US vs. Hong Kong and Singapore (per capita income)
This chart (click link) show GDP PPP for the US, Singapore, and Hong Kong from 1990 to 2014. A number or questions/observations strike me.
1. The US has lower PPP that Singapore or Hong Kong now, but had a higher PPP in 1990.
2. The US PPP is about 1/2 of Singapore today, which means Singapore must be growing at least 2% per year faster than the US.
3. Singapore is growing faster than Hong Kong, despite having a lower economic freedom ranking.
DOES anyone want to hazard a guess why this is true?
1. The US has lower PPP that Singapore or Hong Kong now, but had a higher PPP in 1990.
2. The US PPP is about 1/2 of Singapore today, which means Singapore must be growing at least 2% per year faster than the US.
3. Singapore is growing faster than Hong Kong, despite having a lower economic freedom ranking.
DOES anyone want to hazard a guess why this is true?
1. Singapore has a non-executive president so the government system is more efficient. This is a double-edged sword.
2. In recent decades there have been big efficiency/technology gains in energy/mining/agriculture which have reduced prices. Singapore and Hong Kong are not producers in those areas.
3. Singapore and HK have not inflicted destructive economic policies on themselves to pretend to protect the environment. These policies are an outcome of the carbon change scare scam and even Germany is having second thoughts about penalizing industry.
4. Several nations in Europe have higher GDP per capita than the US. Interpretation of what this actually means should be done with caution, often prices as well as incomes are high so no more can be bought even with the higher wage/salary.
5. Singapore calls itself socialist and a welfare state when it suits them. Yes there is welfare but it is only for those who are 'down on their luck', welfare is not given to support a voluntary lifestyle choice.
6. Heath care- similar to above. Standards are high. Nearly everyone in Singapore pays for their own or family health care so the cost is not rocketing up. (compare UK were health has a big vocal powerful support base and so heath costs absorb an ever increasing proportion of national wealth).
7. Another double-edged sword- the different meaning given to the word 'democracy' such that the electorate can not vote unrealistic benefits for themselves.
8. The government spends big on primary education which is of high standard, teachers are respected and well paid. Tertiary education is of a high standard but entry is restricted to the academically gifted. Thus there is no mass pressure group of university collectivist/communist/climate/LGBTIQ etc advocates.
9. Economic freedom is one of, perhaps the biggest, driver of economic growth, but not the only one.
My guess is this one predominates. Someone could research it by comparing just urban areas.
They may be repressive, however, consider just what their "repressive" nature represses. It is not business.
The United States is NOT pro-business since NAFTA back in the 1990's Remember Ross Perot talking about that GIANT sucking sound?
Perot 1992
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rkgx1...
Next, look at expatriation. Singapore is doing what they can to attract people. "Despite high living expenses, expatriates based in Singapore are happy with their well-being, health, safety, family life, work, and more"
http://www.expatsingapore.com/content...
As the United States becomes more repressive toward success, in its policies constantly attacking the proverbial 1%'ers, this trend will continue.
When the "men of the mind" move, they provide jobs, those jobs provide income to people, as more jobs are created in Singapore, their PPP will continue to increase, until such point as we here in the USA get a smart set of elected leaders that KNOW WHAT IT MENS TO EMPLOY SOMEONE!!!
Men arrive in Singapore growth increases.
This makes the disparity 2x more .
example, 10 USA 10 Singapore. 1 to 1
2 leave.
8 USA 12 Singapore. 2 to 3
2 leave
6 to 14 = 3 to 7.,
Hong Kong became one of China's SEZ or Special Economic Zonea if I remember the term right. It's mission is to make money to support Socialism. China get's it we don't. Along with the other special zone's it's monitored closely and the number one item is graft and corruption.It's basic industries are mineral oriented.
The USA. Let's see it's basic industry is mmmm 'giving away informatioin on the internet?'
Debt based on the fear standard as it attempts to emulate the the success of a China that doesn't exist anymore. On the other hand is running in the top of the pack for dirty and garbage strewn. Both applyt the outdoors and Congress.
1) Inflation here in the US has been a problem since the end of Reagan and I'll bet energy prices are a big portion of that.
2) Rises in the minimum wage have been largely since Bill Clinton took office. These affect PPP by shifting it so that money buys less - even when inflation is at a minimum.
3) Consumer debt and spending have been artificially propping up the US economy as opposed to savings and investment. Debt service is a hidden cost which has only grown in the last twenty years and hampers real growth by diverting investment income.
4) Increased regulatory burden, especially in the last ten years, has severely hampered small business start-ups - the true engine of the economy.
Partially political bias affecting the ranking method.
Economic freedom in Singapore is under a currently benign but repressive government. Likely the limits that places on liberty are repugnant to the ranking judges, while they place less penalty on a so-called democracy (like the US) where the controls are more complete but less obvious. Some clever free market capitalists have chosen to move to Singapore over other regimes, e.g., Jim Rogers. How the ranking process evaluates Hong Kong is not clear to me.
Hong Kong is subject to Communist China's government and that interference could be a limitation to the growth there that Singapore is not currently experiencing.
Admittedly, I am not an expect on either country.
I have my opinion, but also without firm research.
Obama brags about 14 jobs created in his 7 year term...but 90% of those jobs are part-time...industrial job growth is zero over the last 7 years...
My merchant marine uncle used to love Singapore and got more for his money there, he considered it the "Hub" of the world.
Obviously they are not experiencing the nonsense and chaos there like we are...their currency seems to be stable as well.
I think your right about their ranking being off.