What do you mean by 40-50% state?
What is 40 to 50% state? And if you don't know the figures, how do you know it's not the 20 to 30% you recommend?

EDIT: Ah, I see you've clarified a bit. But again, if you don't know the figures, how can you advocate another set of figures?
(MooCow_Byter, Mon 11 Jul 2011, 19:33, 1 reply, 15 years ago)

Got the precsie figures from the World Bank.
I'd advocate 20-30% because the nations I mentioned all are richer than the UK.
(888777555, Mon 11 Jul 2011, 19:38, Reply)

richer=better?

( Citizen Cavy Admires your passion for conformity, Mon 11 Jul 2011, 19:39, Reply)

So if the government spends 50% less of its money in the UK,
we'll become richer than Japan?
(MooCow_Byter, Mon 11 Jul 2011, 19:44, Reply)

Not just public spending cuts will drive the economy once the defecit is gone.
We'd need taxes to be cut in relation to the spending cut.
(888777555, Mon 11 Jul 2011, 19:50, Reply)

Oh, OK.
So once public spending is in line with that of Tanzania, Sierra Lione and Niger, we'll be able to emulate their success?

I'm not trying to have a go at you, I just want to see how your proposal will necessarily improve standards of living. And in fact, according to www.heritage.org/index/explore?view=by-variables all the countries you mention except Chile and Hong Kong are over 30%. And I suggest Hong Kong might be a bit of a special case.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting the figures.
(MooCow_Byter, Mon 11 Jul 2011, 19:59, Reply)

Tax Burden was what I was looking at, but yeah, GDP spending too.
To be honest I'm not saying Its set in stone but we should at least try to emulate the success of Aus, etc.
(888777555, Mon 11 Jul 2011, 20:05, Reply)