Cato on reforming socialist economies

Cato report:

The transition from socialism to the market produced a divide between those advocated rapid, or “big-bang” reforms, and those who advocated a gradual approach. More than 25 years have passed since the fall of the in 1989, providing ample empirical to test those approaches. Evidence shows that early and rapid reformers by far outperformed gradual reformers, both on measures such as per capita and on indicators such as the United Nations Human Development Index.

I am not surprised.

A key argument for gradualism was that too-rapid reforms would cause great social pain. In reality, rapid reformers experienced shorter recessions and recovered much earlier than gradual reformers. Indeed a much broader measure of well-being, the Human Development Index, points to the same conclusion: the social costs of transition in rapidly reforming countries were lower.

NZ would be far worse off if we had not had the rapid reforms from 1984 to 1993.

Comments (57)

Login to comment or vote

Add a Comment