4 ms·

Y'know what's strange? I see people with a particular political bent arguing that Singapore and the USA are apples and oranges, but these same people frequently

Y'know what's strange? I see people with a particular political bent arguing that Singapore and the USA are apples and oranges, but these same people frequently compare extremely small, homogeneous Northern European countries to the USA in support of their political policies. > I don’t know how useful comparisons between countries of similar size are, never mind countries which are so radically different. Anyways, I agree, could you be so kind as to point out these population numbers next time someone points to the small Northern European countries as bastions of happiness, and instruct them to look at the more comparable examples that had similar policies, like the Soviet Union? Just a thought - if we let people cherrypick when to use the "apples and oranges" argument, we'd be letting them get away with all sorts of intellectual dishonesty.

ugh 16y ago
Uhm, I don’t know how similar the policies of Scandinavian countries are compared to those of, say, Soviet Russia. Not very is what I would guess. Also apples and oranges.
- lionhearted 16y ago
  The point was, if you want to compare a state-run economy to a market economy, the larger Soviet Socialist Republics are the better comparable to the USA than Denmark, with its population 5 million and massive amounts of energy reserves. Actually, the more important point is people cite statistics when they're convenient, and ignore them when they're not.
  - jbooth 16y ago
    Actually, it's really not. A capitalist economy with a 50% tax rate, more generous pension, health, unemployment benefits and a larger public sector is still fundamentally a capitalist economy. That's without even getting into the political, speech and rights differences. Little things like "being allowed to trade with other countries or get on a plane to paris if you want". Denmark is still far more similar to the US than to the USSR. EDIT: Not to say comparisons between the US and Denmark are always apples to apples of course. I'm just so sick of repeating to people that no, a slightly larger public sector is not the same thing as collective farming.
    - lionhearted 16y ago
      At the risk of getting downvoted, I'm going to try to reply to show something. Give me the benefit of a read through before downvoting? Discussion is welcome, too. The point I was trying to get across was that people will look qualitatively and ignore quantitative arguments when it suits them, and will do the opposite when it suits them. Heck, you can see it here - "A capitalist economy with a 50% tax rate, more generous pension, health, unemployment benefits and a larger public sector is still fundamentally a capitalist economy." - You could've made a similar reply to ugh explaining why Singapore and the USA is a valid comparison for qualitative reasons despite the population difference. There are qualitative similarities between Singapore and the USA (market economy, dominant emerging industry is information sector, high personal freedom in some areas but strong anti-drug laws, economy is facing falling global demand and a banking system with downward pressure on interest rates due to other countries cutting theirs to rock bottom)... and ugh tosses those qualitative differences due to population size. People don't do the same when the arguments suit them. So people will be skeptical of Singapore data because of its different population size and landmass, while they embrace Denmark... despite the fact that it's a different population size and landmass. This should be noticed and ideally transcended if we want to get to what actually works.
      - jbooth 16y ago
        I wasn't saying that comparisons between Denmark and the US are always valid, I was saying that comparisons between Denmark and the USSR are idiotic. In the case of this particular comparison to Singapore, Singapore is a manufacturing-oriented export economy with low consumption levels. They benefit directly from stimulus in any other country. So the comparison to the US is entirely beside the point -- instead someone should ask, why are they growing? Ok, there's your answer.
      - ugh 16y ago
        People don't do the same when the arguments suit them. That does happen but I hope to be not one of those people.
  - ugh 16y ago
    I don’t think Denmark has a state run economy. Free market with extensive regulation, maybe. And a few state owned companies, probably. Economic policies tend to to get discussed with those dichotomic arguments. I really do think that’s wrong. As though the majority of people in Europe or even just the political elites are in favor of state-run economies! That’s so wrong, it’s ridiculous. There is a whole wealth of decisions you can make about economic policies, not just one. (I personally tend to think that free market mechanisms are a incredibly valuable tool which work in many, probably a large majority of cases, but I don’t think we are lucky enough to always get what we want with them. If the free market would always work there truly would only be one decisions to make – i.e. free market everywhere without restrictions – but I don’t think it’s quite so easy. But that’s just my opinion.) I veer wildly off-topic so I better say that, in the end, I agree that the US would turn into Denmark if they adopted their economic policies 1:1. That wouldn’t work and would be a bad idea.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
notahacker 16y ago
The comparison is also dubious because using Singapore as an example of minimal government intervention is laughable, whereas Scandinavian countries are quite good examples of reasonably effective government service provision in a mixed economy.As is France which is relatively similar to the US. I'm going to assume the Soviet Union comparison was facetious.

ugh 16y ago

Uhm, I don’t know how similar the policies of Scandinavian countries are compared to those of, say, Soviet Russia. Not very is what I would guess. Also apples and oranges.

lionhearted 16y ago
The point was, if you want to compare a state-run economy to a market economy, the larger Soviet Socialist Republics are the better comparable to the USA than Denmark, with its population 5 million and massive amounts of energy reserves. Actually, the more important point is people cite statistics when they're convenient, and ignore them when they're not.
- jbooth 16y ago
  Actually, it's really not. A capitalist economy with a 50% tax rate, more generous pension, health, unemployment benefits and a larger public sector is still fundamentally a capitalist economy. That's without even getting into the political, speech and rights differences. Little things like "being allowed to trade with other countries or get on a plane to paris if you want". Denmark is still far more similar to the US than to the USSR. EDIT: Not to say comparisons between the US and Denmark are always apples to apples of course. I'm just so sick of repeating to people that no, a slightly larger public sector is not the same thing as collective farming.
  - lionhearted 16y ago
    At the risk of getting downvoted, I'm going to try to reply to show something. Give me the benefit of a read through before downvoting? Discussion is welcome, too. The point I was trying to get across was that people will look qualitatively and ignore quantitative arguments when it suits them, and will do the opposite when it suits them. Heck, you can see it here - "A capitalist economy with a 50% tax rate, more generous pension, health, unemployment benefits and a larger public sector is still fundamentally a capitalist economy." - You could've made a similar reply to ugh explaining why Singapore and the USA is a valid comparison for qualitative reasons despite the population difference. There are qualitative similarities between Singapore and the USA (market economy, dominant emerging industry is information sector, high personal freedom in some areas but strong anti-drug laws, economy is facing falling global demand and a banking system with downward pressure on interest rates due to other countries cutting theirs to rock bottom)... and ugh tosses those qualitative differences due to population size. People don't do the same when the arguments suit them. So people will be skeptical of Singapore data because of its different population size and landmass, while they embrace Denmark... despite the fact that it's a different population size and landmass. This should be noticed and ideally transcended if we want to get to what actually works.
    - jbooth 16y ago
      I wasn't saying that comparisons between Denmark and the US are always valid, I was saying that comparisons between Denmark and the USSR are idiotic. In the case of this particular comparison to Singapore, Singapore is a manufacturing-oriented export economy with low consumption levels. They benefit directly from stimulus in any other country. So the comparison to the US is entirely beside the point -- instead someone should ask, why are they growing? Ok, there's your answer.
    - ugh 16y ago
      People don't do the same when the arguments suit them. That does happen but I hope to be not one of those people.
- ugh 16y ago
  I don’t think Denmark has a state run economy. Free market with extensive regulation, maybe. And a few state owned companies, probably. Economic policies tend to to get discussed with those dichotomic arguments. I really do think that’s wrong. As though the majority of people in Europe or even just the political elites are in favor of state-run economies! That’s so wrong, it’s ridiculous. There is a whole wealth of decisions you can make about economic policies, not just one. (I personally tend to think that free market mechanisms are a incredibly valuable tool which work in many, probably a large majority of cases, but I don’t think we are lucky enough to always get what we want with them. If the free market would always work there truly would only be one decisions to make – i.e. free market everywhere without restrictions – but I don’t think it’s quite so easy. But that’s just my opinion.) I veer wildly off-topic so I better say that, in the end, I agree that the US would turn into Denmark if they adopted their economic policies 1:1. That wouldn’t work and would be a bad idea.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]

notahacker 16y ago

The comparison is also dubious because using Singapore as an example of minimal government intervention is laughable, whereas Scandinavian countries are quite good examples of reasonably effective government service provision in a mixed economy.As is France which is relatively similar to the US. I'm going to assume the Soviet Union comparison was facetious.