« Very small countries | Main | Kindle »
The pointer is from Chris Masse
The link, which has further explanation, is here. Chris's prediction markets blog is here.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on April 16, 2008 at 06:45 AM in Data Source | Permalink
Comments
USA! USA! USA!
Posted by: Jonathan Hohensee at Apr 16, 2008 8:13:26 AM
I've always been curious: would the U.S. economy benefit if other large economies turned away from capitalism to any significant degree?
Would the U.S. be able to take advantage because of the lack of nimbleness in these other economies?
Would these other contry's economies slow down dragging the U.S. with it?
Would the difference in GDP growth cause the U.S. to pull away even if it did slow down?
Posted by: Winslow Theramin at Apr 16, 2008 8:49:21 AM
Winslow Theramin: you might find all sorts of things happen, such as a refusal to regulate financial markets properly causing economic chaos in the US...
Posted by: at Apr 16, 2008 9:09:36 AM
Brazil's drop is most distrubing since it has moved
from a clear majority to an even split. I think
it may be time to relook at my Brazilian stocks.
Posted by: sa at Apr 16, 2008 9:30:26 AM
Don't get too excited about the majority of Americans supporting the "free market." From the article:
Interestingly, supporters of the free market show more enthusiasm for a strongly regulated free market system than critics. Among those who agree that the free market system is the best system, three-quarters also agree that it works best with strong government regulation.
I blame the decline in the popularity of free markets at least in part on people associating bad actions (Iraq war) of unpopular self-described conservatives (George Bush) with an historical association of conservatives with free markets.
Posted by: Christopher Monnier at Apr 16, 2008 9:51:13 AM
Also, the "Blagh-Blagh Tribune" just published results from latest global polling by Nose-Picking, LLC. Majorities in most countries continue to support the notion of the flat Earth. Surprisingly, 43% of those who strongly agree that the Earth is flat in their country accept the possibility of it being rather curved somewhere else.
What do these polls tell us besides yet another proof that 'majorities in most countries' form their views by reading newspapers? What a stunning discovery.
Hence, the most important for the survival of the humanity question stays – should hunting of journalists be limited to licensed professionals, or should it be considered a duty of honor for any law-abiding arm-bearing citizen to shoot a journalist on a spot whenever and wherever such species would be encountered?
Posted by: Ozornik at Apr 16, 2008 10:30:17 AM
a strong governmentally regulated free market? ...doesn't that equate to...umm...not equating?
Posted by: shawn at Apr 16, 2008 10:32:03 AM
I've always been curious: would the U.S. economy benefit if other large economies turned away from capitalism to any significant degree?
Sounds like a "broken windows" opportunity to me. If economic growth, etc., drop elsewhere, we lose because they have fewer things that we want and they cannot afford the things we have that they want. "The division of labor is limited by the extent of the market" and all that. I would expect some short term gains due to improved competitive position, offset by long-term failures to gain (as much) on all parts.
Or it could be a more immediate downturn. The Chinese Communist Party decides it is tired of mass-producing junk for the capitalist running dogs who are trying to spoil its glorious Olympic success. Anything on that supply chain is nationalized. The economy reels from a massive drop in supply. Walmart starts checking its backup plans.
Posted by: Zubon at Apr 16, 2008 11:07:37 AM
Tyler-
This is a joke, isn't it? Two questions in the poll, the first of which is "et) The free enterprise system and free market economy work best in society's interest when accompanied by strong government regulations.". Do you think they might be looking for a particular answer?
Posted by: Rich Berger at Apr 16, 2008 12:10:53 PM
Come to think of it, the increase in those not agreeing may represent those who believe the free market works best in society's interest if not accompanied by strong government regulations.
Posted by: Rich Berger at Apr 16, 2008 12:41:36 PM
The world must be waking up to the historical fact that British and American economic supremacy evolved on the back of massive protectionism and government intervention.
We only embraced free markets once we won the battle of development.
Source:
"Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism" by Ha-Joon Chang (2005 Leontief Prize Winner)
Posted by: ideogenetic at Apr 16, 2008 12:49:16 PM
We only embraced free markets once we won the battle of development.
That's nonsense and very poor history to boot!
I have a problem with the survey--the definition of free markets. Many people believe that free markets means anarchy in which the most powerful thief wins. Most Russians believe that. Before you take a survey like this, you should define what you mean by free markets. Include in your definition that free markets mean the rule of law, equality before the law, and protection of the property of poor people from theft by the rich and powerful. Then see what results you get.
Posted by: fundamentalist at Apr 16, 2008 1:28:09 PM
fundamentalist, you'd also have to include protection of the property of the rich from theft by the poor. Of course, most rich people in market economies give away a lot of money, but thats not necessarily part of a free market system.
While this survey is interesting, I don't think it indicates any real preferences on the part of the public. They've been told Bush is "pro-market" while democrats are not, when in fact Clinton was likely more pro-market than Bush. The media labels failure in nearly any industry as a fault of "the market", while nearly all of the failures occur in heavily nationalized sectors (when was the last time we heard about a crisis in anything except finance/investment/banking and health care?).
Of course, if you tell them free markets mean open immigration, they probably wouldn't like them at all.
Posted by: Grant at Apr 16, 2008 4:49:46 PM
Of course, if you tell them free markets mean open immigration, they probably wouldn't like them at all.
This is almost certainly a point that doesn't get emphasised enough.
Posted by: Tim at Apr 16, 2008 5:20:01 PM
I didn't take time to read the article, but I find it interesting that the trend is clearly down at the same time global equity markets and economic growth are up. Maybe an increasing dissatisfaction with, or awareness of, the "wealth / income gap?" Please note that I'm not commenting on the gap per-se.
Just a thought.
Posted by: mike at Apr 16, 2008 5:39:25 PM
Is there some place I could move where there aren't any stupid people? Or where the stupid people didn't vote? Or where voting by stupid people simply wasn't a possibility?
Posted by: Russell Nelson at Apr 17, 2008 2:10:41 AM
The world must be waking up to the historical fact that British and American economic supremacy evolved on the back of massive protectionism and government intervention.OK, let's assume for a second that this is true. It still doesn't say anything about the possibly more extensive protectionism and government intervention in other states. Either you're bad at citing your sources, or Chang doesn't realize that things like these need comparisons. Perhaps Spain, Italy, Prussia, etc. had more barriers to trade.
Even then, correlation is not causation.
Posted by: Daniel Reeves at Apr 18, 2008 10:43:07 PM
If you have to buy some maple mesos, please come to our company.
Posted by: maple mesos at Jan 2, 2009 3:08:43 AM
Dofus kamas
buy dofus kamas
cheap kamas
dofus kama
dofus gold
dofus money
Posted by: aion kina at Mar 18, 2009 8:57:57 PM
