7 ms·

>But all of these countries enforce property rights. Virtually every country in the world enforces property rights. >The country became known as a trade hub b

>But all of these countries enforce property rights. Virtually every country in the world enforces property rights. >The country became known as a trade hub because you could do business fairly there and tax rates were low. Hong Kong country became a manufacturing hub on a par with what China is today in the ~70s. No prizes for guessing why. >Singapore is the most interesting case because it is the one exception to dependence on a foreign power for rights protection. In a way, Singapore exists today because of the immense skill and drive of Lee Kuan Yew. That's the facile propaganda line spat out by the PAP. Singapore actually owes most of its economic success to a Dutch economist called Albert Winsemius whom Lee Kuan Yew had the good sense to follow. Guess what he advocated? And yes, LKY imprisoned a lot of communists who were legally standing for parliament. He was a thug. No, that kind of dictatorial crackdown didn't have anything to do with their economic success. It was purely about the suppression of democracy - a theme that continues to this day (trust me I live here). >Looking at tariff rates and things like income tax in isolation is not productive. Did the post-war period result in considerable US growth for decades despite sky-high personal and corporate tax rates? Looking at tariffs when analyzing infant industry growth is pretty productive. Looking at income tax not so much. Looking at income tax when analyzing inflation and income inequality is productive, however. > Any country that attempts these rates today would destroy whichever of its companies were unable to move abroad Looks like somebody believes everything the American Enterprise Institute tells him.

crdb 11y ago
> Virtually every country in the world enforces property rights. Countries enforce a subset of rights to a certain extent on some sort of scale which goes from "none" (e.g. the DRC, where even your life is the property of whichever warlord pops by) to "just enough to keep the place stable" (e.g. India during the License Raj, where any new business that grew beyond a handful of employees was effectively outlawed resulting in negative real growth for decades and the eventual seizing of the country's gold reserves) to "mostly" (e.g. France, where you're free to start a business so long as it does not compete with one of the oligopolistic families close to government, and you're willing to play by the social rules) to "almost completely" which can be found almost nowhere. I've yet to see foreigners praise Indonesia's or Thailand's property rights. In fact, most Thai startups I know are incorporated in Singapore despite not having even one employee in the country. On your critique of Lee Kuan Yew, I would like to see reliable sources. Obviously, I disagree entirely with your response, and hold Lee Kuan Yew to be one of the most honest and skilled politicians that ever lived, perhaps on par with Churchill or even Washington, but I am always open to new data and reexamining my positions. Mine are based on both Singaporean sources which your theory will call biased, and on French sources written around that time (including discussions with the older members of my family who saw it first hand). I personally have incorporated in the UK thanks to their efficient and rights-protecting jurisdiction and will incorporate in Singapore as soon as I am granted PR (I object to the local ownership requirement but think it a low cost to pay), despite being a citizen of neither countries. Anecdotal evidence does not make data, though and I have too little time to try and find some. I sometimes agree with what the AEI writes, when it is backed by data and aligns with the world view I have developed. Instances of where the AEI and I disagree is in the idea that any socialism is detrimental to business - in some cases government intervention can help avoid hysteresis effects, and obviously, I'm a big fan of Singapore whose health and education policies are outright socialist.

crdb 11y ago

> Virtually every country in the world enforces property rights. Countries enforce a subset of rights to a certain extent on some sort of scale which goes from "none" (e.g. the DRC, where even your life is the property of whichever warlord pops by) to "just enough to keep the place stable" (e.g. India during the License Raj, where any new business that grew beyond a handful of employees was effectively outlawed resulting in negative real growth for decades and the eventual seizing of the country's gold reserves) to "mostly" (e.g. France, where you're free to start a business so long as it does not compete with one of the oligopolistic families close to government, and you're willing to play by the social rules) to "almost completely" which can be found almost nowhere. I've yet to see foreigners praise Indonesia's or Thailand's property rights. In fact, most Thai startups I know are incorporated in Singapore despite not having even one employee in the country. On your critique of Lee Kuan Yew, I would like to see reliable sources. Obviously, I disagree entirely with your response, and hold Lee Kuan Yew to be one of the most honest and skilled politicians that ever lived, perhaps on par with Churchill or even Washington, but I am always open to new data and reexamining my positions. Mine are based on both Singaporean sources which your theory will call biased, and on French sources written around that time (including discussions with the older members of my family who saw it first hand). I personally have incorporated in the UK thanks to their efficient and rights-protecting jurisdiction and will incorporate in Singapore as soon as I am granted PR (I object to the local ownership requirement but think it a low cost to pay), despite being a citizen of neither countries. Anecdotal evidence does not make data, though and I have too little time to try and find some. I sometimes agree with what the AEI writes, when it is backed by data and aligns with the world view I have developed. Instances of where the AEI and I disagree is in the idea that any socialism is detrimental to business - in some cases government intervention can help avoid hysteresis effects, and obviously, I'm a big fan of Singapore whose health and education policies are outright socialist.