[Link] "They go together: Freedom, Prosperity, and Big Government"

post by CronoDAS · 2018-11-18T16:51:00.579Z · score: 9 (1 votes) · LW · GW · 3 comments

Link to article

Our statistical investigations lead to two substantive conclusions:

First, the data appear to support notion that economic freedom makes a positive contribution to personal freedom and prosperity. That holds true whether we measure prosperity in a narrowly economic sense, as GDP per capita, or in a broader sense, using noneconomic indicators of education, health, and personal safety.
Second, the data do not support the notion that a larger government is necessarily detrimental to either freedom or prosperity. On the contrary, countries with larger government sectors tend to have more personal freedom and higher indicators of education, health, and personal safety.

3 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by Richard_Kennaway · 2018-11-19T12:23:50.417Z · score: 15 (5 votes) · LW · GW

The conclusions are causal statements, but none of the findings address causality in any way.

comment by shminux · 2018-11-18T18:09:13.215Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Most of the scatter plots in the link look literally like scatter, as if someone dropped a jar of pennies on the floor. "he data appear to support notion that" there is little to no causation between the two, though there is some barely significant correlation, possibly due to a multitude of various other factors that are poorly understood and partially mentioned but not investigated in the linked article.

Though I agree, they do a decent job pointing out that whatever "statistics" the Fraser institute puts out is largely ideologically motivated. Duh, like they were ever hiding it.

comment by Richard_Kennaway · 2018-11-19T12:27:15.362Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW · GW
Though I agree, they do a decent job pointing out that whatever "statistics" the Fraser institute puts out is largely ideologically motivated. Duh, like they were ever hiding it.

As are those that the article substitutes. They choose a different measure of "size of government" and get a conclusion that they prefer. Would they have stuck with that measure if it had gone the other way?