Drink More Libertarian Kool-Aid Or Else
By Jim Dallas
The Wall Street Journal informs us that America has slipped six places in the "Economic Freedom Index" since George W. Bush took office in 2001:
For the first time in the 11 years that the Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal have been publishing the Index of Economic Freedom, the U.S. has dropped out of the top 10 freest economies in the world.
In 1998, the U.S. was the fifth freest economy in the world, in 2001 it was sixth, and today it sits at 12th, tied with Switzerland. The U.S. drop in ranking is explained in part by a slightly lower score, but mostly by the good performance among its competitors. The lesson? Stand still on the highway to economic liberty and the world will soon start to pass you by.
The 2005 Index, released today, ranks Hong Kong once again as the world's freest economy, followed by Singapore and Luxembourg. But it is Estonia at No. 4 that makes the point. This former Soviet satellite is a model reformer, setting the standard for how fast countries can move ahead in the realm of economic liberalization. Ireland, New Zealand, the U.K., Denmark, Iceland, Australia and Chile, all relatively recent converts to free markets, also outpace the U.S. this year.
Incidentally, it seems that the tax cut juju isn't making us more free:
Most alarming is the U.S.'s fiscal burden, which imposes high marginal tax rates for individuals and very high marginal corporate tax rates. In terms of corporate taxation as an element of economic freedom, the U.S. ranks a lowly 112th out of the 155 countries scored, and its top individual tax rate ranks only slightly better at 82nd. U.S. government expenditures as a share of GDP increased less in 2003 than in 2002, but the rise since 2001 is what explains the U.S.'s decline in score over the period.
The Wall Street Journal also expresses shock and horror over such communistic ideas as corporate responsibility and not being raped by the global economy:
The U.S., with its strong property rights, low inflation and competitive banking and finance laws, scores well in most. But worrying developments like Sarbanes-Oxley in the category of regulation and aggressive use of antidumping law in trade policy have kept it from keeping pace with the best performers in economic freedom.
Somehow, I get the idea that the slippage will (1) be treated as a major catastrophe in Washington; and (2) is largely the product of ever-more ridiculous expectations by ascendant market fundamentalists. But you know, gotta keep up with the Joneses.
Posted by Jim Dallas at January 7, 2005 12:40 AM
| TrackBack