04 Oct 06
Countries with more economic freedom have substantially higher per capita incomes -- ranging from $2,998 in the least free, to $24,402 in the most free, according to the FRASER FORUM's "Economic Freedom of the World."
http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/admin/books/chapterfiles/Sep06ffMcmahon.pdf#
04 Oct 06
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterDoes that make them better off?
Countries with more economic freedom have substantially higher per capita incomes -- ranging from $2,998 in the least free, to $24,402 in the most free, according to the FRASER FORUM's "Economic Freedom of the World."
http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/admin/books/chapterfiles/Sep06ffMcmahon.pdf#
04 Oct 06
Allow me to summarize the benefits of economic freedom:
o Countries with more economic freedom have substantially higher per capita incomes -- $2,998 in the least free quartile to $24,402 in the most free.
o Growth rates are higher in more economically free countries, from an average of -0.2 percent in the least free to 2.1 percent in the most free.
o Life expectancy is over 20 years longer in countries with the most economic freedom than it is in those with the least.
o Political rights and civil liberties increase substantially in countries as economic freedom increases.
04 Oct 06
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterDoes that make them better off?
Allow me to summarize the benefits of economic freedom:
o Countries with more economic freedom have substantially higher per capita incomes -- $2,998 in the least free quartile to $24,402 in the most free.
o Growth rates are higher in more economically free countries, from an average of -0.2 percent in the least free to 2.1 percent in the mo ...[text shortened]... al rights and civil liberties increase substantially in countries as economic freedom increases.
04 Oct 06
Originally posted by RedmikeI knew you wouldn't be able to resist this one. In short, economic freedom is the absence of government control, regulation or interference in the economy. Lower taxes, smaller government and flexible labor markets are hallmarks of economically free states.
How is 'economic freedom' defined?
04 Oct 06
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterThat's all very well, but for this to stand up in any sort of scientific way, we have to know what the measures are. Otherwise it might as well just be made up.
I knew you wouldn't be able to resist this one. In short, economic freedom is the absence of government control, regulation or interference in the economy. Lower taxes, smaller government and flexible labor markets are hallmarks of economically free states.
If you look at the national data behind this, they measure political freedom and civil liberties for each nation. There is a spreadsheet which you can upload with this data for each country.
Each nation is given a number for their political freedom and civil liberties, and sure enough the US and Western Eupropean countries all get top marks, and the usual suspects get bottom marks.
But nowhere is there any detail of how these marks are arrrived at.
Also, there is an assumption that these apparently arbitrary 'political freedom' measures are the only variable. Economics is not that simple. The reasons why a nation performs better or worse than another nation is down to a complex combination of different factors.
This sort of stuff is kindergarten statistics for kindergarten economists.
04 Oct 06
1 edit
Originally posted by RedmikeYou can live alone in your economic wilderness RedMike, wearing your communist hair shirt, dining on Marxist locusts and utopian honey, but the rest of the world is passing you and your cohorts. The facts are that people are living freer, longer and more productive lives in those countries that subscribe to the economic model described in the Fraser study.
...This sort of stuff is kindergarten statistics for kindergarten economists.
04 Oct 06
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterThis is nothing to do with my politics, other than that giving you a smokescreen.
You can live alone in your economic wilderness RedMike, wearing your communist hair shirt, dining on Marxist locusts and utopian honey, but the rest of the world is passing you and cohorts. The facts are that people are living freer, longer and more productive lives in those countries that subscribe to the economic model described in the Fraser study.
The simple fact is that this report makes up an arbitrary score for 'political freedom' and 'civil liberties' and then uses this to justify the notion that countries who do well on these arbitrary scores do well on certain economic measures.
Toytown statistics and toytown economics.
04 Oct 06
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterIt seems to me that people have less leisure time these days, not more. Less vacation time and longer working hours. Food quality, is better for those that buy but much worse for those that produce. Even the quality of the crap we eat these days is debatable. Good health care is becoming less available as accountants and financiers start to control its provision and while there is more consumer choice in some areas there is certainly less, or non in others.
Of course it does...more wealth means more leisure time, better food, better health care, more consumer choice, longer life span, etc.
A longer life span seems to be the only definitive thing I would agree with though I'm not sure if it's worth the effort any more.
04 Oct 06
Originally posted by catfoodtimWhat a bunch of sad sacks you guys are. If you're the best and the brightest your country has to offer, it's no wonder the United States -- even with its 50 percent or higher drop-out rate for minorities and 20 million illegal aliens -- is kicking your butts economically.
I concur Mr Wheely.
der schwarze Ritter is missing a key point: Quality of Life.
That 2 hour commute to that well-paid job to meet the repayments on the mortgage, 2 cars, creche and credit card bills... the longer life span means nothing when you've to work longer - I'm sure by the time I reach 60/65, the retirement age will be well into the 70s - and pay more for health care.
04 Oct 06
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter70.000 Million dollars trade deficit with the EU just in the first half of 2006 doesn't exactly sound like kicking our butts.
What a bunch of sad sacks you guys are. If you're the best and the brightest your country has to offer, it's no wonder the United States -- even with its 50 percent or higher drop-out rate for minorities and 20 million illegal aliens -- is kicking your butts economically.
Evaluation of these indexes can only be made dinamically, not comparing GDP per capita which was built on the history of the entire countries. If you compare growth with the index you'll have a harder time proving a strong correlation.
And don't forget that, in third world countries, there are many components of the index that are trademarks of institution failure of gargantuan dimensions (corruption, the biggest of them all) that are not necessarily relevant in a 'free market' vs 'regulated market' discussion.
05 Oct 06
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritterhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29
What a bunch of sad sacks you guys are. If you're the best and the brightest your country has to offer, it's no wonder the United States -- even with its 50 percent or higher drop-out rate for minorities and 20 million illegal aliens -- is kicking your butts economically.
Notice the EU has a higher GDP than the US.