Yeah, ok, that’s clear. What isn’t clear is what you want us to think based on this list. Or should those names, including one country that Sam lists as a failed or failing “socialist” country (Ireland), be enough to make us just say “wow, the OP was right”? Because they don’t make me want to say that.
How dare you let your own happiness or survival get in the way of the workings of the almighty Market, whose invisible hand will reach out and fix everything – eventually, at least for those who survive?
Are banks your example of an industry that is loosely regulated? Because there are many more government laws that apply to banks than, for example, to dot-com companies. Why do you think the banks were able to make their huge profits in boom times? Do you think that being able to borrow at extremely low rates from the Fed helped?
I never said that I’m against smart laws. Transparency, not allowing financial institutions to become too big to fail, keeping leverage in check are some examples. The government does have a role in creating rules, improving competition and creating a level playing field, but it’s not the same as micromanaging every aspect of even small businesses’ practices. Corporatism-government mix (ex. Goldman Sachs + federal government) is a recipe for disaster.
Does it make you want to say that a lot of economic freedom is good for country’s economy and no economic freedom is bad? Because that was my point, as proved by these lists of countries. Government’s interference in business, investment, property rights, lots of red tape, rules and regulation, etc. are strongly correlated to bad economic performance. Do you argue with that?
Well what the fuck do you think the rest of us want? Give us this and I, for one, will be perfectly happy. Do you understand that we currently don’t have this? And do you further understand that we are now farther away from this because the Republicans wanted all the rules gone? If not, come back when have clue.
Sorry, but you misread the data (but they should’ve made it clearer). “-” on the “Government Spending” doesn’t mean no data, it means 0, if the overall score is shown. You can confirm this by clicking on each country’s name. Therefore, here is the real bottom ten list:
Zimbabwe
Solomon Islands
North Korea
Micronesia
Maldives
Kiribati
Cuba
Eritrea
Seychelles
Sweden
You are wrong if you think that the OP only includes levels of government spending in his definition of “Big Government.” He does not. For example, he specifically mentions “more regulation.” Therefore, not including things like “Business Freedom”, “Trade Freedom,” “Investment Freedom,” “Labor Freedom” by you from the data I linked to, and only including “Government Spending,” is highly misleading.
Mea culpa regarding the meaning of the Heritage Foundation’s dashes.
However, I consider ill-defined terms such as Business Freedom, Trade Freedom, Investment Freedom, and Labor Freedom to be so subjective and qualitative that they are worthless except as a data point of this group’s opinion.
Government spending, at least, can be measured in currency.
Whoever said they were in favor of stupid laws? The OP starts off with the strawman that “The Left” is entirely against capitalism and mindlessly goes around increasing the size of government.
Was the economic downturn caused by big government or did deregulation play a role? Was the bank bailout a creature of Loony Left or Socialist Paradise thinking? Or was it an of-the-moment emergency measure?
You’re not cut out for this sort of a discussion, are you? You don’t seem to be able to make a point without blowing a gasket. What makes you think I care about defending Republicans or Democrats? They both had more than enough chances to implement rules that would improve competition and create a level playing field and they both failed to do so. However, neither of them failed to pressure government-sponsored enterprises into making the problem much worse. Just because your particular partisan fervor makes you blind to the failure by Democrats, it doesn’t mean that others are so blind too.
Please point out where I defend Democrats for their past actions. The fact is that the OP specifically blames the “left” (which is code for Democrats) for the current crises based on their interference with the all-knowing, all-powerful free markets. You jumped in with some sort of defense of…well, I don’t know what exactly. You seem to treasure free markets, but then you turn around a say exactly what many Democrats have been saying while somehow claiming that they want soething else. Maybe I’m the one tilting at windmills here, it might help if you’d lay out a specific thesis that could be addressed.