4 ms·
I'd like to point out that post-WW2 the US had about half of the world's wealth and a ton of labour to produce for the greater world. Regulations or not, they w
by neetle 6y ago
I'd like to point out that post-WW2 the US had about half of the world's wealth and a ton of labour to produce for the greater world. Regulations or not, they would have dominated either way. The US's success, I'd argue, is more about their position in the world at that point in time rather than some ideological "regulations vs innovation" battle.
- avianlyric 6y agoNot to mention the other half of the wealth was battered, war torn, and bombed to shit. The US got to take their wealth and invest it in innovation and growth. Europe had to beg, borrow and steal just to rebuild what it had a couple of decades earlier.
- CamperBob2 6y agoA helluva lot of post-WWII "investment in innovation and growth" was spent in Europe. You're welcome.
- avianlyric 6y agoYou’re not wrong. Something that the US has reaped the benefits of ever since, in the form of a huge market to trade with, and join it in its various wars. It certainly wasn’t charity, and most of it was via loans that were repaid. So yes, thank you, but equally don’t get too big for your boots, it was driven by only shrewd self-interest.
- refurb 6y agoYet, post-WW2, it was Germany that saw an economic miracle of strong growth despite being practically dismantled after the war. So why Germany and not say France or the UK? Countries that saw much less destruction than Germany?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]