How Did We Get So Rich?

Tampa Tribune ^ | 3/21/04 | Jim Beamguard

[T-Bird45]

School children are taught the genius of American federalism, but the equally important economic system set up in the late 1700s is too little appreciated.

Unfortunately, I think the line above is less true than it used to be in both federalism and basic economics. However, it seems a lot of young people are overcoming this handicap.

I may have to check out this new book on Adam Smith, it sounds like a good one for the permanent home collection.

[headsonpikes]

Opportunity to exercise yet more saintly patience ping. ;^)

[dogbyte12]

It was a combination of factors including relatively laissez-fair economics. However, without our natural resources though, we wouldn't have exploded like we did. We had so many minerals, so much farmable land that it allowed that growth to flourish. We have every single climate imaginable, from tropical to artic. We have deserts, we have plains, great lakes, rivers that allowed commerce to flow, and our economic system, and rugged invididualism was allowed to flourish. So many things that we need, we were able to produce ourselves without importation. That is so crucial.

Wars, trade policy, etc can profoundly affect a nation with limited natural resources. If you grow your own, you are one step ahead in the game.

[HarryCaul]

Hi.
Welcome to the concept of "natural resources", of which Haiti has practically none, and of which Iraq lacks in any diversity.

Now if you asked why China or India can't do it, that might be a bit mroe valid...

[BobS]

I immediately noticed that big fat old Benjamin Franklin wasn't mentioned. He got the investment markets going.

[freebilly]

America's greatness lies in the practice of Judeo-Christian principles. When you combine the concepts of spiritual freedom with economic freedom (actually, the two are inseparable) America is inevitable....

[Carry_Okie]

Welcome to the concept of "natural resources", of which Haiti has practically none, and of which Iraq lacks in any diversity.

This inference is garbage. Japan isn't rolling in natural resources and neither is Britain. Hong Kong has virtually none (except a port), and neither does Singapore.

Russia may have the richest natural resources in the world.

Besides oil, Iraq has significant sources of uranium, precious metals, water, soils, and access to the Gulf. It's quite enough for them to prosper. Haiti has marvellous weather, and could have been an island paradise. The difference is liberty under the rule of law. All other factors pale by comparison.

[reluctantwarrior]

An excellent book on the success of our system and the contrast with other nations is "The Mystery of Capital" by Hernando de Soto. The codification of private property rights allows for the ever expanding access to capital, he does a great job explaining it. It is well worth the time and money, highly recommend it.

[Thinkin' Gal]

How Did We Get So Rich?

Genesis 49:26 The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills: they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren.

[headsonpikes]

Welcome to the concept of "natural resources"...

Actually, we're all standing on top of and surrounded by "natural resources" every place on the planet.

This circumstance has always been true for humans; but without reason, liberty, and property rights, these "natural resources" remain valueless.

[Paleo Conservative]

However, without our natural resources though, we wouldn't have exploded like we did.

But there are other large countries with lots of natural resources. Why isn't Brazil or Argentina in the same stratum as the US? If natural resources guaranteed prosperity why did the Soviet Union fail? How did a country like Japan with few natural resources have so much growth in the 20th century? Or Hong Kong? Or Taiwan?

[nutmeg]

read later bump

[HarryCaul]

It's something of a myth that Japan doesn't have access to substantial natural resources, they did after all thrive as a largely isolated and self-sufficient nation for quite a while.

And then they colonized, much as Britain did. Why did they colonize? For access to natural resources.

Among the colonies, you may note, were Singapore and Hong Kong, which made money how? Serving as access points to natural resources.

Haiti has marvellous weather? That's your suggestion for their natural resource?

[HarryCaul]

Re: Brazil and Russia, they have massive resources, but they simply aren't as easily reached as US resources are. You can't just ignore that factor.

Canada is democractic, free, and lives under the rule of law. And while wealthy relative to the world, they're nowhere near the level of US wealth. Why?

[dogbyte12]

I am not suggesting that natural resources equals success. I am just saying that it doesn't hurt to have a bunch of cheap timber, food, cotton, minerals. You can still screw it up, you can still make it with limited resources, but it is naturally better to have it, then not.

[garbanzo]

Welcome to the concept of "natural resources", of which Haiti has practically none, and of which Iraq lacks in any diversity.

Neither does Japan or Hong Kong or Taiwan.

[Carry_Okie]

Haiti has marvellous weather? That's your suggestion for their natural resource?

Hawaii does OK by it. Cuba once did too.

[ocean]

"Why can't Iraq do what American pioneers did? Why haven't Haitians done it, or Russians?"

Simple. Secure and protected rights to private property.

If Iraq doesn't allow all its citizens secure ownership of private property, everything else will fall by the wayside IMHO.

[CGVet58]

excellent posting, T-bird, and I've added it to my Must-Get list of books (it's a long list, but i get to them all in time).

tx,

J

[freedumb2003]

How Did We Get So Rich?

It doesn't matter -- it is all going to go away in 2 generations. Between the flood of immigrants (legal and illegal) and their steadfast refusal to assimilate and Liberal politics which ignores all credos of wealth generation in favor of blatant socialism (such as the EIC) the tenents of our political and economic system are being hacked of at groud level.

Today in the LA Slimes, a writer had the termity to say -- and the Slimes had the audacity to print -- a letter from someone who called for the "High 5 plan" 5% tax on the 5% richest Californians for 5 years (he was protesting the hike in Jr College fees). This blathering idiot doesn't even realize that not only will more businesses relocate OUT of California, but so will the "rich" people (who of course don't work) who alreay pay 80% of taxes anyway! So, instead of the current % or the 5% added, they will get ZERO!

Folks, I am glad I don't have kids. This is the first recorded generation that feels that things will be worse for the next generation. And with good cause.

</Gloom and Doom rant>