If the government takes away your livelihood like this, I think they should help you get back on your feet somehow.

I'm very happy that these farms are being closed, though.

You could also make the argument that farmers should use some of their profits to buy insurance against such things. For example, I remember this story about the UK government and insurance provisions from earlier in the pandemic[1], and there were definitely experts on the radio at the time who said that it's possible to purchase cover against epidemics and other rare events - why not for government deciding to eliminate your herd? Or legal insurance so you can sue for compensation?

Additionally, if mink farmers are aware that their animals can be a vector for disease - and shouldn't they be? - then should they not also take steps to protect their own finances from foreseeable events, regardless of their likelihood?

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51730412

Are they being closed permanently, actually? Yes, this would be a good opportunity to shut down that entire abhorrent industry, but I wouldn't be surprised if the government instead gives a fat handout to the fur farmers to restart their businesses.

Maybe not permanently, but it wouldn't make more sense if they were just allowed to start again next week.

But actually, since the coverage here isn't saying that the industry is being shut down, you're probably right.

You don't have something simulator to Norways social services? In Norway they will help you find a new job, and offer re-education. You also gets up to 80% of your former salary provided by the government until you do.

Yes Denmark have similiar social services. The farms (and related companies that works in the industry) will get financial help and the State will help workers with re-education

From what I noticed in the news is that various European countries have similar policies. Meaning, government doesn't reduce employment by (as government) creating jobs or hiring people. However, they do offer support in fining jobs or making it easier to learn another job. Lastly, unemployment rate is often an important topic and the way that's influenced seems nicer than e.g. UK/US methods. For UK/US it doesn't feel like the government cares about their citizens.

To me (Dutch) the other person is speaking about Denmark without knowing a lot about it.

"You also gets up to 80% of your former salary provided by the government until you do."

Also when you were self-employed, and/or if you quit your job? In Norway can you quit your job for no reason and get 80% of your salary while you look for another (or not)?

Yeah, but if you don't find new jobs for them they start demanding protectionism and tighter migrant quotas instead.

No, but it is the states function to provide for the unemployee. The state also runs job centers, which helps people find new jobs. You don’t need to be communist to care for people, or help the find employment.

Ahem, the US would like a word with you.

Who claimed that Denmark was socialist/communist/marxist? They have social democratic traditions sure, but like the other Scandinavian countries, they have generally transitioned to a more right-wing oriented economic policy over the last 20-30 years, while maintaining their social security net.

Is it somehow inherently socialist/communist/marxist to provide job retraining to people moving between jobs at privately owned companies?

Seems to me that it’s highly beneficial to the private companies involved.

Retraining employees is something that does not require an authoritarian-left dictatorship.

Germany, ruled by conservatives for far too long now, does this too - it's called "Umschulung".