There can be small amounts of capitalism. There will be anyway. the rich will always just buy whatever they want
I think we should emulate the highest GDP per capita country, Luxembourg. We should be a country of 500,000 people, and then we'll have the highest GDP per capita too.
Now who is viewing things in a vacuum? The 150 years prior to that period created the foundation on which all that progress was built.
Which people, in particular? So is it fair to say that the government can violate rights that are defined by "the people"?
I think we should have nationwide programs. But we should split into several 500,000 person nations. And then each of those tiny nations would be just like Luxembourg and have the highest per capita GDP in the world.
I think we could just go back to the way things were under the articles of confederation when each state was basically its own country and the state governments determined how much cooperation and participation occurred on the federal level. Not that there is anything inherently more sensible about the state's boundaries or populations, but traditions and conventions, however arbitrary they might be, are usually easier for people to accept than novelty.
All the people. And yes. We can not have a society unless we accept that some of our rights will be limited
I thought that I posted a list of the 10 most libertarian countries, which included Luxembourg. You suggested that we should adopt the characteristics of those countries in order to emulate them. So I agree, and think we should become 1) racially homogenous and 2) reduce our population to 1/10 to 1/100 our current level. That might mean splitting into several smaller nations, but if that's what it takes to be like the most libertarian countries, then I'm willing to make the change.
Our economic productivity was always high, even before this change. And that change wouldn't have been possible if not for the 150 years of economic growth and development that preceded it.
The benefits of decentralization have been known for centuries. It's why virtually every country in the Anglo-Saxon world, including the USA, has a federalist system of government.
My only disagreement is with the racial homogeneity. To me, it's far more important to be culturally and ideologically homogeneous. Granted, racial homogeneity sometimes tends to correlate to cultural and ideological homogeneity, but not always or necessarily.
We did not become the most powerful nation until the 20th century....right about when social programs started