How Awesome Would the U.S. Economy Be If It Were Set Free from Massive Government Regulations?

[Stephanie]

Just imagine is right

SNIP:
Imagine if the U.S.’s economy had grown an extra 1% every year since 1949 as a result from less strangulating federal regulation.

This is the thesis for a recent Forbes article by Rich Karlgaard, the magazine’s publisher and head writer. Using the concept of compound interest, along with an assertion that runaway federal tinkering and silly regulations have had a massive impact on the country’s economic growth over the decades, he gives a handful of answers to the question:

“Where would the U.S. economy be today without massive federal regulation?”

Here’s what he came up with:

1. The 2014 GDP would be $32 trillion, not $17 trillion.
2. Per capita income would be $101,000, not $54,000.
3. Per capita wealth would be $480,000, not $260,000. It would probably be higher than that, since savings rates might be higher.
4. The U.S. would have no federal, state or municipal debts or deficits.
5. Pensions would be solid. So would Social Security.
6. The trend of new entrants to The Forbes 400 would not favor entrepreneurs in software, the Internet and financial services but would be more broadly distributed across all industries. Electronic bits–money and software–are less prone to regulation than such physical things as factories, transportation, etc.
7. Faster, quieter successors to the supersonic Concorde? Cheap, safe nuclear power? Cancer-curing drugs for small populations? Bullet trains financed by private investors? Yes!
8. The U.S. would have the resources to fight the multiplicity of threats from abroad, from ISIS to hackers.

ALL of it here:
How Awesome Would the U.S. Economy Be If It Were Set Free from Massive Government Regulations

 

[deltex1]

Would we still have gay stuff to talk about?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Just imagine is right

SNIP:
Imagine if the U.S.’s economy had grown an extra 1% every year since 1949 as a result from less strangulating federal regulation.

This is the thesis for a recent Forbes article by Rich Karlgaard, the magazine’s publisher and head writer. Using the concept of compound interest, along with an assertion that runaway federal tinkering and silly regulations have had a massive impact on the country’s economic growth over the decades, he gives a handful of answers to the question:

“Where would the U.S. economy be today without massive federal regulation?”

Here’s what he came up with:

1. The 2014 GDP would be $32 trillion, not $17 trillion.
2. Per capita income would be $101,000, not $54,000.
3. Per capita wealth would be $480,000, not $260,000. It would probably be higher than that, since savings rates might be higher.
4. The U.S. would have no federal, state or municipal debts or deficits.
5. Pensions would be solid. So would Social Security.
6. The trend of new entrants to The Forbes 400 would not favor entrepreneurs in software, the Internet and financial services but would be more broadly distributed across all industries. Electronic bits–money and software–are less prone to regulation than such physical things as factories, transportation, etc.
7. Faster, quieter successors to the supersonic Concorde? Cheap, safe nuclear power? Cancer-curing drugs for small populations? Bullet trains financed by private investors? Yes!
8. The U.S. would have the resources to fight the multiplicity of threats from abroad, from ISIS to hackers.

ALL of it here:
How Awesome Would the U.S. Economy Be If It Were Set Free from Massive Government Regulations

yes, imagine if we hadn't had 132 Federal and State programs to regulate the housing market to get millions of people into homes the unregulated free market said they could not afford!!

 

[TheOldSchool]

China's economy is growing exponentially faster than the U.S.'s. We should adopt their model.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

China's economy is growing exponentially faster than the U.S.'s. We should adopt their model.

dear, liberals would object to more and more capitalism but it is a good idea obviously.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Hey cons win a couple elections, vote to repeal the constitution, and then you can do whatever you want!!!

 

[guno]

Just imagine is right

SNIP:
Imagine if the U.S.’s economy had grown an extra 1% every year since 1949 as a result from less strangulating federal regulation.

This is the thesis for a recent Forbes article by Rich Karlgaard, the magazine’s publisher and head writer. Using the concept of compound interest, along with an assertion that runaway federal tinkering and silly regulations have had a massive impact on the country’s economic growth over the decades, he gives a handful of answers to the question:

“Where would the U.S. economy be today without massive federal regulation?”

Here’s what he came up with:

1. The 2014 GDP would be $32 trillion, not $17 trillion.
2. Per capita income would be $101,000, not $54,000.
3. Per capita wealth would be $480,000, not $260,000. It would probably be higher than that, since savings rates might be higher.
4. The U.S. would have no federal, state or municipal debts or deficits.
5. Pensions would be solid. So would Social Security.
6. The trend of new entrants to The Forbes 400 would not favor entrepreneurs in software, the Internet and financial services but would be more broadly distributed across all industries. Electronic bits–money and software–are less prone to regulation than such physical things as factories, transportation, etc.
7. Faster, quieter successors to the supersonic Concorde? Cheap, safe nuclear power? Cancer-curing drugs for small populations? Bullet trains financed by private investors? Yes!
8. The U.S. would have the resources to fight the multiplicity of threats from abroad, from ISIS to hackers.

ALL of it here:
How Awesome Would the U.S. Economy Be If It Were Set Free from Massive Government Regulations

Yep Steph, You would be free your government paid Medicaid, and government furnished cheese and welfare benefits that you told us you get, You would be free to become big business tycoon!! But wait why haven't you done that in the past when bush and reagan were in office???

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Hey cons win a couple elections, vote to repeal the constitution, and then you can do whatever you want!!!

too stupid of course since it is cons who like the Constitution and want to read it literally while it is libs who spied for Stalin, elected Barry, and hate the literal meaning of the Constitution.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Hey cons win a couple elections, vote to repeal the constitution, and then you can do whatever you want!!!

too stupid of course since it is cons who like the Constitution and want to read it literally while it is libs who spied for Stalin, elected Barry, and hate the literal meaning of the Constitution.

Wow is that really your first post after saying that you would support adopting China's economic model?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Hey cons win a couple elections, vote to repeal the constitution, and then you can do whatever you want!!!

too stupid of course since it is cons who like the Constitution and want to read it literally while it is libs who spied for Stalin, elected Barry, and hate the literal meaning of the Constitution.

Wow is that really your first post after saying that you would support adopting China's economic model?

dear, conservatives have always wanted more and more capitalism

 

[TheOldSchool]

dear, conservatives have always wanted more and more capitalism

And yet we became the most powerful and richest nation on the planet all while under liberal rule. Hmm...

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

dear, conservatives have always wanted more and more capitalism

And yet we became the most powerful and richest nation on the planet all while under liberal rule. Hmm...

actually dear as liberalism as inclined our country has declined. Liberalism under Barry is the worst ever and all agree we are in decline

 

[Freemason9]

One word about deregulation:

ebola

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

One word about deregulation:

ebola

too completely stupid and liberal of course. Those who are for deregulation are not for deregulation of Ebola. Only a liberal can be that slow.

See why we are forced to believe that liberalism is based in pure ignorance?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

dear, conservatives have always wanted more and more capitalism

And yet we became the most powerful and richest nation on the planet all while under liberal rule. Hmm...

if by liberalism you mean classical liberalism wherein govt was the most limited in the world you are correct.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Hey cons win a couple elections, vote to repeal the constitution, and then you can do whatever you want!!!

too stupid of course since it is cons who like the Constitution and want to read it literally while it is libs who spied for Stalin, elected Barry, and hate the literal meaning of the Constitution.

Wow is that really your first post after saying that you would support adopting China's economic model?

conservatives and libertarians would support moving toward more and more capitalism as China is doing.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Hey cons win a couple elections, vote to repeal the constitution, and then you can do whatever you want!!!

very very stupid since cons like the Constitution and like to read it literally while it is libs who want to read it creatively to mean anything they like at the moment.