The Danes are free in both senses of the word. They can make decisions but they are provided for if it all goes wrong. I dont' get what your problem is with that. Poverty is not a social good. The absence of poverty does not mean the absence of making decisions.
I don't have a problem with it, nor am I Danish. I have a problem with the basis of a disagreement being centered around word usage.
I am trying to illustrate different uses of the term 'freedom', and how some uses require an additional qualifier, and how it is fallacious to then drop that qualifier and call it a different 'concept' of freedom. It is a specific application of freedom. If some subset of people hold '
Freedom from x' as their highest ideal, they have the
freedom to do that.
When I refer to freedom, it means the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action.
In Denmark, there is a very different understanding of what "freedom" means. In that country, they have gone a long way to ending the enormous anxieties that comes with economic insecurity. Instead of promoting a system which allows a few to have enormous wealth, they have developed a system which guarantees a strong minimal standard of living to all -- including the children, the elderly and the disabled.
It sounds like you are endorsing the idea that freedom includes a guarantee of a strong minimal standard of living to all.
I sort of like it too. Especially if we are moving to a society where machines remove the need for most workers.
I suppose it could seem that way, when you paste in a quote that I did not make as if it were mine.