City-States Without Limits

[PAF]

Relative to most of their peers in the world, I would say both Singapore and Hong Kong did pretty well for themselves. Even if Hong Kong did slightly better. Unfortunately, as China increasingly exerts its control over Hong Kong, it's unlikely their level of prosperity will continue.

And yea Singapore and Hong Kong are authoritarian in many regards. But that's okay with me. Freedom of movement between city states means that there are limits to how authoritarian they can be.

And while I'm frequently an advocate of closed borders and closed trade, that model changes with city states. City states usually depend on free trade and free movement in order to thrive.

I don't condone authoritarianism. But, since it's already set up that way in Singapore and Hong Kong, I won't prevent you [ and @Anti Federalist ] from going over there

...technocratic planning and the enduring power of freedom. Cheang does not deny that Singapore achieved remarkable success, but he warns that this success came at a cost: diminished creativity, limited innovation, and a citizenry conditioned to look to the state for initiative.

For policymakers, scholars, and defenders of liberal capitalism, this book is both a corrective and a beacon. Cheang reminds us that real prosperity comes, not from orchestration, but from freedom—freedom to trade, to create, to fail, and to try again.

 

[TheTexan]

I don't condone authoritarianism. But, since it's already set up that way in Singapore and Hong Kong, I won't prevent you [ and @Anti Federalist ] from going over there

I was seriously considering moving to Hong Kong for a while, as it was arguably the freest place in the world. But with China taking it over, that's no longer true. The US is the freest place in the world and there is nowhere left to go.

 

[TheTexan]

I don't condone authoritarianism.

Do you condone private property rights? It's hard to condone private property rights, while simultaneously not condoning authoritarianism.

Private property rights is authoritarianism. "My house, my rules."

I understand this because I'm more of a libertarian than you are. Some day you'll catch up

 

[PAF]

I was seriously considering moving to Hong Kong for a while, as it was arguably the freest place in the world. But with China taking it over, that's no longer true. The US is the freest place in the world and there is nowhere left to go.

There are places if you know where to look. But with U.S. education being 38th in the world nobody can figure out where to look.

I was going to remind you that if you did go to Hong Kong, leave those twins alone. I still plan on going for a visit, unless they come here first

 

[TheTexan]

There are places if you know where to look. But with U.S. education being 38th in the world nobody can figure out where to look.

You should see that graph that AF posted a short while back. It basically shows that the US has the best education when you account for race.

I was going to remind you that if you did go to Hong Kong, leave those twins alone. I still plan on going for a visit, unless they come here first

All yours

 

[PAF]

Do you condone private property rights? It's hard to condone private property rights, while simultaneously not condoning authoritarianism.

Private property rights is authoritarianism. "My house, my rules."

I understand this because I'm more of a libertarian than you are. Some day you'll catch up

Private Property Rights are paramount. But that doesn't give me a right to control where other go, where they end up, or their destinies. They can have private property rights too as long as it isn't welfare. I do believe government has no business in areas such as those, unless/until a person commits a crime against person or property, and they get to face their accuser.

I understand this because I'm more of a libertarian than you are. Some day you'll catch up

 

[PAF]

You should see that graph that AF posted a short while back.

You said "graph"

I thought you were a libertarian/individualist? For true libertarians/individualists, graphs don't mean squat. Someday you'll understand

 

[TheTexan]

Private Property Rights are paramount. But that doesn't give me a right to control where other go, where they end up, or their destinies.

It literally does give you a right to control where others go. Specifically, it gives you a right to control whether they go or not go on your property.

And keep in mind, there is no such thing as "public property". What people call public property, is merely private property with ambiguous ownership. (It is not possible for an abstract entity e.g. government to own property)

 

[TheTexan]

You said "graph"

I thought you were a libertarian/individualist? For true libertarians/individualists, graphs don't mean squat. Someday you'll understand

It was very carefully laid out with bars and numbers which means it must be true

 

[PAF]

It literally does give you a right to control where others go. Specifically, it gives you a right to control whether they go or not go on your property.

And keep in mind, there is no such thing as "public property". What people call public property, is merely private property with ambiguous ownership. (It is not possible for an abstract entity e.g. government to own property)

By that analogy I forbid you to go up in the sky. Well, unless you want to be only person in existence in the world.

 

[TheTexan]

By that analogy I forbid you to go up in the sky. Well, unless you want to be only person in existence in the world.

Well it's not your sky, it's mine, I inherited it from my grandpappy and I have a piece of paper to prove it.

 

[PAF]

The Great Reset, Part VI: Plans of a Technocratic Elite | Mises Institute

The cozy relationship between multinational corporations and governments has aroused the scorn of a few left-leaning critics. They note that the governance

mises.org