Sweden did well after WW2 for much the same reason that the US did: it was industrialized and not destroyed. It's always tempting to believe that there was som

Sweden did well after WW2 for much the same reason that the US did: it was industrialized and not destroyed. It's always tempting to believe that there was something special about their "ideological prowess", but that isn't really the case. With or without laissez faire they would have done well. With or without a welfare state they would have done well. Econ 101 is "people respond to incentives". Think tanks representing the rich and wealthy (of which libertarianism.org/CATO is one) have a strong incentive to try and give laissez faire credit for every positive economic development ever. It's what makes their donors wealthy. The Kochs (a major source of funds for this website) would particularly like you to think this because of some of the truly epic fights that they have had with the environmental protection authority. To them, "regulation is bad, mkay". Guess why? Hence why, even though I'm sure he honestly believes it, Johan Norburg gives free markets credit for Sweden solving their infant mortality problem.