Agreed.
The example might be a stretch, but the unifying force at the Plymouth Colony was the shedding of a communal effort (no one did any work), and the introduction of free choice concerning what and how much to produce.
In Europe, the social net is celebrated, and entrepreneurship is scorned. Banks are the chief source of finance (rather than the capital markets) leading to regulatory preferential treatment, little ability for investors to share risks, inadequate choices for firms to build optimal capital structures. This leads ultimately to an underfunded capital stock of productive assets and poor economic performance or little growth. The cycle then starts all over again.
You know why Japan was the envy of the world from the 1950's until 1989? No capital gains taxes. Joe Stiglitz won a nobel prize for basically suggesting that it was their banking system that provided capital. Turns out he was wholly wrong, as were, typically, the Nobel committee members.
In Europe, start with cutting taxes and offering incentives for saving, then beef up the capital markets (the same thing the sneering pig Chirac derides).
Success in a generation or less. Then you'll have a European identity.
You'd find it funny to know that even at LSE, Imperial, SOAS (London University colleges all) they're teaching macroeconomic policy according to the US.
You are so correct. I enjoyed reading your entire post. Thank you.
You are so correct. I enjoyed reading your entire post. Thank you.
It's easy (and fun!) for us to sit back and tell Europe what to do. But really, I like your ideas and I wish we could do more of them here in the U.S.