I’ve written about the success of Hong Kong (particularly when compared to nations such as Cuba, France, and China), but haven’t paid as much attention to Singapore.
But it’s time to correct that oversight. I’m motivated to write about Singapore because of a story that reveals one of the unique features of that jurisdiction: The bureaucracy gets monetarily rewarded if the economy prospers.
Here are some passages from a Bloomberg report.
In Singapore, civil-servant bonuses rise and fall with the economy’s performance… The nation…links civil servants’ bonuses to how well the $298 billion economy does. …Civil servants are typically paid a variable incentive twice a year, on top of a fixed one-month bonus. The mid-year payment was skipped in 2009, when the economy contracted during the global recession. …“Singapore may be one of the few countries that explicitly pegs bonuses to growth,” said Vishnu Varathan, an economist in Singapore at Mizuho Bank Ltd.
Wow. Think of what that might mean if applied in the United States. Would we get as many crazy growth-sapping regulations from bureaucracies such as the EPA, IRS, and EEOC if the paper pushers knew they would lose bonuses?
To be honest, I’m not actually sure that this system makes much difference in Singapore or, if it does work there, whether it would work the same way in the United States (where bureaucrats seem to get bonuses based on bad behavior!).
But one thing we can say with certainty is that Singapore is an economic success story.
Look at the rankings for per-capita gross national income from the World Bank. You’ll notice a few trends, such as it’s good to be a tax haven (Monaco, Liechtenstein, Bermuda, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Isle of Man, etc) or to have a lot of oil (Qatar, Kuwait, Norway, UAE, etc).
But you’ll also notice that Singapore is one of the world’s most prosperous jurisdictions, regardless of which methodology is used.
So why is Singapore so rich?
Well, there aren’t many natural resources other than ocean access, so the only reasonable explanation is that the country has good economic policy.
And if you look at the latest data from Economic Freedom of the World, you’ll see that Singapore ranks second for economic liberty.
I’m particularly impressed by the nation’s fiscal policy. The corporate tax rate is just 17 percent and the top tax rate for households is only 20 percent. In other words, there’s no Obama-Hollande class warfare against successful taxpayers.
Equally important, the burden of government spending is very small by world standards, averaging less than 20 percent of economic output since 1990 according to the IMF.
And the one time government spending climbed significantly about 20 percent of GDP (during the Asian financial crisis), the government then did a remarkable job of implementing the Golden Rule of spending restraint.
Singapore’s fiscal discipline between 1998 and 2003 was particularly impressive as spending was cut (genuine cuts, not the make-believe cuts you find in Washington) by an average of 9 percent each year.
But the statistic that matters most is that the burden of government spending dropped to 12 percent of GDP by 2007, a reduction of almost 16 percentage points (even larger than Sweden’s budget cutting between 1992 and 2001).
Government spending in Singapore has since 2007 slowly climbed back to about 18 percent of economic output, but that’s still quite good by modern standards (though much larger than government was in America back in the 1800s and early 1900s).
Let’s close by preemptively dealing with the statist argument that relatively small government somehow prevents the provision of genuine public goods.
Earlier this month, I shared some remarkable data from a study published by the European Central Bank. That research showed that “countries with small public sectors report the ‘best’ economic performance” and also receive the highest scores for providing public goods in a cost-efficient manner (referred to as “public sector efficiency”).
Looking at country groups, “small” governments post the highest efficiency amongst industrialised countries. Differences are considerable as “small” governments on average post a 40 percent higher scores than “big” governments. …This illustrates that the size of government may be too large in many industrialised countries, with declining marginal products being rather prevalent.
But as part of that post, I groused that the researchers were only looking at OECD member nations. Yet none of those countries have small public sectors.
I can’t help but wonder what the results would have been if Hong Kong and Singapore also were added to the mix. After all, I don’t consider the United States to have a “small” government. Same for Japan, Switzerland, and Australia. Those are simply nations where government isn’t as big and bloated as it is in France, Italy, Sweden, and Greece.
Well, I’m happy to report that I found another study from the European Central Bank that broadens the net to include some nations from Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America.
Singapore was one of the nations in the study and you won’t be surprised to learn that it received the highest score for “public sector efficiency.” But not merely the highest score, Singapore’s 2.39 was dramatically higher than the scores in the earlier study for the nations that supposedly had “small” governments (even though the actual burden of government spending in those countries is almost two times larger than it is in Singapore).
So what’s the bottom line?
The first ECB study clearly concluded that “small” government is more efficient and productive than either “medium” government or “big” government.
Based on the second ECB study, we can conclude that it’s even better if government is…well, I guess we’ll have to use the term “smaller than small.”
So congratulations to Singapore for readjusting the rankings. Now if we can find a jurisdiction where government consumes just 5 percent of GDP, we’ll be able to complete the research and finally figure out the “correct” size of government.
P.S. As I noted back in 2009, Singapore is a multi-ethnic (like Bermuda) and multi-religious society, yet diversity isn’t a problem when government doesn’t practice favoritism.
P.P.S. By the way, I’m not claiming Singapore is an ideal society. It is only #39 in a ranking of total freedom, which includes measures of personal liberty. And Singapore’s version of privatized Social Security is far from perfect since government controls the investment of private savings. In other words, Singapore isn’t libertarian Nirvana. But it is reaping the rewards of being more pro-market than almost all other nations.
P.P.P.S. If you read this far, you deserve a reward. Here are a couple of Thanksgiving-themed cartoons.
We’ll start with Henry Payne’s look at another example of Obama governing by “executive order.”
And here’s Rick McKee’s contribution. But since I’m not partisan, I’ll simply say that McKee has identified the first member of the Moocher Hall of Fame.
P.P.P.P.S. At this time last year, there were a bunch of great Thanksgiving-themed cartoons about the Obamacare disaster.
P.P.P.P.P.S. And if you want some serious Thanksgiving-themed policy analysis, I strongly recommend this video on how the Pilgrims were saved by property rights.
[…] that bigger government leads to more competent government. Indeed, all the evidence points in the other direction (with the pandemic response being a painful example of how bloated governments do a bad job of […]
[…] is probably the world’s leading example for mandatory savings, while Australia, Denmark, Chile, Switzerland, Hong […]
[…] is probably the world’s leading example for mandatory savings, while Australia, Denmark, Chile, Switzerland, Hong […]
[…] is probably the world’s leading example for mandatory savings, while Australia, Denmark, Chile, Switzerland, Hong […]
[…] final comment. Long-run growth matters. Hong Kong and Singapore, for instance, used to be poor jurisdictions. But free markets and small government have produced […]
[…] Another study from the European Central Bank. […]
[…] is an amazing example of a nation that broke through the middle-income trap, as I noted back in 2014 and […]
[…] it is lagging. The bottom line is that China needs to copy Hong Kong and Singapore if it wants to become a rich nation. Or even Taiwan, which is an under-appreciated success […]
[…] is a successful example of the right […]
[…] is a successful example of the right […]
[…] But I like how he embraces lower tax rates to compete with low-tax competitors in the region, such as Singapore. […]
[…] Hay mucha libertad económica, que se ha traducido en enormes mejoras en los niveles de vida . […]
[…] In other words, these nations are role models for “public sector efficiency.” […]
[…] In other words, these nations are role models for “public sector efficiency.” […]
[…] Banco Central Europeo tiene dos estudios separados (aquí y aquí) que concluyen que un gobierno más pequeño es más […]
[…] a lot of economic liberty, which has resulted in huge improvements in living standards. Indeed, people in Singapore are now much richer than […]
[…] European Central Bank has two separate studies (here and here) that conclude smaller government is more […]
[…] European Central Bank has two separate studies (here and here) that conclude smaller government is more […]
[…] One final comment. Long-run growth matters. Hong Kong and Singapore, for instance, used to be a poor jurisdictions. But free markets and small government have produced […]
[…] attention. Here’s a look at the top nations, led (as is almost always the case) by Hong Kong and Singapore. Switzerland also deserves some recognition since it has always been in the top […]
[…] studies (here and here) showing small government is more […]
[…] the ECB came up with equally strong results in a 2006 study that looked at a larger list of […]
[…] has a great system, and Switzerland and the Netherlands are good role models as well. Hong Kong and Singapore also rely on private savings for retirement, and both jurisdictions demonstrate that aging […]
[…] has a great system, and Switzerland and the Netherlands are good role models as well. Hong Kong and Singapore also rely on private savings for retirement, and both jurisdictions demonstrate that aging […]
[…] it also doesn’t have a pervasive tax-and-transfer welfare state. People are responsible for saving for their own retirement and healthcare. So the absence of future taxpayers isn’t a major challenge because the system doesn’t […]
[…] also greatly admire Singapore’s strict adherence to my Golden Rule for a 10-year period beginning in the late 1990s. Government spending actually shrank by a bit more […]
[…] very small (about 10 percent of GDP, about one-half the size of the current Hong Kong and Singapore public […]
[…] was very small (about 10 percent of GDP, about one-half the size of the current Hong Kong and Singapore public […]
[…] The bottom line is that there’s no substitute for free markets and limited government. If nations want faster growth and more prosperity, they need to mimic jurisdictions such as Hong Kong and Singapore. […]
[…] video, narrated by Abir Doumit, reviews success stories from around the world, including Hong Kong, Singapore, Chile, Estonia, Taiwan, Ireland, South Korea, and […]
[…] I mentioned in the article for The Hill that there are two exceptions. Hong Kong and Singapore have extremely low birthrates and aging populations. But neither jurisdiction faces a fiscal crisis […]
[…] I mentioned in the article for The Hill that there are two exceptions. Hong Kong and Singapore have extremely low birthrates and aging populations. But neither jurisdiction faces a fiscal crisis […]
[…] congratulations also to Singapore, New Zealand, Switzerland, and […]
[…] Just compare France and Switzerland. Or look at the wreckage of communism. Or consider the prosperity of Hong Kong and Singapore. […]
[…] to say, there’s nothing in the report to square the circle. Nothing to explain why Singapore manages to be so rich with such a small burden of government. It’s as if the bureaucrats hoped that nobody would […]
[…] Just compare France and Switzerland. Or look at the wreckage of communism. Or consider the prosperity of Hong Kong and Singapore. […]
[…] Just compare France and Switzerland. Or look at the wreckage of communism. Or consider the prosperity of Hong Kong and Singapore. […]
[…] 20 of Doing Business, led by the “unsung success story” of New Zealand, followed by the capitalist haven of […]
[…] world, I’m also not surprised to see strong scores for free-market success stories such as Singapore, Estonia, Hong Kong, and […]
[…] its member nations). Nonetheless, it would be great to somehow include places such as Hong Kong, Singapore, Bermuda, and the Cayman Islands (all of which punch way above their weight in the international […]
[…] good news is that being #3 is still pretty good, and it’s hard to beat Switzerland and Singapore because they have such good free-market policies. And that’s where America falls […]
[…] Not to mention that most sentient beings can look around the world and look at the moribund economies of nations with large governments (such as France, Italy, and Greece) and compare them with the better performance of places with smaller government (such as Hong Kong, Switzerland, and Singapore). […]
[…] But then policy began to move in the right direction, especially between 1985 and 1995, the country became a Mecca for market-oriented reforms. The net result is that New Zealand’s score dramatically improved and it is now comfortably ensconced in the top-5 for economic freedom, usually trailing only Hong Kong and Singapore. […]
[…] attention. Here’s a look at the top nations, led (as is almost always the case) by Hong Kong and Singapore. Switzerland also deserves some recognition since it has always been in the top […]
[…] Here’s a look at the top nations, led (as is almost always the case) by Hong Kong and Singapore. Switzerland also deserves some recognition since it has always been in the top […]
[…] good idea to be in the top-left quadrant, hopefully close to the corner, sort of like Hong Kong and Singapore. And it’s a big mistake to be in the bottom-right quadrant, sort of like Cuba, North Korea, […]
[…] Today’s column is about Switzerland, but I can’t resist pointing out that Hong Kong and Singapore both score highly for rule of law and small government. And Chile deserves honorable mention as […]
[…] three out of the top four jurisdictions (Hong Kong, Singapore, and Switzerland) rank in the top four for economic liberty according to Economic Freedom of the […]
[…] You’ll see several of my favorite places, including the Cayman Islands, Liechtenstein, Singapore, Switzerland, and Bermuda. But leading the list is […]
[…] course, the real role models should be Hong Kong and Singapore since those jurisdictions have more economic liberty than even […]
[…] final comment. Long-run growth matters. Hong Kong and Singapore, for instance, used to be poor jurisdictions. But free markets and small government have produced […]
[…] final comment. Long-run growth matters. Hong Kong and Singapore, for instance, used to be poor jurisdictions. But free markets and small government have produced […]
[…] final comment. Long-run growth matters. Hong Kong and Singapore, for instance, used to be poor jurisdictions. But free markets and small government have produced […]
[…] The bottom line is that Sweden actually is somewhat like the United States. There are some very bad policies and some fairly decent policies. America ranks above Sweden in a couple of areas, but lags in other areas. The net result is that we’re both more market-oriented than the average western nation (compare Sweden and Greece, for instance), but both well behind the pace setters for economic liberty, Hong Kong and Singapore. […]
[…] Folks on the left may get excited by whether we travel 60 mph in the wrong direction or 90 mph in the wrong direction, but this seems like a Hobson’s choice for those of us who would prefer that America become more like Hong Kong or Singapore. […]
[…] seems appropriate when examining how people of Chinese origin earn very high incomes in Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, and the United States (all places with reasonably high levels of economic liberty), but […]
[…] to see that nations with smaller public sectors got much more bang for the buck (with Singapore easily winning the prize for the most efficient […]
[…] to see that nations with smaller public sectors got much more bang for the buck (with Singapore easily winning the prize for the most efficient […]
[…] to see that nations with smaller public sectors got much more bang for the buck (with Singapore easily winning the prize for the most efficient […]
[…] final comment. Long-run growth matters. Hong Kong and Singapore, for instance, used to be poor jurisdictions. But free markets and small government have produced […]
[…] Folks on the left may get excited by whether we travel 60 mph in the wrong direction or 90 mph in the wrong direction, but this seems like a Hobson’s choice for those of us who would prefer that America become more like Hong Kong or Singapore. […]
[…] Folks on the left may get excited by whether we travel 60 mph in the wrong direction or 90 mph in the wrong direction, but this seems like a Hobson’s choice for those of us who would prefer that America become more like Hong Kong or Singapore. […]
[…] seems appropriate when examining how people of Chinese origin earn very high incomes in Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, and the United States (all places with reasonably high levels of economic liberty), but […]
[…] Empire left behind an ethos of liberty, free markets and private property rights in places like Singapore and Hong Kong. These places are now global economic powerhouses. Perhaps our former colonies now […]
[…] One final comment. Long-run growth matters. Hong Kong and Singapore, for instance, used to be a poor jurisdictions. But free markets and small government have produced […]
[…] as the jurisdiction with the most liberty to engage in mutually beneficial exchange, followed by Singapore. Other highly ranked nations include New Zealand,Switzerland, and […]
[…] as the jurisdiction with the most liberty to engage in mutually beneficial exchange, followed by Singapore. Other highly ranked nations include New Zealand,Switzerland, and […]
[…] as the jurisdiction with the most liberty to engage in mutually beneficial exchange, followed by Singapore. Other highly ranked nations include New Zealand, Switzerland, and […]
[…] as the jurisdiction with the most liberty to engage in mutually beneficial exchange, followed by Singapore. Other highly ranked nations include New Zealand, Switzerland, and […]
[…] destiny. At least in most advanced nations. The exceptions are jurisdictions such as Hong Kong and Singapore. By the way, both have aging populations and extremely low birthrates (Singapore in last place out […]
[…] But while Goldilocks always liked the middle option, I obviously think we should be more like Hong Kong and Singapore. […]
[…] For all intents and purposes, they’re advising nations in the region to copy France and Italy instead of seeking to be more like Hong Kong and Singapore. […]
[…] For all intents and purposes, they’re advising nations in the region to copy France and Italy instead of seeking to be more like Hong Kong and Singapore. […]
[…] or Switzerland with its medium-sized government? Where do you think government is more effective,Singapore with its small government or the United States with its medium-sized […]
[…] or Switzerland with its medium-sized government? Where do you think government is more effective, Singapore with its small government or the United States with its medium-sized […]
[…] or Switzerland with its medium-sized government? Where do you think government is more effective, Singapore with its small government or the United States with its medium-sized […]
[…] But the bad news is that we have more of these policies than Hong Kong and Singapore. […]
[…] because America is a hyper-free market jurisdiction like Hong Kong or Singapore. Instead, the U.S. does better simply because European nations deviate even further from the right […]
[…] But if they reside in a medium-tax country with a medium-sized government, they are highly productive (so just imagine what they could achieve in Hong Kong or Singapore!). […]
[…] But if they reside in a medium-tax country with a medium-sized government, they are highly productive (so just imagine what they could achieve in Hong Kong or Singapore!). […]
[…] But for purposes of today’s analysis, our message is more basic. Simply stated, the United States should not be more like Europe. Instead, we should seek to be more like Hong Kong and Singapore. […]
[…] now has dropped to #16. Here are the new rankings (based on a 0-10 scale), with Hong Kong and Singapore once again leading the […]
[…] of stereotyping, the Chinese people are remarkably productive when given the chance. Hong Kong and Singapore are dominated by ethnic Chinese, and those jurisdictions routinely rank among the world’s top […]
[…] Singapore, with ranks second for economic freedom. That makes the country economically dynamic, but Singapore only ranks #75 for personal […]
[…] is still way behind the United States and other nations with more capitalistic systems. Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan are appropriate role […]
[…] of miracle. Yes, it would be nice if Greece and other nations decided to become like Hong Kong and Singapore, high-growth economies thanks to small government and […]
[…] at the incredible economic rise of jurisdictions such as Hong Kong and Singapore, it’s easy to answer that question. Simply put in place the rule of law, accompanied by free […]
[…] scholarly research – including from bureaucracies such as the International Monetary Fund and European Central Bank – that confirms small government is more efficient and […]
[…] point. Just like it’s good to have positive examples (think Hong Kong, Switzerland, Texas, or Singapore), it’s also good to have bad examples (such as France, Italy, California, and […]
[…] jurisdictions such as Hong Kong and Singapore, there may be a significant amount of income inequality simply because some people are getting […]
[…] in the month, I wrote about a second ECB study that looked at a broader set of nations and further confirmed that smaller government produces […]
[…] in the month, I wrote about a second ECB study that looked at a broader set of nations and further confirmed that smaller government produces […]
[…] Which means, of course, that we’re also fixated on the importance of free markets and small government. We understand that an economy will grow much faster if the burden of government is constrained (think Hong Kong or Singapore). […]
[…] Kong and Singapore have been role models for economic liberty for several decades, so it’s no surprise that […]
[…] should mimic Hong Kong and Singapore, not France and […]
[…] Needless to say, these results confirm the research from the European Central Bank showing that nations with smaller public sectors are more efficient and competent, with Singapore being a very powerful example. […]
[…] Fortunately, there’s no contradiction between these views. Indeed, academic researchers have found that nations with smaller government also have more efficient government. With Singapore being a very powerful example. […]
Both Singapore and Hong Kong have income from rent, since they both have a monopoly on land. How does this factor in to their low tax rates?