Fair enough, you are Hayekian on this one. All countries are collectivist to a degree and therefore all authoritarian. Fine, but this doesn't tell us much about comparative government.
That weird silence from Democrats over Venezuela's massive rejection of socialism
- Thread starter OKSTATE1
- Start date
Peruse the chart. Notice which countries are in the top 20 as the most economically free in the world?
https://www.heritage.org/international-economies/commentary/2018-index-economic-freedom
It’s amazing how differently we see things! Yes, all governments are authoritarian. They differ in the degree of authoritarianism. The more authoritarian societies have fallen into poverty and despair. The freer the society, which is indistinguishable from economic freedom, the more prosperous.
Again, where does Norway fall on this? Are they less authoritarian even though they are more socialist?
Dan have you looked into this index? How much weight does it apply to state ownership of the means of production (our agreed upon definition of socialism).
I believe they are ranked as the 26th freest economy in the world. Ahead of Japan. Ahead of South Korea. Two places behind Germany.
I have never heard of the People’s Policy Project. I’ll take your word for it they are legitimately objective in their pronouncements. Give me some time to let this percolate.
OK , I’ve ruminated on what you have said. This is pure speculation on my part because I probably couldn’t point to Norway on a map. Government ownership of a country's wealth is not the same thing as government ownership of its means of production. Take the oil and natural gas in the North Sea around Norway. The government claims ownership of the oil and gas. That’s ownership of the wealth. Then it nationalized it’s local oil company, at least the major portion of it, I believe about 67%, and issues licenses to privately owned companies to also drill in the area. In addition it sits on a trillion dollar fund (which came mostly from it oil riches, I presume), which it uses in its welfare dolances, among other things. So it’s wealth comes from a mixture of a partially nationalized oil conglomerate in conjunction to licensing private companies to help extract the wealth. I feel it is my duty to inform you that is not an example of government ownership of the means of (oil) production, which is our agreed upon definition of socialism. It’s a classic case of a mixed economy.
Dan, are you saying owning the means of oil production is different than owning the means of production? If so what about owning all of the companies in this report https://www.regjeringen.no/contenta...d64c0e4cc1/eierberetning-engelsk-2017_web.pdf
?
If owning the oil production doesn't count as sociallist, is Venezuela actually socialist?
Dan, you don't have to read the whole thing, you can just browse to understand the extent of state ownership.
And just so we are clear, definitionally, if a country takes an 66% ownership stake in all of it's companies, we are going to still call that mixed economy and not sociallist? How much ownership is required for socialism?
How about in the future we can agree that when I advocate for socialism, I am advocating for state ownership of 60% of wealth including much of national industry. We appear to be in agreement that that is cool and would result in greater economic freedom than we currently have according to the heritage foundation.
And just so we are clear, definitionally, if a country takes an 66% ownership stake in all of it's companies, we are going to still call that mixed economy and not sociallist? How much ownership is required for socialism?
How about in the future we can agree that when I advocate for socialism, I am advocating for state ownership of 60% of wealth including much of national industry. We appear to be in agreement that that is cool and would result in greater economic freedom than we currently have according to the heritage foundation.
Argh! I posted a very long reply, hit send and it disappeared. I’ll try again with a shorter version.
To begin I’m not about to read that whole thing! Talk about homework!
I think I read where 38 or 39 private companies pay the Norwegian government licensing fees to drill in Norway’s claimed territory in the North Sea. Privately owned companies, (not government owned) pay a king’s ransom for the opportunity to drill for oil. In addition the Norwegian government nationalized a sizable portion of the local oil industry, about 67% I believe I read. Which leaves one third of the company held privately. This by itself negates our agreed upon definition of total government ownership. This also comports with what I had read earlier: the government oil company has been placed in direct competition with private companies operating in it back yard. None of this qualifies as socialism as we have mutually defined it.
Look, I don’t deny Norway has a great thing going. A country with a population of around 5 million (a million. less than Dallas/Ft. Worth), that is ethnically and religiously homogenous hits the jackpot of billions of gallons of oil and gas right in its back yard. They have found a formula that works for them; nationalize part of the golden goose and use it to “spread the wealth” via generous welfare, etc., while maintaining a strong defense of private property. That’s great for them! But it isn’t what we have mutually defined as socialism.
And their way would never work in the US, a country of over 300 million ethnically and religiously diverse people. Can you imagine the squabbling between the vying groups for more of the loot?
Last edited:
I’m saying owning the means to extract the oil is not the same as owning the oil under the sea. One I’m calling the wealth for this purpose, and the other is the means of production.
Sure, I’ll try to remember your abridged definition. I will say this, however. I don’t think the Norwegian government has confiscated 67% of every company in Norway. 33% privately held ownership in their oil and gas industry is probably just enough to keep government bureaucrats on their toes. The private investors are going to keep a much sharper eye on the bottom line, surely you agree with that.
As for your other question, I don’t know where the demarcation is between true socialism and a mixed economy. It’s probably like the quip about pornography: I know it when I see it.
Gawd I’m stupid! I don’t even know what that is! I must have hit a wrong button on this phone.
And with that I’m going to bed. It’s weird, isn’t it? This thread started as a discussion about Venezuela, and morphed into talking about a country on the other side of the globe. Ain’t life swell!
What else does the Norwegian government own besides an oil producer and the rights to Norwegian oil reserves? Do they own food producers? Beer producers? Fertilizer producers? Telecommunications companies? Transportation companies? Farms and agriculture businesses? Cement producers? Glass producers? Tourism? Steel producers?
