Well, Sweden isn't really socialist. It's more of a social democracy, and yes, you've been brainwashed into thinking that they really care about equality.

Say you have two teams with lots of mega stars, Manchester City versus Real Madrid; even if I agree with you in principal, there's no way their performance is creating enough stimuliation on the job market to justify their salaries relative to societal value. Another thing that annoys me is that we tend to dote on athletes and actors and hate on entrepreneurs, for some strange reason.

Example above, quick maths; Manchester City's total wage expenses are around 2.680.000 £ weekly, that makes about 3.680.000 $, add bonuses that are quite common, and one can easily add another 5-10% on top. The yearly cost is s staggering 1.393.600.000 £, or roughly 1.910.000.000 $.

Real Madrid weekly wage expenses are around 2.173.000 £, that makes about 2.980.000 $, the same type of bonuses are just as common here, adding another 5-10% or more on top. Yearly cost is about 1.130.000.000 £, or roughly 1.780.000.000 $.

With bonues, let's say about 4.000.000.000 $ with bonuses, which is likely on the low side. Even when you factor in medical staff, training staff and facilities, maintenance on stadiums, transport, PR departments, ticket salesmen, waiting staff, cleaning staff and stadiums and all other related jobs, even the net sales of shirts and other effects and the ones working these stores (where shirts from all sorts of teams are sold), the outcome will always favor an entrepeneur, considering the relative low amount of working hours per person per team, they simply don't employ nearly enough people through their sport. Given, it's hard to put a price on entertainment, but it's still food for thought. The net gain from actors are even worse, someone like Tom Cruise, who could easily make 50-100 million $ on a big film that takes him about 1.5-2 years to take part in, in bouts separated by breaks and other projects, a similar generation of revenue across actual industry or similar positions to provide jobs would be massively advantageous over this.

Fascinating, your insight into the economics of sports.

But are your numbers really correct?

You say salaries with bonuses for Man U are £3.68 million weekly, which should become 52 x 3.7 = £191 million per year, and yet in the end you're refering to figures in the billions of pounds, nearly ten times the figure of £191 million.

Hah! I seem to have confused it with NOK....

But, yes, the weekly figures are pretty close to correct, the bonuses are harder to calculate since it's on a weekly basis and depends on goals scores, man of the match wins, clean sheets etc.

Okay, cool.

But is there any correlation between your insight into sports economics and your +100 hours spent on FIFA 17?

Indeed Sweden is a mixed economy between capitalism and socialism, and it has worked so well in practice producing a harmonic society (although the economic policy is only one factor, our hard working Lutheran heritage might be an even stronger factor to explain our success, as well as Christianity in general, and the humble Northern European mentality on top of it all) that even I, a person who is an extreme right wing conservative nationalist, think that it's quite a decent model.

But why do you imply that our model, the Scandinavian model, isn't mainly about equality?