Jones Beene wrote:
Would the USA even be in the top 10 if we were not blessed with extreme natural resources, timber, minerals, petroleum and good farm land?
Probably yes. Natural resources help but there are many cultural factors at work. Apart from water, Mexico has as many natural resources as the US, yet they are not wealthy. If the Confederacy had won the Civil War, I think that by now it would be an economic basket case worse than Haiti.
Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark, have none of these yet they are doing quite well, thanks to their advanced political system (for one thing).
Norway is doing well partly because they have oil.
In terms of economic competitiveness, even without the benefit of natural resources, the message has been clear for years. Socialism rules.
I disagree. Finland's wealth comes from private corporations such as Nokia. I favor a pragmatic mix. Some things obviously must be socialized. Even the most dyed in the wool conservative agrees that small children should be offered public education, and food stamps if they need them. Health care is economically distorted because a person will pay almost any amount of money to stay alive, and no one chooses to be ill, so I agree with Winston Churchill that it should be socialized. However, most sectors of the economy work best when they are mainly capitalistic, with a modicum of common sense regulation, and occasional government investment.
Also, I do not see how anyone can complain about the major technologies invented by government researchers, such as computers and the Internet. No one should shun the cold fusion research conducted by Ohmori, Mizuno, Miles or Storms (when he was at LANL). A breakthrough is a breakthrough. Just because the inventor happens to be on a government payroll, that does not mean we should belittle the researcher or the discovery.
There are a few small but vital economic sectors that are not amenable to capitalism. The best example is fundamental research into physics, chemistry, medicine or biology. You cannot patent a force of nature. Basic research requires that information be shared freely and promptly before it reaches the practical stage, and you can't do that in a corporation. I doubt that cold fusion can be developed starting at this stage with private enterprise alone. If a basic theory is developed, or if someone figures out how to make robust devices without a theory, from that point on we can leave it up to private industry.
- Jed
