Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Many conservatives feel that conservativism is such a great thing and yet when you look at the countries and places around the world that are conservative they are often have major problems (ie Saudi Arabia, Libya, Afghanistan[can't get much more conservative then that],etc.). Now, when you look at the liberal countries (most of Europe, Japan, S. Korea, etc.) they are in a hell of a better situation. Heck, the "conservatives" in many of those countries are the equivalent of many Democrats here. Even here in this country if you take away the more liberal areas (ie west coast, much the midwest, northeast) our country would be a shadow of itself. So where are these great examples of countries that conservatism produces?
The problems are seen by the attitude of this post. The country that was once looked for for inspiration was America before Obama
If the Baltic States are the model for American conservatives, isn't it slightly a misleading one? As you rightly point out, these economies have grown very quickly because they started so far back. But just like the People's Republic, their high rates of economic growth can't be sustained forever - they'll catch up, then they'll plateau.
And just like the PRC, it's unlikely in the Baltic States that an informed population which has grown accustomed to an ever-improving standard of living, and which is also very familiar with the Western standard of social safety, will accept a safety net with big holes in it forever.
It seems to me that to suppose the Baltic peoples are a sort of "Lost Tribe of Israel", deeply committed to an ideologically pure laissez-faire liberal market, is to fundamentally misunderstand the recent history of that region.
You are right...they will plateau eventually but it is difficult to determine when. As long as their tax rates are favorable to international investment (and by comparison to the rest of europe they willl be) they will continue growth. If they manage their growth/inflation/interest rates properly they can sustain it for a long time. Also...their tax rates being flat do not necessarily mean that they are fundamentally low...they are just equitable across all incomes. Don't quote me on this but I think they are like 26% in most of the baltic countries with essentially no deductions. That is basically a higher effective rate than 70% of all Americans. The issue that I praise the Baltic countries for is making the rate flat and lowering deductions. The rate itself is important but the simplicity is key.
Now...whether or not they will accept a weak safety net is speculative. It's possible that they will end up developing more of a safety net in the future to combat rising income inequality and poverty but it's hard to say what they'll compromise to get it. A benefit the baltic people have is a demographically homogenous structure in terms of average child birth, a static population, and a smaller population. The last two italicized words are key. A large and rapidly growing population is more difficult and costly to manage. In these little microcosms like latvia and estonia it is easier to maintain which make the possibility of a safety net possible and ultimately as long as their receipts stay high (and so far they are showing no reason to assume they won't) they would have no trouble funding a solid social welfare system without increasing or "tiering" their tax rates. That would be the key....I don't know of any republicans that believe we should wipe out the welfare system as a whole....we just have different ideas on how to fund it.
And on the last paragraph I agree as well. They aren't working to become these Milton Friedmanesqe purists. I read a paper while I was in undergraduate school by the Estonian PM and he essentially equated the Estonian adherance to the "free market" ideology to a reactionary movement against what they had been subjected to for the last decade which makes sense.
But to the OP....If you are genuinely interested in which countries the GOP looks to as examples of free market politics...the ones I listed are those. That being said though...no country can be a true comparable for any ideology or economic model. All countries have different demographics, infrastructure, and cultural identities which impact how their economic models play out.
Actually we liberals would like to see us become more like Denmark or Sweden. When that happens, then we will definitely be dancing in the streets and riding our bikes everywhere. Or even Germany, it would be great to be more like Germany. You seem to think there is only one liberal country in Europe, hate to break it to you, but there are many liberal countries there.
I just watched a documentary a few days ago about Sweden's campaign against domestic violence. The Swedish government sent scientists to Norway, Canada, and America to research ways to reduce domestic violence. When they returned with recommended treatment programs, the government didn't implement them because "treatment doesn't work and is too focused on the violent men instead of the female victims."
Yes, that's right. Swedish politicians simply decided the treatment didn't work so they didn't try it. Because they would be seen by feminist voters as spending money on men instead of on victimized women, they let women keep being abused when their own committee had hard data on how to reduce domestic violence.
Seems eerily similar to Obama putting together a panel on how to solve the economic problems and when the panel returned its results he didn't implement them because they were policies that Republicans favored.
So excuse me if I'm not eager to dance in the streets about being more like Sweden.
I just watched a documentary a few days ago about Sweden's campaign against domestic violence. The Swedish government sent scientists to Norway, Canada, and America to research ways to reduce domestic violence. When they returned with recommended treatment programs, the government didn't implement them because "treatment doesn't work and is too focused on the violent men instead of the female victims."
Yes, that's right. Swedish politicians simply decided the treatment didn't work so they didn't try it. Because they would be seen by feminist voters as spending money on men instead of on victimized women, they let women keep being abused when their own committee had hard data on how to reduce domestic violence.
Seems eerily similar to Obama putting together a panel on how to solve the economic problems and when the panel returned its results he didn't implement them because they were policies that Republicans favored.
So excuse me if I'm not eager to dance in the streets about being more like Sweden.
I am not familiar with this campaign so I would have to read into it first before I could just take what you are saying as truth, it is easy to make anything up on the internet or ignore reasoning for decisions.
But I do agree we have a problem of domestic violence in our country and I think how we handle it is wrong. We have a country that objectifies women and sexualizes them to no end, then blame the woman for being attacked and treating the man like his is the ill person that needs to be reformed.
We live in a country where it is easier to have a boy and teach them not to rape than it is to have a girl and teach her every man could potentially rape her. So I don't blame the Swedes for not wanting to do what we are doing.
The contention that I have with your question is that you are focusing only on socially conservative issues like strict religious adherance (at least that is what I assume if you are making comparisons to countries like Saudi Arabia) which isn't quite the platform of the GOP. As a conservative (and a religious agnostic) I am not a fan of the GOP social platform...so I naturally have an issue with comparisons to GOP political ideology to theocratic fascism. Further...Saudi Arabia actually has fairly leftist policies in terms of their redistribution. They use a large portion of their oil wealth for their social welfare and their universal healthcare systems. Further they take a tax which is one of the pillars of Islam that is another way to assist the poor. So your comparison to these countries is a little off base...you're painting some pretty broad strokes......Tantamount to me saying "how can you be a liberal when Kim Jong Un/Il/Il, Stalin, and Pol Pot were communists!!! How could you do this?!?!?!!" <--doesn't make sense does it?
Now...if you want to look at countries that most conservatives look at as examples of right wing fiscal policy in action...go to either the heritage foundation or another site and look for economic liberty indicies. You'll notice countries like Estonia, Poland, Hong Kong, Lithuania, and Latvia. These countries all share an intriguing parallel that they (except Hong Kong) were introduced to the "free" market in the 90's when communism fell in eastern Europe. These countries were economic graveyards after decades of fiscal mismanagement by their communist governments yet now they are thriving (google Baltic Tigers). All of these countries have very low marginal tax rates, low (by comparison) social welfare policies, and have seen years and years of sustained growth (save 08 of course).....far higher than the US average. These countries have instituted low, flat tax rates, closed loopholes in their receipts, and mitigated some of their more burdensome regulations to attract foreign investment and it has shown to be very profitable for them. They are working towards building a sustainable model which in theory...can't outgrow itself. The issue with a Nordic welfare state is that population growth has to remain static to keep payments and usage in line which it does fairly well in those countries...not the case in the US. The demographic that has seen the highest birth rates consequently are the ones with the lowest employment rates and the highest users of the "system." Ultimately though...we are living longer, and requiring more money to remain healthy as healthcare costs increase. Something HAS to break...and it's either taxes or benefits. The issue with taxes though...you can only raise them so many times before you either hurt growth or disincentivize labor. Would you have any interest in working if you only took home 35% of your pay? I wouldn't.
Now...that being said there have been some detriments to the baltic model. Income inequality has gone up a bit which is a detriment of decreased social welfare systems but that is a risk that I'm ok with taking if it means reduced unemployment and stable growth....which they've seen.
You make a decent argument but how many conservatives have heard about the Baltics? Or even most Americans for that matter. The Baltics are also very small and, as someone else mentioned, are starting from a pretty low point to begin with. But hey, it's the best argument I've heard yet.
You make a decent argument but how many conservatives have heard about the Baltics? Or even most Americans for that matter. The Baltics are also very small and, as someone else mentioned, are starting from a pretty low point to begin with. But hey, it's the best argument I've heard yet.
The Baltic states and Poland are the ones that most closely mimic what we GOPers want to see here. Romney made a visit to Poland for that reason but most Americans are so egocentric that they have a hard time thinking about different economic models or country circumstances...they just should the Reagan mantra. But the arguments made against the Baltics and Poland are true...they are young economies relatively speaking and all economies regardless of their economic models will experience boom/bust periods over their development. Even the Soviet economy during Khruschev in the 50's experienced faster growth than the US for a period and this was a blantant command economy.
I would like to bring up another point regarding the Nordic countries. We all know these countries are taxed VERY heavily...that goes without saying. Therefore, we automatically assume that their example correlates to the US left and is valid. What most fail to realize is that despite having very high personal income taxes they have VERY VERY little in the way of corporate tax rates and business/financial regulation. If you look at the Heritage Foundation (Conservative think tank) Indices of Economic Freedom which essentially gauges the ease of opening and operating a business in a country (freedom FROM burdensome regulation and fee structures) the Nordic countries are at the top. Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Sweden all have relatively low regulations and the ease of starting business is far more streamlined. This goes out of hand to some degree with the US left that (to me anyway) almost feels to be anti-business to some degree.
If I had my druthers...I would love to see a flat tax in this country like Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, or Poland with no deductions or loop holes for individuals or businesses...just a low flat rate (25%). I would also like to see our military expenditures cut substantially, a lot of our overseas bases closed, and our defense R&D budgets geared down with that money put into our social welfare system...will it happen?
It seems some Conservatives are confused, here is the economic liberty indices and I do not see any East European country in the top ten, I notice that Aus and NZ, liberal countries at 3rd and 4th, of course we do not hand bundles of money over to large agri firms.
US Conservatives have some thing in common with Aussies or Kiwis, well as a politician here said our liberal parties are like the Democrats and our centre right parties are like the Democrats.
Let's try "I don't believe in science, therefore all science is wrong." Makes as much sense.
You obviously don't believe in reason either.
Science is actually tangible, real, and can be tested rigorously. Religion is based on fables, stands on the faith of the user, and in all reality can't be tested. Hardly the same in comparing them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Or even Germany, it would be great to be more like Germany. You seem to think there is only one liberal country in Europe, hate to break it to you, but there are many liberal countries there.
