If Laissez Faire is so great then why are most countries who practice it poor?

[Fairly Unbalanced]

Somalia is so awesome right? Most of the great industrial powers have a lot of of government involvement in the economy. No Anarcho-capitalist country has ever been successful for an extended period of time. Hong Kong and Singapore are an exception. Marxism has achieved a lot more, but even that system has its limits. The best system is social democracy and Third Way.

[Unca Alby]

Somalia is an example of lawlessness.

In order for Laissez Faire to work, you need to have a stable rule of law plus a cultural and legal respect for private property rights.

Having a country run by warlords isn't any better than being run by a dictator or a political class.

You will find that every other example of a poor country is being run by a dictator or by Marxist wannabes. Even Sweden, that "shining example of a socialism that works", is finding itself in an unsustainable situation where they're spending more than what they're taking in. They are beginning, slowly, to shed as much socialism as they can get away with politically.

Hong Kong and Singapore are not exceptions. Every country that comes close to what they've achieved have done so without the help of government.

I notice you didn't point to North and South Korea. I understand that South Koreans are even taller than their North Korean relatives, because free market capitalism has brought them so much better food and health. North Korea is a basket case, and they can't even properly feed their own. This is what you want for the world?

[Mukesch Kaley]

Who says Laissez Faire makes you rich ? It just makes you free.
When awake, you have to face reality.....better sleep and dream. that's LF.

[Tommy L]

Typical progressive economic argument there. Lassiez-fare and small goverment =anarchy. No, no it dosen't the founders of our country were big fans of Adam Smith and his ideas, however they created a consitiution that created a strong goverment. Why is that because busniess can't exist in an area that lacks 3 things. First off you don't open a busniess in a place no one can get too and you can't ship anything out of so you need roads, 2nd you don't open up in a place where your going to get robbed at least twice a day so your going to need security, 3rd you don't open in an area where there is no money or currency in which you can barter with. Somalia lacks all 3 of those has do most places where there is anarchy.

However this is diffrent from the goverment coming in and monoring each exchange, and micromanaging the busniess, and the exchanges that take place.

You say marxism has done a lot well lets look at what Marxsim has done. We have the holodomore in Ukraine more people died there then the Nazi holocost, we can throw Mao's China in the same example. More people leave Cuba every year for America. Greece is starting to collapse under it's socalsim, Spain under a command economy has 20% unemployment and is in threat of collaspe.

But if your going well a lot these countrys our corrupt scumbags then lets look at Ghandi's India. You can't get more passive then Ghandi yet under the rules of the goverment he helped set up people were still driving cars that were 1950's era when India decided to open itself up to free markets. Since opening up to more free markets both China and India have become major players in the world market.

Marix's theories were flawed and it's easy to poke holes in theroy of labor (like for example the value of labor isen't valued by the labor but by the consumer who consumes product, if one person makes a corvet, and in the same time frame one person builds a pinto, who decides who's labor is more valued, the person who is willing to pay for either car, and more people would choose to drive a corvet)

But maybe your right Marix idea have done a lot, genocide and poverty for everyone.

@uncaalby N. Korea, and S. Korea are great examples. So was East and West Germany both had similer cultures but because of there economic system one was much poorer then the other.