 |
|
RE: Have we gotten so focused on philosophy that we
Posted on: December 3, 2016 at 16:19:21 CT
MUTGR MU
Posts:
67111
Member For:
24.01 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
While in theory I believe the Constitutional Republic designed by the Framers coupled with more or less free market capitalism is a superior design for government, I've realized that the relative success of a given nation at the margins has more to do with the capital stock of the people that comprise that nation than with the particular design of government. There are obvious outliers: Communism has been a disaster wherever it's been tried (see Russia, Cuba, South Korea).
But I came of age a Reagan Republican and was a firm believer in the theory of smaller government, lower taxes, less regulation, free trade, etc. I thought NAFTA at the time was a good idea. I looked down on the social democratic systems in Europe.
In hindsight, while I still think the old American model is still preferable and the best, did the European countries, in particular the Nordic countries, not seem to be rather happy, peaceful and successful with their social democratic forms of government? I would suggest it had more to do with the fact that they had relatively smaller populations that were homogeneous and high functioning. They constantly ranked high in surveys of the most happy countries, most content populace, etc. While I argued here and elsewhere that they were wrong because they were quasi-socialistic, who can say they weren't successful for their people?
You can implement any form of government you want, or no form at all (AC) in your typical African or middle-eastern country and it will be a complete disaster, largely because the populations there are not highly functional.
I would note that the Nordic countries are now falling in those surveys with mass immigration from Africa and the Middle-East, mostly Muslim.
If Trump does anything to stem the tide of mass immigration from third world countries, he will have been a success in my book.
Everything else is trivial.
Edited by MUTGR at 16:24:47 on 12/03/16
But I came of age a Reagan Republican and was a firm believer in the theory of smaller government, lower taxes, less regulation, free trade, etc. I thought NAFTA at the time was a good idea. I looked down on the social democratic systems in Europe.
In hindsight, while I still think the old American model is still preferable and the best, did the European countries, in particular the Nordic countries, not seem to be rather happy, peaceful and successful with their social democratic forms of government? I would suggest it had more to do with the fact that they had relatively smaller populations that were homogeneous and high functioning. They constantly ranked high in surveys of the most happy countries, most content populace, etc. While I argued here and elsewhere that they were wrong because they were quasi-socialistic, who can say they weren't successful for their people?
You can implement any form of government you want, or no form at all (AC) in your typical African or middle-eastern country and it will be a complete disaster, largely because the populations there are not highly functional.
I would note that the Nordic countries are now falling in those surveys with mass immigration from Africa and the Middle-East, mostly Muslim.
If Trump does anything to stem the tide of mass immigration from third world countries, he will have been a success in my book.
Everything else is trivial.
Edited by MUTGR at 16:24:47 on 12/03/16
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
RE: Have we gotten so focused on philosophy that we - MUTGR MU - 12/3 16:19:21
-