- Who was the more devastating president for the long run interests of the U.S. economy, Franklin D Roosevelt or George W. Bush?
- If the U.S. becomes the socialist paradise its leaders (not to mention Stiglitz and Krugman) seem hellbent on making it, where to should Atlas shrug? That is, which country has the best mix of a strong freedom-preserving constitution and low cultural shock change?
Monday, September 22, 2008
Two Questions
Leave an answer in the comments to these two questions:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
1) I would have to go with FDR by a good amount. I'd say FDR provided the foundation for Bush to have some interesting decisions.
2) I'd go with New Zealand here; same language, economically very free (#3 I believe), weather isn't altogether different (though reversed). The amount of land is a lot smaller, and the density of sheep is a lot higher, but otherwise...I think it'd be a good match.
Matt is right on #1. The New Deal lives on (for the worse) in every corner of our government and economy 75 years later. As bad as Bush has been, I don't see the citizens of the 2090's being affected to the same extent by Bush's follies.
On #2, the points you make about NZ are all valid but you better study up on the finer points of Rugby if you don't want to be a complete social misfit there, not to mention Cricket and learning to drive on the other side of the road. Seriously, the cultural gap is wider than you would think. My experience in moving from Australia (which is as similar to NZ as you can get) to US is that it is the constant differences in little things that catch you out.
Actually, I think Australia is a better fit. The idea of the frontier and open space and the ability to move out into the middle of nowhere and start again fit Australia's geography much better.
Ireland might not be bad. Good economic freedom there, but I'm not sure that it is constitutionally protected.
Post a Comment