tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post4639118186318690704..comments2024-03-14T11:09:32.759-05:00Comments on Falkenblog: The Perennial HubrisEric Falkensteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-74639718225392662892011-05-12T14:59:39.631-05:002011-05-12T14:59:39.631-05:00anon: None of these countries are socialist using ...anon: None of these countries are socialist using the definition of having public ownership of the means of production, they merely have substantial governments that are large percents of GDP. You find countries like N. Korea, Iraq and Cuba with the largest states, and stateless countries like Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, and Haiti at the bottom, both bad. If you think % of economic activity by government generates a strictly positive derivative, note it is much larger in our pathetic inner cities such as Detroit, and as mentioned, our Keynesian stimulus plans, and other US fiscal plans, have been a rather strong failure. <br /><br />Brad: I think post WW2 government proves free markets work, because Konrad Adenauer rejected Keynesian advice and his economy thrived, Japan also is primarily a market based economy. I think the trillions wasted on foriegn aid is very instructive; how many billions does one have to spend before one is convinced it didn't help? Do they need to merely 'double down'? A good example of the folly of government is here, where two do-gooders <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ray-lahood/a-strategic-investment-ge_b_860820.html" rel="nofollow">talk about</a> how they are helping people by spending money, never mentioning the cost. Give me $1B and I can help a lot of people, it's the opportunity cost that matters, and they are totally oblivious to this trade-off. it is simply improbable they are covering their costs if they are not even aware they have any.Eric Falkensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-33859182019147488452011-05-12T14:06:53.471-05:002011-05-12T14:06:53.471-05:00Brad F., education is not a public good. It is (t...Brad F., education is not a public good. It is (to some degree) rivalrous and excludable in consumption. You can get only so many desks into any given classroom.<br /><br />And, even if it was, as David Friedman is fond of pointing out, there are negative externaliites associated with it; better informed rent seekers.Patrick R. Sullivannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-61314670703131043542011-05-12T12:48:48.219-05:002011-05-12T12:48:48.219-05:00"Allowing people to fail incents them to make..."Allowing people to fail incents them to make optimal decisions, no less so for Joe Sixpack than for Bear Stearns. It is a shame that large corporations are so cravenly dependent upon government for favors, but given the size of government and the capriciousness with which it can apply the law and create valuable favors, a corporation is like a college football program: it can't be big and not somewhat corrupt."<br /><br />This is a rather pathetic justification for applying socialism to the rich while simultaneously imposing the most brutal form of libertarianism on the poor. <br /><br />"Government can't increase our aggregate income any more than it can increase our aggregate happiness..."<br /><br />And yet, all the World's happiest countries are socialist. It's no wonder the rich in the U.S. are happy; they really do live in a socialist paradise (for them anyway). Data! http://www.forbes.com/2010/07/14/world-happiest-countries-lifestyle-realestate-gallup-table.html<br /><br />Rank<br />(by % Thriving) Country Region Percent<br />Thriving Percent<br />Struggling Percent<br />Suffering Daily<br />Experience<br />1 Denmark Europe 82 17 1 7.9<br />2 Finland Europe 75 23 2 7.8<br />3 Norway Europe 69 31 0 7.9<br />4 Sweden Europe 68 30 2 7.9<br />4 Netherlands Europe 68 32 1 7.7Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com