About the Scandinavian countries, I have repeatedly said that I don’t expect us to follow their policy at all. I was pointing out precisely what you said in the last sentence, that they have succeeded due to their spectacular private industries. My point is that this proves that for a private industry to succeed, a non-existing or minimal government is not a pre-condition. Their companies have consistently adapted to changing world scenario and technology without any problems despite high taxes(which I don’t approve of) and regulation. In spite of being welfare states they have retained the flexibility to incorporate new ideas refuting the claim that having a government stifles ideas and makes progress and adaptation difficult. Libertarians always raise this point that even a minimal regulation will lead to fantastic losses, which the success of Scandinavian countries disproves.

Despite this I am not asking for Scandinavian style policies at all. They are not what India needs currently. I merely sought that our antagonism towards their ideology should not preclude us from studying them. We may be able to find something relevant there. While studying about Hong Kong and South Korea, there is nothing wrong in reading about those countries. If nothing else at least you will be able to explain better to dissenters why those policies are an anathema rather than just deriding them and saying we shouldn’t follow their policies “because they are welfare states. period.” A little more reading hurts no one.

Kerala follows 50-70% leftist policies. The Scandinavian countries follow a lot of leftist policies. Honestly now, how spectacularly have they failed? In terms of human development index these states rank way up.

There may be no correlation between the policies and results thereof. That Kerala has done well with regard to development index is in large measure a contribution of expatriate workers from that state. Most educated Keralites have had to go outside of that state to find meaningful employment. These folks (including expats) have remitted a lot of money to that state.

At 60% tax rates (as in most European leftists countries) and long waits in queues to get simple medical treatment, I’d rather not talk about any “success” that European countries have. [Btw, most of them have succeeded due to their spectacular private industries.]

I am not a “debating enthusiast”. I am not a good speaker and I am not good at verbal arguments.

That was a sacrilege you realize , the justice will be swift and merciless.

PS. I do not care what tone anyone has, but then I hardly know anything about economics or logical fallacies

Regards

ok.. I get what a libertarian is.. The government decisions should never (adversely) affect you..
No.. wait .. I am still confused.. what would be libertarians position be vis-à-vis those displaced by the Narmada Dam project..
I am sure the people displaced were ‘affected’.. but was not the standard libertarian view that those opposed to the dam were lefty losers?
Do correct me (gently.. if you please) if I am wrong here..

But I believe in both cases(the leftist policies and the Narmada dam) the government’s policies were supposed to be for the ‘greater good’..

Maybe it would be wise to clarify what exactly is a libertarian.. I thought I was one.. until I found that I don’t agree with most libertarian thought around here..
——————-

Ok.. what is it with Any Rand anyway.. seriously.. I find it hard to believe any well read person would take her seriously.. she does writes entertaining stuff.. But to treat her books as Economics 101?

I was sent this link by the authors of Kautilya.com when I said what I said in the para above in response to one of their posts..
I am not sure why though..
The link was a compilation of criticisms/critiques on Ayn Rand and her works..

http://world.std.com/~mhuben/critobj.html

One of the links is a review of “Atlas Shrugged”.. and is quite hilarious..
http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/books/techrev/bkatshrg.rvw

“..Marriage vows in an objectivist church would probably run along the
lines of “Do you promise to attempt to dominate and subdue this woman
until such time as you grow bored?” “Maybe.” “Close enough. And do
you promise to applaud this man’s production until such time as you
find someone with a bigger … corporation?” “Whatever.” “By the
power vested in me by having scammed you guys out of a marriage
license fee, I now pronounce you man and appendage. ..

Some of the writing is guilty of caricaturing Rand’s position.. but I believe it still in a worthy read because the caricatures do help at times get across the naivety of her thought ..

————————–

I have probably taken of on a tangent from the discussion between Ravi and Chetan (who quite admirably has maintained a dispassionate tone in the entire discussion)..

Regards,
the ‘Other’ Reuben
PS: No offence was intended to any.. but I fear, it will be taken anyway..

2. I’m not saying you’re debating free markets at all. On the contrary, I’m saying you do not have any point to your long-winded prose at all, other than being an apologist for statism.

You’re not comfortable with relinquishing governmental control over peoples, and hence have nebulous statements to make that are nebulous by your own admission. You label this as openmindedness. I label this backdoor leftism/statism.

3. One thing to note is you merrily conflate three different aspects; implementation and properties and benefits; of a system such as a free-market.

Perhaps somebody (Ravikiran/Sauvik?) could start a discussion on some of the implementation aspects of an incentivized RULE OF LAW?