Switzerland has arguably the most well-run government on the planet. It also indubitably has the best mix of geography and culture of any state. It isn't really a nation-state. It exists for the reason of common ground between all the various European countries that realize that even through war, they all need an unaffiliated entity that can protect their assets. IIRC Switzerland's government has the lowest amount of counterproductive business regulations in the world, and its culture attracts almost exclusively productive and/or wealthy people. Additionally, it's a state with competent monetary policy smack dab in the middle of a confederation of states with abysmal monetary policy. Monetary policy isn't sexy and it doesn't get much attention, but it's the red blood cells of the economy. It's not a miracle creator, but it is deterministic of how good or bad an economy can be.Originally Posted by rong
Without making this any longer, the short of it is that complexities of societies are so great that you can't say a specific policy will have a specific result. For example, even though a certain policy may reduce productivity and overall prosperity in the American south, the same policy will likely go unnoticed in a country several times richer and less diverse. That doesn't mean the policy isn't bad, but effects are relative.
FWIW I think the true capacity civilization has for annual growth is >10%. Given that growth is currently around 2-3% and people tend to think that's a natural rate unaffected by policy, my speculation seems ridiculous. Regardless, there are about a billion different ways to increase or decrease growth, and countries can do all sorts of bad stuff if they do enough good stuff. The ratio matters too. An example is in countries like Denmark and Sweden. The left likes to prop them up as success stories of high tax and high welfare systems (while ignoring a much larger percentage of those countries that have shitty economies), yet what's really going on is that Denmark and Sweden have some of the most sensible regulatory policies in the world. They're vastly more market oriented than the US's regulatory system, and the effect is so powerful that the countries can afford to throw money away in some programs that the US can't.
I don't know. Probably all of the above. Given that it's statewide, it could have some seriously awful effects in the rural areas. I don't know how bad, but in many places outside NYC, $15/hr is really close to the median wage, which means every entry level and/or shitty employee will make about the same amount of money as those who have been working and moving up for a decade or so. This is a recipe for disaster.2. Min wage for food service industry in new York just went up to $15ph so according to what we've discussed we should see a bunch of people laid off and mechanisation of the service? Or will the price of a big Mac go up?
Mostly what I think this will do is make it so that prices in the rural areas are so high that the restaurants lose business. It should reduce immigration to the rural areas and possibly increase it to the cities, but overall it should be lower than it otherwise would be. The ultimate result will probably be harm for the regions with the least amount of economic activity and some tangential benefit for entrenched special interests in the city. Which is the way the left likes it. "Fuck the hillbillies, they're not even real people. We want to live elite lifestyles on our liberal arts diplomas and perpetual table-waiting jobs".
Reply With Quote