[Makarov]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Well, your question was worded in a way that wasn't useful if you were looking for a specific answer. You asked if there were countries with "zero socialst policies". I take it that you meant zero social programs.

Healthcare is a good example. We know that the best way to deliver necessary services to your people is through a competition based system (let's call it capitalist). The challenge with healthcare appears to be ensuring that that system isn't corrupted. People erroneously use the US as a model for market based healthcare, but it's a straw man. The US healthcare system is highly funded by the public coffers, and the remainder of it is captured by any number of interests - usually using the long arm of gov't to enforce various rent-seeking policies. The "socialized" alternative, like Canada's also does a poor job: mostly because of administrative capture, labour union excesses, and a general lack of motivation (ie incentive), to deliver.

I think there is good data to show that social safety nets can have a positive impact on entrepreneurism, and I believe that is likely the case. The flipside is that capitalism and socialism aren't just systems, they are moods. It's harder to have the benefit of capitalism if the citizenry aren't into it. Is a citizenry that is very into social programs the same citizenry that is interested in the go hard or go home attitude that makes capitalism work?

We are probably better off when gov't spending was predominantly on infrastructure, defence, etc. instead of the current version which is predominantly on services and little on infrastructure. The former creates a public good(s), and the latter does not.

A healthy, well-educated population with relatively equal opportunities to succeed is just as much a public good as a bridge IMO.