Scottish Referendum on Independence

[Nicodeamus]

Most of those countries have strong social programs to deal with the inequality. Its not the property rights (though these are important) that bring down inequality. Also, those countries have strong, very involved governments. Well, Sweden and Switzerland do. Sweden is probably one of the most socialist countries I know. Switzerland has amazing government development as well as strong regulation in many areas. As I pointed out in the previous discussion where you brought up those countries. Both those countries have and will socialize a resource if its in the countries interest. So they have property right limits like everyone else.

PS, you are still ignoring the inequality issue Saying "property rights" and "freedom" 10 times doesnt change anything

Sweden hardly intervenes, it has the highest property right index in the world. It has little competition regulation (except for the case of natural disaster). They have even privatized their healthcare and social services in the recent years! http://www.freemarketfoundation.com/issues/sweden-turns-to-the-market-for-health-care
Not so long ago trade unions in sweden were advocating less government. That is how free they are.

You can always look at the free market foundation for evidence of these claims (they actually do studies on it).

Private property is a prerequisite to reduce inequality. Countries they do not grand it (or grand it only to a certain portion of their population) have high inequality levels:

1. South Africa.
2. Brazil
3. Venezuela.
4. Zimbabwe
5. Russia

back to scottland!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEOOZDbMrgE

 

[Nicodeamus]

Hong Kong is one of those that provides a welfare state. They also take land ownership out of the equation. Not things the libertarian economists normally mention.

I am not going to lose sleep over a 75, 99 or 999 year land lease.

Scotland is currently dependent on oil and gas for a fair percentage of their revenue. They also have trouble attracting people.


Both Sweden and Switzerland have significant intervention in the personal lives of their citizens.

It depends on the Swiss canton, sweden has personal life intervention (more social), but they intervene on average less than any country in the world, as I pointed out they have the highest private property index. They still have a social service that is big (but in recent years they have been moving in the other direction).

 

[w1z4rd]

Sweden hardly intervenes, it has the highest property right index in the world. It has little competition regulation (except for the case of natural disaster). They have even privatized their healthcare and social services in the recent years! http://www.freemarketfoundation.com/issues/sweden-turns-to-the-market-for-health-care
Not so long ago trade unions in sweden were advocating less government. That is how free they are.

You can always look at the free market foundation for evidence of these claims (they actually do studies on it).

Private property is a prerequisite to reduce inequality. Countries they do not grand it (or grand it only to a certain portion of their population) have high inequality levels:

1. South Africa.
2. Brazil
3. Venezuela.
4. Zimbabwe
5. Russia

back to scottland!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEOOZDbMrgE

I think you grossly misunderstand Sweden. You get public and private healthcare but its mostly decentralized government public healthcare ..... you get taxed close on 70% of your salary. Your kids get free education, you get housing allowances, etc etc. They are probably one of the most socialist countries in the EU (and in the top 10 most socialist countries in the world). However, if thats what you want. Welcome to the good side Sweden is also a nanny state and highly regulated

Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, etc are all very very socialized countries. All of them make up part of the 10 most socialist countries in the world. If Scotland vote for independence, this is the route they will take as well. They will become more socialist (which is why Chris is having a wobble)

 

[noxibox]

Not so long ago trade unions in sweden were advocating less government. That is how free they are.

They could certainly do with less government, as could Switzerland.

Private property is a prerequisite to reduce inequality. Countries they do not grand it (or grand it only to a certain portion of their population) have high inequality levels:

1. South Africa.
2. Brazil
3. Venezuela.
4. Zimbabwe
5. Russia

back to scottland!

You should include the UK in that list then. Most people cannot afford to own property and it is getting worse every year.

 

[Nicodeamus]

I think you grossly misunderstand Sweden. You get public and private healthcare but its mostly decentralized government public healthcare ..... you get taxed close on 70% of your salary

not true

from wikipedia

Sweden has a progressive income tax, the rates for 2014 are as follows:
0% from 0 kr to 18,800 kr (~0 - 2,690 USD)
Circa 31% (ca. 7% county and 24% municipality tax): From 18,800 kr to 433,900 kr (~2,690 - 62,140 USD)
31% + 20%: From 433,900 kr to 615,700 kr (~62,140 - 88,180 USD)
31% + 25%: Above 615,700 kr (88,180 USD and up) [4]

. Your kids get free education, you get housing allowances, etc etc. They are probably one of the most socialist countries in the EU. However, if thats what you want. Welcome to the good side

up to 10% of swedesh children are in private education, which is higher than the world average. I am not against public education if it is of high quality.

Sweden is also a nanny state and highly regulated

It is a nanny state in the social sense (healthcare and education etc), but not in the business sense. It is has little to no competition law and little business regulations, http://www.heritage.org/index/country/sweden

In the past few years sweden has significantly increased its business freedom index by 11 points making it one of the most free places in the world to do business in. Your claim is simply not true.

 

[noxibox]

It depends on the Swiss canton, sweden has personal life intervention (more social), but they intervene on average less than any country in the world, as I pointed out they have the highest private property index. They still have a social service that is big (but in recent years they have been moving in the other direction).

I'll wait for one of my Swiss friends to go back there someday and then tell me they've done away with their petty regulation of everyday life.

 

[Nicodeamus]

They could certainly do with less government, as could Switzerland.


You should include the UK in that list then. Most people cannot afford to own property and it is getting worse every year.

In at Uk at least they have some access to capital, but unfortunately due to the banking crisis and the strict criteria for getting a loan it is true. The situation is even worse in the USA.

In South Africa for example, even RDP owners do not have title deeds. Black real estate agents make up 3% of the total market, simply because black people do not own the land they they are living on. Therefore it has little value and they are kept in poverty.

 

[zippy]

Less than 6 million people live in Scotland. I don't know if that's viable. But good luck to them if they do vote for independence. It's a mistake, but it's theirs to make

 

[Nicodeamus]

I'll wait for one of my Swiss friends to go back there someday and then tell me they've done away with their petty regulation of everyday life.

It is very canton dependent, but I want to emphasis again that there is a different between social and economic regulation. i.e. having to fill in a form where you live or go to and only being allowed to drive 40km/h has less effect than a business regulation. The European countries have managed to split these two, which is why ''social countries'' in some sense have free markets.

SA is a good example where we have a lot of social freedom, but our economic freedom is limited.

 

[w1z4rd]

not true

Well the part about me correcting you about Sweden's healthcare is true, I was wrong on the progressive income taxation rate though, thanks for correcting. It appears to only go up to 56%

up to 10% of swedesh children are in private education, which is higher than the world average. I am not against public education if it is of high quality.

Yeah, thanks to good public education many people can use a good education to get out of poverty and go private. Im not against private education

It is a nanny state in the social sense (healthcare and education etc), but not in the business sense. It is has little to no competition law and little business regulations, http://www.heritage.org/index/country/sweden

Lol, Ive said your point many times. That Sweden is very economically free. You should have paid attention instead of arguing with me when I brought that up in the past. Yes, in a well regulated market competition thrives. Thats been my point here for the last several years. It allows smaller firms to compete with bigger firms because the regulation allows a more fair playing field.

However, Sweden, like other countries have shown that when people dont play fair, the ball gets taken away from them. An example would be them nationalizing some banks in the past.

In the past few years sweden has significantly increased its business freedom index by 11 points making it one of the most free places in the world to do business in. Your claim is simply not true.

No, it is my true. Ive been saying this for years! Ive basically showed you this example many times! With the same heritige.org link!

Libertarians have been saying for years that government regulation is bad for economic freedom and I have been saying for years... good government regulation is good for an economy. Sweden, Canada and the other socialist states have been my examples for many years. If you look at the top 10 most socialist states in the world (most of them with the exception of China) are in the top 10 most economically free countries in the world. This is done through smart regulation of the economy. The longer this smart regulation continues the more a culture of compliance develops. The more everyone plays fair, the less need there is for more regulation.

Small businesses thrive when the big predator corporations are kept in line.

 

[noxibox]

It is a nanny state in the social sense (healthcare and education etc), but not in the business sense. It is has little to no competition law and little business regulations, http://www.heritage.org/index/country/sweden

A possible reason that might be the state of affairs in Sweden is that their culture makes them behave better without intervention. What we've witnessed in other countries like the US, UK and South Africa is that business will rape and pillage given half a chance. The regulations, without getting into whether they go too far or are the wrong sort of regulation, were a response to that business behaviour. Even now businesses push the limits to see how much they can break the law or bend the regulations and get away with it.

 

[Nicodeamus]

A possible reason that might be the state of affairs in Sweden is that their culture makes them behave better without intervention. What we've witnessed in other countries like the US, UK and South Africa is that business will rape and pillage given half a chance. The regulations, without getting into whether they go too far or are the wrong sort of regulation, were a response to that business behaviour. Even now businesses push the limits to see how much they can break the law or bend the regulations and get away with it.

The unintended consequence was the business ended up writing the regulations, causing more harm than there initially was (that is the case with SA and the USA).

I agree to an extend that European culture has an effect, but that opens a whole can of worms for one nations states to be better than multi-cultural states.

 

[w1z4rd]

Anyone who says that Sweden does not have a well regulated (by government) economy is simply telling fibs. They have many regulators for many different industries and are quick to clamp down on economic abuse.

 

[w1z4rd]

I agree to an extend that European culture has an effect, but that opens a whole can of worms for one nations states to be better than multi-cultural states.

Switzerland is very multicultural. There are three main, but very separate groups. Germans, Italians and French

 

[Nicodeamus]

Switzerland is very multicultural. There are three main, but very separate groups. Germans, Italians and French

Each Canton has a largely unique cultural character and the main groups are concentrated among the cantons. That is why most of them only have one official language. Graubünden being the only exception. This is however the european model, which allows minorities more rights (at least up to federal level) in their own country and it is far better than a one man one vote rule.

 

[w1z4rd]

The top 10 most socialist countries in the world are:

China
Denmark
Finland
Netherlands
Canada
Sweden
Norway
Ireland
New Zealand
Belgium

Most of those countries (excluding China) have strong and intelligent regulation to manage the large predatory corporations from stifling smaller/startup companies. This is one of the main reasons why they are so economically competitive.

 

[w1z4rd]

Each Canton has a largely unique cultural character and the main groups are concentrated among the cantons. That is why most of them only have one official language. Graubünden being the only exception. This is however the european model, which allows minorities more rights (at least up to federal level) in their own country and it is far better than a one man one vote rule.

Yeah, but each group votes for their leaders and policies via direct democracy (ie, everyone gets a vote). You can have one man, one vote in both direct democracy and representative democracy.

 

[Nicodeamus]

Yeah, but each group votes for their leaders and policies via direct democracy (ie, everyone gets a vote). You can have one man, one vote in both direct democracy and representative democracy.

Swizerland provides a good model for SA imho, direct democracy and minority rights at the same time.

 

[w1z4rd]

Swizerland provides a good model for SA imho, direct democracy and minority rights at the same time.

As long as they come with that great public infrastructure and smart regulation for the economy the Swiss have. Ill support that

 

[cr@zydude]

Double post