On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> wrote:

On Nov 9, 2014, at 11:43 PM, Richard Aiken <raikenclw@gmail.com> wrote:

I read somewhere recently that democracies tend to have higher productivity and thus greater disposable income than autocracies. At first glance, China is a contra-example. But it really isn't, since it didn't start getting relatively wealthy until the autocrats eased back on the economic controls.

Abandoning central control of the economy != democracy. It is perfectly possible to have an autocratic capitalist system.
 
 
 
That's not what I said. I said that democracies tend to have higher productivity and thus greater disposable income than autocracies.
 
I agree that it's perfectly possible to have an autocratic system that practices capitalism. It just won't have as high a productivity as it could have. Hong Kong is one now, just as the U.S. was for most of the 19th century (the era of the railroad barons and other monopolists).
 
--
Richard Aiken

"Never insult anyone by accident."  Robert A. Heinlein
"A word to the wise ain't necessary -- it's the stupid ones that need the advice." - Bill Cosby
"We know a little about a lot of things; just enough to make us dangerous." Dean Winchester