Comments on: The Laissez Faire Welfare State http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/ The Sweet Release of Reason Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:11:50 +0000 hourly 1 By: Dann http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12428 Dann Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:21:55 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12428 I'm quite ignorant in these subjects, I admit. But regarding the problem of scale, what's really the deal with it? If it works for a tiny country, theoretically you could get ten, twenty, a hundred of tiny countries with that working, right? Up to the populational number of a large country where it supposedly wouldn't work due to being much larger. Then the intuitive conclusion is that the welfare structure is somehow sliced in tiny pseudo-countries within a country, it would work as if it were many tiny countries. What am I missing? Bureaucracy could put a hold in this goal anyway, I'm not questioning that. But other than that, is there some sort of "structural" problem that would be analogue to trying to raise a skyscraper with the structure of many normal houses one above the other or something like that? I can't really see it. To me seems that it would be more like building many houses side by side than something that would collapse. But again, I don't really know much. I'm quite ignorant in these subjects, I admit. But regarding the problem of scale, what's really the deal with it? If it works for a tiny country, theoretically you could get ten, twenty, a hundred of tiny countries with that working, right? Up to the populational number of a large country where it supposedly wouldn't work due to being much larger. Then the intuitive conclusion is that the welfare structure is somehow sliced in tiny pseudo-countries within a country, it would work as if it were many tiny countries. What am I missing? Bureaucracy could put a hold in this goal anyway, I'm not questioning that. But other than that, is there some sort of “structural” problem that would be analogue to trying to raise a skyscraper with the structure of many normal houses one above the other or something like that? I can't really see it. To me seems that it would be more like building many houses side by side than something that would collapse. But again, I don't really know much.

]]> By: Dann http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12427 Dann Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:21:55 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12427 I'm quite ignorant in these subjects, I admit. But regarding the problem of scale, what's really the deal with it? If it works for a tiny country, theoretically you could get ten, twenty, a hundred of tiny countries with that working, right? Up to the populational number of a large country where it supposedly wouldn't work due to being much larger. Then the intuitive conclusion is that the welfare structure is somehow sliced in tiny pseudo-countries within a country, it would work as if it were many tiny countries. What am I missing? Bureaucracy could put a hold in this goal anyway, I'm not questioning that. But other than that, is there some sort of "structural" problem that would be analogue to trying to raise a skyscraper with the structure of many normal houses one above the other or something like that? I can't really see it. To me seems that it would be more like building many houses side by side than something that would collapse. But again, I don't really know much. I'm quite ignorant in these subjects, I admit. But regarding the problem of scale, what's really the deal with it? If it works for a tiny country, theoretically you could get ten, twenty, a hundred of tiny countries with that working, right? Up to the populational number of a large country where it supposedly wouldn't work due to being much larger. Then the intuitive conclusion is that the welfare structure is somehow sliced in tiny pseudo-countries within a country, it would work as if it were many tiny countries. What am I missing? Bureaucracy could put a hold in this goal anyway, I'm not questioning that. But other than that, is there some sort of “structural” problem that would be analogue to trying to raise a skyscraper with the structure of many normal houses one above the other or something like that? I can't really see it. To me seems that it would be more like building many houses side by side than something that would collapse. But again, I don't really know much.

]]> By: Freedom vs. Risk | Heretical Ideas Blog http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12426 Freedom vs. Risk | Heretical Ideas Blog Fri, 29 Aug 2008 14:34:59 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12426 [...] century laissez faire, but rather the welfare state/unregulated capitalism that is the hallmark of Denmark and Iceland. I can’t help but wonder if, stripped from the worry that an unforeseen illness will lead to [...] [...] century laissez faire, but rather the welfare state/unregulated capitalism that is the hallmark of Denmark and Iceland. I can’t help but wonder if, stripped from the worry that an unforeseen illness will lead to [...]

]]> By: The Libertarian PC Police « A Banner Coward http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12425 The Libertarian PC Police « A Banner Coward Wed, 19 Mar 2008 23:52:28 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12425 [...] Okay, I’m all for that. So would McArdle be in favor of transforming the United States into a Scandinavian-style social democracy, for instance? That certainly seems to be the best way to provide Americans with some form of [...] [...] Okay, I’m all for that. So would McArdle be in favor of transforming the United States into a Scandinavian-style social democracy, for instance? That certainly seems to be the best way to provide Americans with some form of [...]

]]> By: anonymous http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12424 anonymous Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:20:14 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12424 It would be interesting to see which is cheaper: having a minimum wage and less government expenditure or having extensive spending and no minimum wage. It would be interesting to see which is cheaper: having a minimum wage and less government expenditure or having extensive spending and no minimum wage.

]]> By: anonymous http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12434 anonymous Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:20:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12434 It would be interesting to see which is cheaper: having a minimum wage and less government expenditure or having extensive spending and no minimum wage. It would be interesting to see which is cheaper: having a minimum wage and less government expenditure or having extensive spending and no minimum wage.

]]> By: Finland, Iceland, and Denmark, and No War « Just Above Sunset http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12423 Finland, Iceland, and Denmark, and No War « Just Above Sunset Mon, 25 Feb 2008 07:37:34 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12423 [...] here he argues with Will Wilkinson and all the the others who think that the economic success of countries like Iceland and Denmark [...] [...] here he argues with Will Wilkinson and all the the others who think that the economic success of countries like Iceland and Denmark [...]

]]> By: TGGP http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12422 TGGP Mon, 25 Feb 2008 05:54:59 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12422 I bet Danish immigrants to the U.S and their children are similarly well educated. I bet Danish immigrants to the U.S and their children are similarly well educated.

]]> By: TGGP http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12436 TGGP Mon, 25 Feb 2008 05:54:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12436 I bet Danish immigrants to the U.S and their children are similarly well educated. I bet Danish immigrants to the U.S and their children are similarly well educated.

]]> By: John http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12421 John Sun, 24 Feb 2008 21:15:48 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/02/22/the-laissez-faire-welfare-state/#comment-12421 I think key moral draw from this story is not just that free market policies can help welfare states, but that well organized welfare states can be the best enviornments in which to engage in buisness. One of the sources of Denmark's success has been its truly massive investment in education and worker training, which keeps their economy much more agile than the rest of the world's. Ditto goes for their tech investments. So the free market knife cuts both ways, methinks. One other thought: The fact the its so incredibly difficult to get rich in Denmark would seem to throw quite the monkeywrench into libertarian thinking on personal gain. If people shouldn't work incredibly hard with negligible profit motives, then how can a system premised on high income taxes be remotely as successful as the Nordic tigers? I think some responsibility could be put on cultural cohession, the nordic work ethic, and that people living in these countries think about collective gains in a much more concrete way than say, Americans, might, but all of those would seem to throw water on free marketeer's assumptions about what really drives people to pursue gain. I think key moral draw from this story is not just that free market policies can help welfare states, but that well organized welfare states can be the best enviornments in which to engage in buisness. One of the sources of Denmark’s success has been its truly massive investment in education and worker training, which keeps their economy much more agile than the rest of the world’s. Ditto goes for their tech investments. So the free market knife cuts both ways, methinks.

One other thought: The fact the its so incredibly difficult to get rich in Denmark would seem to throw quite the monkeywrench into libertarian thinking on personal gain. If people shouldn’t work incredibly hard with negligible profit motives, then how can a system premised on high income taxes be remotely as successful as the Nordic tigers? I think some responsibility could be put on cultural cohession, the nordic work ethic, and that people living in these countries think about collective gains in a much more concrete way than say, Americans, might, but all of those would seem to throw water on free marketeer’s assumptions about what really drives people to pursue gain.

]]>