Countries that followed the Austrian School to Prosperity

[JohnDoe]

I'm not a commie defending Allende's gov. but do you realize that you are supporting a dictatorship?

I do not support the dictatorship, I support the reforms that took place during it. If I had been 18 at the time of the plebiscite I would have voted "yes" not to maintain Pinochet in power, but to maintain Buchi in charge of the economy.

Most Chilean people think that all of that shit (or a part of it) you're talking was caused by rich business people boycotting gov.

Rich people boycotting government prompted the adoption of stupid policies? Huh, first time I hear that excuse. I'm pretty sure the crisis happened because as good socialists, the administration wanted immediate gratification and was incapable of seeing 2 feet in front of them, so they did what they do best and just spent like madmen trying to magically convert the lower class into middle class, completely oblivious that it was unsustainable. Thus, hyperinflation, and then a series of stupid measures which made things worse, like price controls, high protectionism and taking over distribution of goods. 

Read some more Allende horror stories here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_chile#Popular_Unity_Government

I live in a municipality around 400.000 inhabitants but has no hospital, "our" hospital is in another that has 700000 inh. But if it is for you a prosperous country.

That's your measure? That scenario can be found in any country in the world except maybe for Singapore and other small rich countries.

Btw, I live in Chile too and have 3 high quality hospitals near me plus a couple other regular ones, so I guess that averages things out for the country

[1715295842]

1715295842

[1715295842]

1715295842

[ffuentes]

Btw, I live in Chile too and have 3 high quality hospitals near me plus a couple other regular ones, so I guess that averages things out for the country

Do you want saying "clínica"?

Clínica = Private hospital only for rich.

[JohnDoe]

Yeah, I was referring to clinicas, Alemana, Las Condes, UC.

[The Script]

I don't think number of cheap hospitals is a good standard for prosperity.  As long as the medical industry is regulated and controlled by the government and government sanctioned monopolies like the AMA the cost of health care will be prohibitively high.  I don't know what the situation is like in Chile, but I can't afford to go to the hospital without going into debt either and I live in the US. 

[someotherguy]

Since there are so many fans of Austrian economics here I'd like to ask for examples of success stories where a country used Austrian economic polices to become prosperous.

Please post what you find below, thanks!

 

Here are a few good examples of "free market" vs. "socialist" economic structures and you can understand the results pretty easily. Certainly, they're not "Austrian economics" countries, but the examples exemplify the principles of markets vs. coercion which is at the core of Austrian ideology.

- North Korea vs South Korea
- East Germany vs West Germany post WWII
- East Germany under USSR vs. East Germany after unification
- Haiti vs. Dominican Republic
- Cuba vs. Costa Rica
- Any Chinese City vs. Hong Kong
- China vs. Taiwan
- China under communism vs. China today
- India pre-market reformations vs. India post-market reformations
- Any Malaysian City vs. Singapore
- Vietnam vs. Singapore
- UK vs. Ireland over the past 20 years
- Chile pre-Pinochet vs post-Pinochet (not that Pinochet wasn't also a violent douchebag)
- Venezuela vs Chile
- Zimbabwe vs South Africa
- Burma vs. Thailand
- Syria vs. United Arab Emirates
- Communist Estonia vs. Post-USSR Estonia
- Soviet Russia vs. Russia post 1989

And surely I needn't mention US history from 1776 up through about 1920, when it was actually a generally capitalist, free-market nation and grew from mere peasantry to the world super power in 150 years.

Every single example above compares a territory that is/was more centrally planned vs a territory that is/was more free. This list doesn't prove anything, but you might want to take note OP.

Whoa (mis)information overload!  Calm down buddy.  Apparently the 'carpet bombing' technique was more popular on this forum than I originally thought.  Nice list, but let's try to focus more on a single success story, not a laundry list of things deemed successes.  I don't want to even start with the list because: the burden of proof isn't on me to disprove a claim (or else I'd spend the rest of my life writing a rebuttal to this post as you've listed so many countries) and we want "a success story" a single story, not a list.  If we want to say that the 'opposite' of a 'free market' is the obvious failure of the system of true communism then we are in agreement; but that isn't the dichotomy here.  It's not a choice between total laissez faire 'free markets' and total state controlled top-down Soviet style communism.  I'm talking specifically about Austrian economic policy, views, beliefs or suggestions and how that was used as a framework for building a nation out of the primitive state of man: poverty.  Observing a system that has an element of market dynamics isn't a Austrian phenomenon, the market doesn't belong to the Austrian school.

Maybe you should do US history, specifically how Austrian style "Free Market" views were critical in creating prosperity, just flesh out 1776 to 1920 and why you think that "when it was actually a generally capitalist, free-market nation and grew from mere peasantry to the world super power in 150 years".  Why 1776?  The US economic situation was in horrible disarray during and shortly thereafter the Revolutionary War; in addition there were multiple other economic and social calamities in this time frame.  You don't even mention the Civil War.

You completely fail on so many levels Niemivh, I really don't know where to begin.  Oh heck screw it, I got better things to do than deal your delusions.

[lemonginger]

hoooly shit. i can't believe JohnDoe is seriously pointing to Chile as a free market success story. Are all libertarians creeping authoritarian fascists or just this one? (yes yes, I know you're not all secret authoritarians, but really there need to be more AnCaps in this thread denouncing Chile wholeheartedly as it is about as far from a voluntary society as you can get) For god's sake I realize that a dictatorship is a "smaller government" than a democracy, but each step towards smallness is not the same folks. You are as bad as Communists that defend Stalin or Mao.

[myrkul]

hoooly shit. i can't believe JohnDoe is seriously pointing to Chile as a free market success story. Are all libertarians creeping authoritarian fascists or just this one? (yes yes, I know you're not all secret authoritarians, but really there need to be more AnCaps in this thread denouncing Chile wholeheartedly as it is about as far from a voluntary society as you can get) For god's sake I realize that a dictatorship is a "smaller government" than a democracy, but each step towards smallness is not the same folks. You are as bad as Communists that defend Stalin or Mao.

At least in a dictatorship there's only one person to shoot.

[The Script]

hoooly shit. i can't believe JohnDoe is seriously pointing to Chile as a free market success story. Are all libertarians creeping authoritarian fascists or just this one? (yes yes, I know you're not all secret authoritarians, but really there need to be more AnCaps in this thread denouncing Chile wholeheartedly as it is about as far from a voluntary society as you can get) For god's sake I realize that a dictatorship is a "smaller government" than a democracy, but each step towards smallness is not the same folks. You are as bad as Communists that defend Stalin or Mao.

It's only a free market "success story" in as much as they adopted some free market policies which improved things and actually led to Chile being less authoritarian.  Whether or not Chile has maintained this progress, I don't know (this was back in the 70s for heaven's sake).  But the market reforms did make the people of Chile better off, at least as long as they were followed.

I realize sometimes ancaps in this forum stretch to make examples fit, but on the other hand we get straw manned to hell:

"The situation in Somalia improved without a government."
"You think Somalia is a paradise!?  Hahahaha! Fool!  Why don't you fucking move to Somalia?"

"When free market reforms were adopted in Chile the economy improved greatly, and the political situation got a little better as well."
"Chile is a prosperous, first-world, free market haven?  Why don't you fucking move to Chile?"

Seriously.   This happens to me all the time, even in "real life" debates with friends.

[JohnDoe]

hoooly shit. i can't believe JohnDoe is seriously pointing to Chile as a free market success story. Are all libertarians creeping authoritarian fascists or just this one? (yes yes, I know you're not all secret authoritarians, but really there need to be more AnCaps in this thread denouncing Chile wholeheartedly as it is about as far from a voluntary society as you can get) For god's sake I realize that a dictatorship is a "smaller government" than a democracy, but each step towards smallness is not the same folks. You are as bad as Communists that defend Stalin or Mao.

First, we are talking purely economic policies here. How those economic policies came to be is not relevant to the discussion. And second, you probably don't get the context. Chile was in very deep shit before the coup so I believe the means justify the end on this one.

Tell me honestly, would you rather live in countries like Zimbabwe and North Korea, or in Nazi Germany pre WWII? I'm as anarchist as one can get but I'd choose the latter any day. At least there you are still permitted to have property and wealth and you won't die of hunger.

[lemonginger]

you're comparing Chile under Allende to North Korea? hyperbole much? A democratically elected government to a megalomaniacal dictator?

Christ compare Allende - a democratically elected leader to Pinochet's reign of terror, torture, disappearances, and imprisonment of dissenters. Seriously, you do know that Chile is like something out of a capitalist horror show right? Military takes over greatly helped by the CIA, installs dictator, who rules by terror/murder and installs US technocrats and economists as consultants....

You do realize that the "pure" phase of reforms (arguably the most Austrian phase) was by and large a failure, not only because the only way it could be sustained was through massive authoritarian structures of terror but because there was little GDP growth (late 70s and early 80s) and a full scale collapse that pushed 50% of the population back under the poverty line in like 83 or 84.

Anyway, end thread derail, if someone wants to debate Chile let's do it elsewhere.

[ronwan]

What countries use to become industrial or modern economies is so far from the "Free Market" that it might surprise most here.  Transitioning from a 3rd world status to a 1st world status is nearly impossible if you open your doors to total free market polices.  Throwing your infant industries on the world market before they are able to compete only benefits the largest global interests in said market as they will easily be able to crush you via dumping their products at lower prices until those companies goes under. 

However a small minority of folks in said country will always do well in this Globalized system and be the regional vanguard of the neocolonialism that Globalization truly is. 

Gotta get back to researching Chile.

So you are arguing that protectionism is not only beneficial but necessary to build up an economy?

You can't "dump" products onto a market, you can sell products you are more efficient at making for products that the other country is more efficient at making. This makes both groups better off*.  When you "dump", you have to "dump" for something in trade. NO! the more restrictions you put up to "protect" your producers the more you hurt your consumers and there are far more of them to hurt. 

* not EVERYONE in the group is better off in the very short term. If you make the Trabant and you let Toyota's and Volkswagen's in, your Trabant employees will have to go find something else to do. They will also be better off in the long term.

[Piper67]

hoooly shit. i can't believe JohnDoe is seriously pointing to Chile as a free market success story. Are all libertarians creeping authoritarian fascists or just this one? (yes yes, I know you're not all secret authoritarians, but really there need to be more AnCaps in this thread denouncing Chile wholeheartedly as it is about as far from a voluntary society as you can get) For god's sake I realize that a dictatorship is a "smaller government" than a democracy, but each step towards smallness is not the same folks. You are as bad as Communists that defend Stalin or Mao.

First, we are talking purely economic policies here. How those economic policies came to be is not relevant to the discussion. And second, you probably don't get the context. Chile was in very deep shit before the coup so I believe the means justify the end on this one.

Tell me honestly, would you rather live in countries like Zimbabwe and North Korea, or in Nazi Germany pre WWII? I'm as anarchist as one can get but I'd choose the latter any day. At least there you are still permitted to have property and wealth and you won't die of hunger.

I'd rather live in Sweden... or Holland... or Belgium... or Norway... or Canada... oh, hang on, I do live in Canada, goodie :-)

[JohnDoe]

you're comparing Chile under Allende to North Korea? hyperbole much? A democratically elected government to a megalomaniacal dictator?

Christ compare Allende - a democratically elected leader to Pinochet's reign of terror, torture, disappearances, and imprisonment of dissenters. Seriously, you do know that Chile is like something out of a capitalist horror show right? Military takes over greatly helped by the CIA, installs dictator, who rules by terror/murder and installs US technocrats and economists as consultants....

Hyperbole goes both ways I guess if you think the Pinochet era was A REIGN OF TERROR!!1. Sure, he rounded up and killed, tortured and imprisoned his enemies but that's no different than what happens now in the world. Do you consider the United States a reign of terror because the administration likes to kill a lot of muslims and torture them in Guantanamo?

You do realize that the "pure" phase of reforms (arguably the most Austrian phase) was by and large a failure, not only because the only way it could be sustained was through massive authoritarian structures of terror but because there was little GDP growth (late 70s and early 80s) and a full scale collapse that pushed 50% of the population back under the poverty line in like 83 or 84.

Anyway, end thread derail, if someone wants to debate Chile let's do it elsewhere.

You should research more thoroughly to avoid looking like an idiot. Late 70's GDP growth was pretty high (10% on '77 and over 7% until the crash, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_chile) and '82 was a region wide crash (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_American_debt_crisis) which struck Chile pretty hard because some idiots decided it was a good idea to peg the peso to the dollar, which appreciated real interest rates on loans to over 40% yearly (http://ideas.repec.org/p/chb/bcchwp/57.html page 18 of .pdf) while there was a huge amount of foreign capital flowing in. I don't need to tell you how anti Austrian is the pegging of currencies.

[Rassah]

Also Does it count as prosperous if you are 10,000,000,000,000 in debt? Im not sure where you live but where I am, Orange County, CA we get a lot of people that "look" prosperous but really only have a bunch of debt and will eventually be living in a one bedroom apt. The wiser of us know better than to give them any credit at all.

Debt is only one half of a Net Worth equation. Someone with $1,000,000 in debt that is used to cover a $1mil apartment complex that is paying out $100,000 a year is way better off than someone who has no debt and is making $50,000 a year. for our country, we have a lot of debt, but we also have a pretty large revenue stream (tax income), and a whole lot of advanced military hardware and troops that we can sell or rent to other countries (which we do).

[cbeast]

Somalia is a beautiful country for those that practice strict individualism like Austrian Economics. There, you can have anything you want if you have enough creativity and wealth. There are no large government bureaucrats to interfere with Libertarian friendly businesses like sexual slavery, pirating, and other laissez faire pursuits.
This commercial message brought to you by the Somalia Department of non-existent tourism. =p

[lemonginger]

Hyperbole goes both ways I guess if you think the Pinochet era was A REIGN OF TERROR!!1. Sure, he rounded up and killed, tortured and imprisoned his enemies but that's no different than what happens now in the world. Do you consider the United States a reign of terror because the administration likes to kill a lot of muslims and torture them in Guantanamo?

Of course I do! (think that the USG is guilty of mass murder and torture) - The US is a police state at home and a nightmare abroad if you happen to live in one of the countries they are currently targeting. The USG is quite literally the Evil Empire at the moment, with the highest rate of incarceration at home and more military spending than most of the rest of the world combined

The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist. McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley's technologies to flourish is called the US Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. (Tom Friedman, NYT persistent defender of US capitalism/globalization)

Of course the Pinochet regime was a reign of terror -- What else do you call it when a dictator assumes power in a military coup and systematically kills, imprisons, or destroys his political enemies, embezzles millions from the government, etc. Really, you have absolutely zero moral ground to stand on here if you are trying to make the case that Pinochet's regime was somehow "freer" or "more democratic" than Allende's

[Piper67]

Hyperbole goes both ways I guess if you think the Pinochet era was A REIGN OF TERROR!!1. Sure, he rounded up and killed, tortured and imprisoned his enemies but that's no different than what happens now in the world. Do you consider the United States a reign of terror because the administration likes to kill a lot of muslims and torture them in Guantanamo?

Of course I do! (think that the USG is guilty of mass murder and torture) - The US is a police state at home and a nightmare abroad if you happen to live in one of the countries they are currently targeting. The USG is quite literally the Evil Empire at the moment, with the highest rate of incarceration at home and more military spending than most of the rest of the world combined

The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist. McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley's technologies to flourish is called the US Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. (Tom Friedman, NYT persistent defender of US capitalism/globalization)

Of course the Pinochet regime was a reign of terror -- What else do you call it when a dictator assumes power in a military coup and systematically kills, imprisons, or destroys his political enemies, embezzles millions from the government, etc. Really, you have absolutely zero moral ground to stand on here if you are trying to make the case that Pinochet's regime was somehow "freer" or "more democratic" than Allende's

The irony, of course, is that the US armed forces are, in effect, socialist... i.e. state-funded and run.

As for the notion that Pinochet may not have been that bad after all... it takes a spectacular disconnect from history to even suggest something of the sort. I guess our friend thinks that Austrian economics is Austrian because that was the birthplace of Hitler... also not such a bad chap, after all.

[billyjoeallen]

Somalia may suck now, but it was even worse when it had a central government.

[ffuentes]

Oh Somalia, what a paradise!

[The Script]

Oh Somalia, what a paradise!