According to Economic Freedom of the World, there are five major factors that determine a nation’s economic performance.
Here’s the recipe for growth and prosperity.
- Rule of law and property rights.
- Small government.
- Stable monetary policy.
- Reasonable regulatory policy.
- Free trade.
This great publication is the first thing I check when I want to see whether a country leans in the direction of markets or whether it is burdened by a lot of statism. And it allows for meaningful comparisons between nations since it relies on global data sources.
But not all economic variables have good data sources that allow apples-to-apples comparisons. It’s very difficult to measure the degree to which various governments interfere with the price system by imposing controls (either minimum or maximum price limits).
Identifying the degree of cronyism in an economy also is a challenge since there are not reliable numbers for the degree to which politicians in various nations provide favors for particular firms or sectors.
So I was very interested when I saw that the Economist has put together a ranking that shows the degree to which a nation’s billionaires either earn their wealth via markets or cheat their way to wealth via cronyism.
It obviously doesn’t cover nearly as many nations as Economic Freedom of the World, but perhaps the folks at the Economist have come up with a methodology that eventually will allow a specific measure of cronyism in the future.
The article explains how the rankings were derived.
…for the past 20 years, from Malaysia to Mexico, crony capitalists—individuals who earn their riches thanks to their chumminess with government—have had a golden era. Worldwide, the worth of billionaires in crony industries soared by 385% between 2004 and 2014, to $2 trillion. The Economist’s crony-capitalism index tries to measure the extent of this graft for a number of important countries. Industries that have a lot of interaction with the state are vulnerable to crony capitalism (a full list of industries is provided in the table below). These activities are often legal but always unfair (Donald Trump, a casino and property tycoon, earns the 104th spot in our individual crony ranking). …Germany is cleanest, where just a sliver of the country’s billionaires derives their wealth from crony sectors. Russia fares worst in our index: wealth from the country’s crony sectors amounts to 18% of its GDP.
I’m glad to have these new numbers, but I’m not completely sold on the methodology used by the Economist.
Is all banking and finance really cronyism? That seems a bit of a stretch. While there are some indications that Warren Buffett is now a cronyist, I’m not aware of any evidence suggesting he used government connections to become rich in the first place.
And what about energy and chemicals? That description may apply to some rich people in the U.S. and elsewhere, but there are plenty of examples (the Koch brothers) of billionaires in this sector that have earned their wealth.
And speaking of wealth, why did the article compare wealth (which is a stock) and GDP (which is a flow)? I realize the Economist needed some sort of benchmark, but they chose an approach that has dubious methodological value.
All that being said, I suspect that the countries near the top of that list have a genuine problem with cronyism and the ones near the bottom do a better job of letting market forces operate.
So congratulations to Germany and South Korea and boos for Russia and Malaysia.
And a bit of applause for the United States. We have some egregious forms of cronyism that benefit the undeserving rich, but most American billionaires apparently earn their money.
Now let’s zoom out and look at the historical case against cronyism with this superb video from Prager University.
The bottom line is that scams like Solyndra are the modern version of what many railroads did in the 1800s.
I didn’t realize, though, that Uncle Sam also squandered money trying to invent the airplane.
P.S. You can enjoy other great videos from Prager University by clicking here, here, here, here, here, and here.
[…] of the private sector is a big reason to reject industrial policy. As shown in this video, we get better resultswhen businesses focus on attracting customers, not attracting […]
[…] of the private sector is a big reason to reject industrial policy. As shown in this video, we get better resultswhen businesses focus on attracting customers, not attracting […]
[…] of the private sector is a big reason to reject industrial policy. As shown in this video, we get better resultswhen businesses focus on attracting customers, not attracting […]
[…] of the private sector is a big reason to reject industrial policy. As shown in this video, we get better results when businesses focus on attracting customers, not attracting […]
[…] private companies. These forms of intervention inevitably produce inefficiency, subsidies, cronyism, corruption, and […]
[…] under those approaches is that politicians and bureaucrats control investment decisions. And we know that doesn’t work very […]
[…] prefer competitive markets, which reward decisions that make us more […]
[…] already shared two great videos on government planning versus the market. I strongly recommend this Prager University video, narrated by Professor Burton Folsom, on the failure of government-dictated investment. And also […]
[…] Yes, cronyism and corporate welfare are an economic issue. It is bad for long-run growth when political favors distort the allocation of capital. […]
[…] isto só pode acontecer se a China acabar com o capitalismo de laços deixando o capital ser alocado pelas forças de mercado ao invés das conexões […]
[…] Simply stated, I want to reverse the data in this chart because I understand the data in this video and this chart. […]
[…] Yes, cronyism and corporate welfare is an economic issue. It is bad for long-run growth when political favors distort the allocation of capital. […]
[…] private sector in a system governed by market prices. Government investment, by contrast, is a recipe for pork, inefficiency, corruption, and […]
[…] sector in a system governed by market prices. Government investment, by contrast, is a recipe for pork, inefficiency, corruption, and […]
[…] sector in a system governed by market prices. Government investment, by contrast, is a recipe for pork, inefficiency, corruption, and […]
[…] the private sector in a system governed by market prices. Government investment, by contrast, is a recipe for pork, inefficiency, corruption, and […]
[…] by the private sector in a system governed by market prices. Government investment, by contrast, is a recipe for pork, inefficiency, corruption, and […]
[…] bottom line is that an unfettered market produces the best results for the vast majority of people. Yes, people are greedy, but that leads to good outcomes in a […]
[…] bottom line is that an unfettered market produces the best results for the vast majority of people. Yes, people are greedy, but that leads to good outcomes in a […]
[…] central planning, by contrast, capital and labor are allocated based on the preferences of politicians and bureaucrats. And even if you assume those officials have good motives, there’s no way they can replicate […]
[…] with big government in order to obtain unearned wealth with bailouts, subsidies, protectionism, and other examples of […]
[…] put that message in blunter terms, there’s too much cronyism in Eastern […]
[…] put that message in blunter terms, there’s too much cronyism in Eastern […]
[…] início do ano, compartilhei alguns dados, baseado em fontes de riqueza bilionária, que sugeriam que o cronismo não era um fator tão importante nos Estados Unidos. Mas a nova […]
[…] Earlier this year, I shared some data, based on sources of billionaire wealth, that suggested that cronyism wasn’t a major factor in the United States. But Bessen’s new […]
[…] government-run development bank miraculously and improbably steered clear of corruption, it’s always a bad idea to let politicians and bureaucrats invest with other people’s […]
[…] that can only happen if China ends cronyism by letting capital be allocated by market forces rather than political […]
[…] Barton Folsom was the narrator of the superb video from Prager University on government-controlled […]
[…] Barton Folsom was the narrator of the superb video from Prager University on government-controlled […]
[…] Earlier this year, I shared some data, based on sources of billionaire wealth, that suggested that cronyism wasn’t a major factor in the United States. But Bessen’s […]
[…] people as socialists if it’s more accurate to refer to them as statists, redistributionists, cronyists, or […]
[…] 1: Free market pricing vs. controlling the production; Crony capitalism and how it defeats country growth and prosperity; John Fund – the union president election and the impact it could have on the country; Donald […]
Energy and mining activities and related transport activities get us what we need and want despite so much adverse government intervention, including claims by the state of ownership by the people which opens the door to much mischief and slow going. But hey, getting Russia at the top serves the interests of the Economist’s clientele.
Where’s Venezuela?
Reblogged this on Freedom Is Just Another Word….
Self serving index. If oligarchs have the sense to use shell companies in Panama, all we see are diffused ownership and therefore the cronysism index in US looks falsely low!
Lets see it by corporations or holding companies or percentage of yearly nation state income appropriated by corporations.
I can see Big pharma and the military industrial complex being high on the list with their diffused shareholders of ownership.
With that said, useful mental marker for future research and comparison!