- Joined
- May 22, 2012
- Messages
- 103,961
- Reaction score
- 66,757
- Location
- Uhland, Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
That's conservative economic theory - and it sounds really reasonable to you, doesn't it? It sounds really, really sensible, doesn't it?
Now, if that's how it really worked out in the REAL world, then shouldn't it be reflected in the economies of the world, all over the world? Yes, it should...but it doesn't.
Look at ALL the first-world democracies on the planet - every single one. What do they ALL share in common? "Big Government", high effective taxes, and strong regulation. EVERY first-world democracy has ALL of those traits. (and FYI, some try to argue "Singapore" as an instance of low taxes, but their taxes are even higher when the "mandatory savings account" is taken into account - it's a tax in all but name)
On the other hand, are there democracies that have the conservative trifecta of small government, low effective taxes, and weak regulation? Absolutely...and they're ALL third-world nations.
So this begs the question: WHY is it that ALL first-world democracies have the kind of economic policies that conservatives claim are a sure-fire recipe for economic doom, whereas when it comes to democracies that have the kind of economic policies that conservatives do support, ALL of them are third-world nations? WHY is that?
Why is it that in every single instance, the actual RESULTS of conservative economic theory are precisely the opposite of what conservative dogma requires? WHY is that?
Yet, despite its "third world" policies, you choose to live here. WHY is that?