How is it that countries with supposedly 'economically illiterate' policy are the best off economically?

How is it that countries with supposedly 'economically illiterate' policy are the best off economically?

Interested but stupid burger here. Can you elaborate further?

Not even mentioning IHDI, countries with left leaning economic policy far outclass countries with right leaning policy in HDI. Effect is especially significant when also considering their relative GDP's per capita.

>HDI
heavily abstracted junk science.

Are more years of schooling better? I mean, probably? But shouldn't we test that theory? And is a year of Norwegian schooling of equivalent value to a year of Canadian or Liechtensteinian or Singaporean schooling? Aren't these assumptions we should test before considering HDI the be-all and end-all of assessing nations?

>GNIpc
why adjust for Purchasing Power Parity? Why look at income logarithmically but life expectancy and schooling linearly?

There's all sorts of problems with HDI.

It is not as easy as you put it. Nations like Sweden or Denmark may be far on the left in some regards, but they also rank very high on the ease of doing business and are home to many international corporations.

Can you give some example of what you mean by left leaning? Like a National Healthcare System or Subsidized Colleges?

Better yet can you point me to a website that states Australia's( assuming not a proxy) economic policies?

>How is it that countries with supposedly 'economically illiterate' policy are the best off economically?

Because it literally takes you less than an hour to gather enough information to realize that right wing politics is extremely dated and ideologically driven with a history of consistent failure. For example a simple understanding of the concept of "velocity of money" and the many many studies done that show that there's much less velocity among the rich than the poor, makes it blatantly clear that cash injected at the bottom has a more stimulating effect on the economy than cash injected at the top, and there is indeed need for some redistribution of wealth if the demand side isn't gonna shrink to the point where it stifles the supply side and cause recession....

Right wingers don't care about "facts" or "studies" though. They never present anything of value, they just call other people "idiots" or "uneducated" and leave it at that, hoping it will somehow make them appear smarter to people even dumber than they are.

baby's first macroeconomics

>baby's first macroeconomics

Case in point.

>b-b-but professor Goldstein said mercantilism doesn't work!

No one is saying HDI is perfect senpai

It's all that awesome labor they're getting out of Muslim immigrants!

It is though

stimulus and recessions has hardly anything to do with most economic policy and is mostly handled by central banks

also dumb to bring it up with europe since you have countries like Germany at the top of the list with a budget surplus

Oil money, Jew gold and the states bleeding the tax payers dry can make this system work.. for some time.

Because HDI is economically boosted by the government. Singapore is known as the laissez-faire country but we actually have huge government programs in healthcare, education and retirement.
>are more years of schooling better?
Other than an educated population being a hallmark for civilisation, advanced civilisations depend heavily on skilled labour like doctors and engineers. All the developed economies are mostly made of the Services sector.

>Is education progression the same in many countries
International education systems follow a mostly fixed pattern, deviations are mostly a year tops. China students who come to Singapore are about a year older at the same education level, and Singaporean students are about a year ahead of US.

>why adjust for purchasing parity
So it's more accurate? Standards of living are different across countries.

>logarithmic scale
I'm assuming because things don't go linearly to shit the poorer you get.

>stimulus and recessions has hardly anything to do with most economic policy and is mostly handled by central banks

That's simply not true. Progressive taxes and competition stimulus (for example free education and small business stimulus packages) is what keeps pumping new blood into the system and keep the market fresh, vigorous and on its toes with new talent and innovation from the bottom. This is done via govt policies.

Trickle down economics has the opposite effect. It kills competition and turns big money corporations into complacent welfare recipients. In the US it's even part of their business to expand profit by begging for more money from the govt via lobbying to lower taxes and exploit the workers (who are the real money spenders). It's beyond idiotic.

>it's not economic policy it's the central banks

Economic policy affects banks.

if youre taxed through the roof and have no disposable income, wtf is the point?
if youre government has a huge deficit from welfare, wtf is the point?
if youre nationalised industries are losing money, wtf is the point?

You're forgetting the loss of investment because of lowered profit margins. At best the government serve as an effective investor but that's unlikely, and you'll get very little foreign investment.

>inb4 someone says trickle down doesn't exist

>Norway

Oil niggers

>Australia

Iron niggers

>Switzerland

Bank niggers

>Denmark

Pig niggers

>Netherlands

Oil niggers

>Germany

Car niggers

>Ireland

Science niggers

>USA

Silicon niggers

>Canada

Oil niggers

Quality Leafpost.

>no disposable income
Continuum fallacy. To have no disposable income tax would have to be a 100%.
>huge government deficits
Government deficits aren't necessarily bad. Governments are not individuals. There is a healthy range of government debt.

>developed countries provide important goods and services that's why they do well

Such an insightful post

Wait til WW3 and we will be Uranium Niggers

>lower taxes is welfare

...yet businesses will go where the taxes are lowest

and Indiana seems to be doing great doing all the right-wing things, lower taxes and more jobs than ever.

And it is left-wing people who want to limit industries like energy that could create millions of jobs and lower costs. Not sure how you think rightwing policies can limit competition.

>who are the real money spenders
wow how valuable...

Contrary to what both conservatives and liberals believe, "economically illiterate" policies have nothing to do with healthcare or taxes, economic illiteracy is a term targeted towards anti-free market policy, similar to both what Trump and Bernie Sanders are in favour of.

The reason why Scandinavian """""socialism""""" works so well is because it's not socialism, it's a mixed economy with a profound emphasis on the free-market.

>if youre taxed through the roof and have no disposable income, wtf is the point?

Can't speak for everyone but we have 4-6 weeks paid vacation in Sweden. Every swede with a job can afford to travel abroad every single year. Only one in three can afford a vacation in the US, the richest country on earth.

Social mobility. Lets say I was a brilliant mind but born to a single mom who spends her cash on meth. In Sweden I'd get free education all the way up to university. I'd get a job and thanks to not being weighed down by student loans, medical insurance, dental, etc I could easily skip going on vacation for a couple of years and save enough money to start my own business. That business would then get govt subsidies in the start up period and the govt would pay part of my workers salary (up to $2000) if he/she is a long term unemployed.

So I could go from "meth abusing single mom" to "living comfy and travelling the world" or "running my own business and hiring people" and there is absolutely nothing that stops me from doing so. In the US, unless I was truly exceptional, I'd be fucked and would potentially be costing society money if I turned to crime or got on welfare.

So this is not an ideological position it is economic pragmatism and not even our right wing parties are in a hurry to change them.

...

>...yet businesses will go where the taxes are lowest

Yes. Like China.

And how is that working for you?

They also went to Ireland en masse, and as a result Ireland has had some of the greatest economic growth its ever seen over the past year.

>Other than an educated population being a hallmark for civilisation, advanced civilisations depend heavily on

I'm not sure what colleges are like where you're from, but the majority of people who attend college in America are dumber when they finish their liberal arts degree in gender ethnic sensitivity than when they started.

Only STEM has been unaffected, and leftist retards are still trying to ruin it at the high school level.

>They also went to Ireland en masse, and as a result Ireland has had some of the greatest economic growth its ever seen over the past year.

Race. To. The. Bottom.

I could sell all my belongings for a $1 per item and I would see a massive "increase in economic growth". But at the end of it my $1500 computer would have been sold for $1 and in total I'd have less than $500 to show for it.

disposible income is money after tax, rent and bills
government deficits are bad in alot of cases.
the uk has 70 bill on interest payments, annual inflation is at 1% so its shorting 10bil of that. paying 1k per person for nothing isnt good nomatter how much of marx you swallow