving the middle class fall farther and farther behind; and a broken, divisive political system that changes direction every four years.

Now, I'm not suggesting we all pack up and move to Scandinavia. But I am suggesting there's a lot we can learn from Scandinavian countries, starting with the fact that what works best for most people is not the unfettered capitalism most Republicans embrace, but the Nordic mix of a free-market economy with private ownership, coupled with significant state investment in health care, education, and social security. Plus, no matter what Republicans have been preaching and practicing for more than 50 years, there are more important priorities than cutting taxes. Experience shows: cutting taxes helps only those already on top, does nothing for those at the bottom or in the middle, and means consumers pay more for health care, education, and other public services.

For most Americans, paying a little more in taxes (as long as everyone pays their fair share) in return for lower health care costs and lower tuition would be considered a good deal.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not packing for Finland. I'm a proud American. I don't want to live anywhere else. We live in a wonderful country. But we'd be an even better country if we spent less time bragging about how great we are, and a little more time learning from others.

(C)2026 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Cesar Chavez: Say it isn’t so!

In 30 years, every column I've written has been about policy or politics. This one is personal. I'll never forget, as a young political operative, how thrilled I was to meet the already legendary Cesar Chavez. And now I'll never forget, as an older political junkie, how stunned and devastated I was to learn the secret history of years of sexual abuse that was buried with him.

For more than 50 years, I worshiped Cesar Chavez. My very first political activity was joining a farmworkers protest against buying California table grapes in front of the Safeway at 14th and Market streets in San Francisco. "Don't Buy Grapes," we chanted. And then the Farmworkers' slogan: "Si se puede!"

In 1975, I was working for California Governor Jerry Brown when he signed the Agricultural Labor Relations Act, which gave farmworkers the right to vote by secret ballot whether to join a union - and which led directly to formation of the United Farm Workers, led by Chavez. One year later, when Brown ran for president, busloads of farm workers, led by master organizer Marshall Ganz, showed up to campaign for him in every state primary he entered. I know, I was there.

I finally got to meet the great man himself at the 1976 Democratic National Convention, and was struck by how humble and soft-spoken he was. The next day, he electrified the convention with a speech nominating Brown for president. I met with Chavez several times after that. And in 1993 I attended his funeral in Delano, California, and took turns with others carrying his casket on our shoulders to the gravesite.

Cesar Chavez was my hero - until the New York Times this week released the sickening results of a five-year investigation showing that Chavez, at the peak of his popularity and power, used his position to abuse, molest and rape young girls, some as young as 12 or 13. Shades of Jeffrey Epstein! To his glorified record of historic labor leader, civil rights icon, Latino legend, family role model and winner of the Presidential Medal of Freedom must now be added one more title: criminal sexual pervert.

The news of Chavez's secret life as a pedophile came as a blow to the chest. But the immediate follow-up came as a hard kick in the groin: a statement by 95-year-old Dolores Huerta, who founded the UFW with Chavez and Gilbert Padilla, and whom I got to know well, attended several political rallies with and have interviewed many times.

Huerta told the Times what, out of loyalty to the cause of justice for farmworkers, she had chosen to keep secret for six decades: that Chavez had also raped her, co-founder of the union, repeatedly forced her to have sex with him, and fathered two children with her, whom she secretly put up for adoption. "Unfortunately, he used some of his great leadership to abuse women and children - it's really awful," she told the Times.

It's all so unbelievably shocking. And the fallout, as it should, will be brutal. Schools, streets, parks and public buildings will be renamed, statues torn down, marches canceled, and the federal holiday created on his March 31 birthday by President Obama will soon no longer be recognized. Even the UFW, the union he founded and led, announced it would never celebrate his birthday again.

For all of us who believed in Cesar Chavez and what he stood for, it's hard to process. We'd like to just remember all the good things he did, and forget the bad. But we can't. Because that would not only be denying reality, but ignoring the suffering of those young girls whose lives he destroyed. We must accept the facts, condemn him for his actions and deal with the consequences.

The Cesar Chavez story is an all-too-painful reflection of the human condition. Good people can still do horrible things. Thomas Jefferson is one of our most celebrated founders, one of only two to have his own memorial on the Washington Mall. Yet Jefferson not only owned slaves, he raped Sally Hemings when she was only 14 and later fathered six children with her.

And now another once-upon-a-time hero has let us down. Which, if nothing else, should remind us that, while we do need heroes to look up to, we must also always maintain a certain level of healthy skepticism about everybody. We have never met the perfect person - and never will.
____

(C)2026 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

The maniacal leader of one country starts a war against another, not because he has to, nor because his own country is directly threatened, nor because the other country attacked first, but simply because he wants to, it makes him feel strong, and he's sure it'll be over in a couple of days. Instead, the war drags on forever and ends up destroying the economy of his own country.

Sound familiar? It should. It's Vladimir Putin's war against Ukraine. But it's also Donald Trump's war against Iran. Indeed, it's uncanny how closely Trump in Iran is following Putin's playbook in Ukraine, often using the very same language.

OK, to be honest, it's not exactly the same. There are no American troops on the ground in Iran (not yet). The United States is not trying to seize any Iranian territory (not until the Trump crime family builds a new Trump Tower in Tehran). And, so far, Trump's war has only lasted a couple of weeks, not four years. But the similarities between the two wars are striking.

For starters, neither Putin nor Trump call it an act of "war." When Putin launched Russia's attack on Ukraine in February 2022, he called it a "special military operation," or "S.V.O" - which is what Russians still call it today. Trump follows suit. Although he's occasionally slipped and uttered the "w" word, Trump and his followers know the American public have no stomach for another war in the Middle East. So they twist themselves inside out, trying to come up with non-war words.

Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters "I think it's an operation." Other Republicans in Congress have called it "strategic strikes," "combat operations," or a "military mission." On March 11, Trump himself called it nothing but a "little excursion."

Also out of the same playbook: Both Putin and Trump falsely accused the other country of starting the war. In 2022, Putin said Ukraine had harmed Russia for so many years, he had "no other choice" but to invade. Using almost the same words, in 2026, Trump blamed Iran for decades of "bloodshed and mass murder" and asserted that "we can't take it anymore." Although Ukraine never attacked Russia, and Iran never attacked the United States.

Obviously, Trump didn't learn anything from Putin. Like his BFF Vladimir, Trump started the war in Iran with unclear goals and shifting objectives. At first, Putin insisted his goal was "regime change." Then his goals narrowed to seizing most of eastern Ukraine and keeping Ukraine out of NATO. Similarly, Trump still hasn't provided any straight answer for what his war's all about. Depending on the last reporter he talks to, he shifts from regime change, to eliminating terrorist threats, to destroying Iran's nuclear capacity, to wiping out its missile arsenal. It's impossible for him to win a war, or for the American people to support a war, he can't explain.

Both Putin and Trump also operated on two false assumptions. One, that the other side would quickly collapse. Instead, both Ukraine and Iran have shown surprising resistance. Two, that once they launched their war, citizens would rise up and topple their own government. Putin urged Ukrainian soldiers to "take power into their own hands." Trump called on Iranians to "seize the moment." It didn't happen in Ukraine and hasn't in Iran.

Perhaps most troubling, both Putin and Trump started their wars with no obvious, achievable exit strategy. Which has already led to a long, deadly, costly conflict in Ukraine, with still no end in sight. Without a clear end game, many military experts warn that Iran could turn into a "Ukraine-like quagmire." Trump has no idea how long his war will last. One day, he predicts it'll take months. The next day, he says it's already over.

Meanwhile, of course, civilian casualties mount up. As of early 2026, 15,172 civilian deaths were documented in Ukraine. An estimated 1,800 so far in Iran, including 175 school girls, according to a preliminary Pentagon investigation, killed by a misguided U.S. Tomahawk missile. Which Trump, without any evidence, but solely in his "opinion," blamed on Iran.

One thing for sure. Watching Trump's war in Iran, now we know why he's done nothing to stop the war in Ukraine, which - remember? - he promised to end on day one. Why not? Because he's always had a man-crush on Putin and wanted to be just like him. So now in Iran he's following Putin's war-making tactics to the letter. Vladimir must be so proud.

(C)2026 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.