Freer is better

From CroziervisionWiki

Work in Progress
This page is in need of a lot of work which it will receive when the author gets time





Author: Patrick Crozier
Permalink

I think freer is better because that is what I observe in the real world

Contents

Q&A

For instance?

Oh golly, so many possible examples. The ones that really do it for me are:
  • The Cold War
  • Britain in the 1980s
  • The things I see around me right now

Britain in the 1980s

So, Britain in the 1980s?

Yes, the 1970s were dreadful. In the 1980s, the state reduced inflation, privatised businesses, stopped subsidising others and made industrial action much harder to take. Britons got a lot richer and the privatised businesses got a lot better.

How dreadful was "dreadful"?

Endless strikes, double-digit inflation, the feeling that the country was going down the pan

How has the state reducing inflation got anything to do with freedom?

Well, ideally, I would leave the provision of currencies to the market but in the absence of that a state policy that mimics what the market would do will have to do. My guess is in a free market note-issuing banks would have every incentive to keep inflation down, so a state policy that keeps inflation down is the second best option.

Why do you reckon note-issuing banks would keep a lid on inflation? Why wouldn't they just print notes like crazy?

Because inflation would go up and people would start to use other banks' notes.

Making industrial action harder to take? Surely, that is reducing freedom?

My understanding is that there were very few strikes before the state got involved ie reduced freedom. For the most part what the state did in the 1980s was to reduce its own powers

So, what did the state do that it later undid?

Introduce strike pay. There was a time when the state paid people while they were on strike. This ended in the 1980s and played a large part in the defeat of the Miners' Strike

For the most part?

The state demanded that unions hold ballots before calling strikes. This has always struck me as a monstrous imposition on a free association, but you can't have it all

The things I see around me

So, the things you see around you?

Yes, it seems to me that all the things that work eg, shops, travel, music, cars, the internet are largely free of the state while all the things that don't eg the National Health Service, state schools, housing, roads, railways are either owned or otherwise dominated by it

So, what don't you like about the NHS?

The cost? But isn't it the case that most other countries spend a much higher proportion of their GDP on health?

Yes, I'm really thinking here about the cost to me.

And state schools?

  • Poor standards
  • The lack of discipline
  • The poor state of the buildings
  • The cost

Housing? But isn't that part of the free market?

It is, but planning ie permission to build, isn't

So, what's your beef about housing?

The cost. Housing in the UK is extraordinarily expensive

And roads?

Traffic jams, poor surfaces, stupid speed laws, fuel tax, car tax, disposal laws

But, surely, roads have to be provided by the state?

I don't think so

And railways?

The cost, delays, dirt, vandalism, the structures

Other

What about the Industrial Revolution?

The argument has long been that while life for some improved at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, for the vast majority it didn't. In support of this argument most of us have been fed on a diet of dark, satanic mills, smog-shrouded cities, dead rivers, three families to a room and children being sent down the mines. I am not sure this was the case. And even if it were the case I am pretty sure it was short lived. Anyway, while I am still making up my mind here is some further reading: http://www.econlib.org/LIBRARY/Enc/IndustrialRevolutionandtheStandardofLiving.html

Comments

If you would like to comment on this article I suggest you make it here rather than attempting to use the Talk/Discussion page. I have recently received a large amount of Wiki spam and the only effective way of preventing it is to prevent the unmoderated creation of new accounts without which the page is uneditable (unless your name is Kieran or Jax).