Countries With Economic Freedom Are Far Better Off
Even the poorest citizens of free countries fare better than the middle classes in economically repressive nations.

The ability to choose your job, start a business, own property, or decide how to spend your paycheck may seem natural to most Americans. Yet for billions around the world, the most basic economic freedoms remain out of reach. The latest Economic Freedom of the World index, just released by the Fraser Institute, reminds us why freedom matters for everyone, whether you're a factory worker in Michigan, a tech entrepreneur in Austin, or a farmer in Niger.
Economic freedom isn't just some wonky concept debated in academic halls. It's about whether a government protects property rights or seizes assets at will; whether regulations are sensible or suffocating; whether you can trade freely or face a maze of obstructions; whether your money holds its value or your purchasing power gets eroded by government mismanagement; and whether you can count on courts to enforce contracts fairly.
The 2024 index, using the latest available data from 2022, measures precisely these factors across 165 countries, as it has done since 1996. The results are striking.
The freest economies enjoy an average gross domestic product (GDP) per capita about 7.6 times greater than that of the 25 percent least economically free places. They have cleaner environments, better health care outcomes, and longer life expectancies—by a lot. Even the poorest citizens of free countries fare better than the middle classes in economically repressive nations.
Who are these lucky countries? "Hong Kong (1st), Singapore (2nd), Switzerland (3rd), New Zealand (4th), the United States (5th), Denmark and Ireland (tied for 6th), Canada (8th), and Australia and Luxembourg (tied for 9th)." It shouldn't be lost on my readers that Denmark, which Sen. Bernie Sanders (D–Vt.) often uses as an example of a socialist democratic regime, has far more in common with the United States than with a truly socialist country.
Speaking of socialist-like countries, the 10 least free are Yemen, Libya, Iran, Argentina, Myanmar, Algeria, Syrian Arab Republic, Sudan, Zimbabwe, and Venezuela.
This isn't just about numbers. When Venezuela dismantled economic freedoms and became a socialist country through nationalizations, price controls, currency controls, and business and trade restrictions, it also went from being one of South America's richest countries to one that millions of citizens fled due to its poverty. Meanwhile, Botswana embraced economic freedom and transformed from one of Africa's poorest nations into a middle-income success story.
That's why economic freedom isn't chiefly about profits; it's about prosperity for ordinary people. The report reminds us why we shouldn't wish economic oppression on our worst enemies. For example, inhabitants of the 25 percent least economically free countries experience infant mortality rates nine times greater than those who live in the freest 25 percent. Extreme poverty is 30 times likelier. Child labor is routine, as is illiteracy, especially among girls.
The consequences reach far beyond stock markets or GDP figures. Sadly, this year's report reveals the continuation of a troubling trend. After decades of expanding economic freedom that lifted over 1 billion people out of poverty, we're now witnessing a global retreat. Global economic freedom is in decline for the third consecutive year.
Even traditionally free economies like the United States are slipping, with increased government spending, heavier regulatory burdens, and higher trade restrictions. In addition, COVID-19 lockdowns and other pandemic-era government tyrannies are showing their ugly faces in the data.
The stakes are exceptionally high. We face global challenges with the rise of right-wing authoritarian regimes hostile to immigration and other aspects of economic freedom. Even in the United States, economic freedom isn't on the ballot in an especially clear way. Both Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump are eager to deploy and expand the government into many economic areas of our lives. We Americans must therefore choose a candidate along different margins.
Nevertheless, we can insist that more future candidates embrace economic freedom as a core value. History shows that economically free societies are more resilient and adaptable. They respond to challenges through decentralized problem solving rather than central planning, unleashing the creative potential of millions rather than relying on the blindered purview of a few regulators.
To regain America's leadership position, we must also address the areas where we're falling behind. This means trimming back our out-of-control regulatory system, reforming a tax code that punishes work, investment and innovation, and resisting the temptation to solve every problem with more government intervention.
Let's remember that economic freedom isn't about abstract ideology—it's about real people enduring the consequences of real choices made by government officials about their lives. The index doesn't just measure economic statistics; it measures human potential, and that's something worth protecting.
COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Even the poorest citizens of free countries fare better than the middle classes in economically repressive nations.
How can you achieve middle class in an economically repressive nation?
I don't think I understand the question. There is always a "middle class" just like there is always an average in any given population. It's the portion of the population 'in the middle'.
In an economically repressive nation, the middle class may be quite small and considerably poorer than the middle class of a freer, more affluent nation but it's still the middle by that nation's standards.
Thanks, not how I envisioned it, but makes sense.
You probably pictured Kamala's upbringing, which we all know was middle class.
Gee, a correlation between economic and political freedom.
Who would've thought that?
Hong Kong (1st), Singapore (2nd),
Does anybody want to tell her that these two are pretty fucking authoritarian?
I don't know what you're talking about.
I'm allowed to chew gum in Hong Kong and protest the Chinese Communist Party in Singapore.
And you can denounce Biden without penalty in either one!
The paper lists the criteria they use.
Size of government, as in taxation and spending. I can see the US failing there.
Legal system and property rights. Again I don't see the US doing well.
Sound money. US is comparatively good on that.
Freedom to trade internationally. Definitely not doing well there, and it's going to get a whole lot worse if Trump is elected.
Regulation. US does poorly there too. And even if Trump can cut some federal regulations, he can't do dick at the state level.
Authoritarian or not, it wouldn't be that hard to be more economically free than the US.
Both Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump are eager to deploy and expand the government into many economic areas of our lives.
You don't understand. It's different when Trump does it.
Yeah, they hate it when Trump does. But not when they do it.
I keep hearing about Trump and tariffs but not a one of those outlets mention the big tariffs Biden laid on China. The conclusion I draw is that they don’t really care about tariffs as much as they hate Trump.
Actually, according to sarc logic, it will be ok when trump does it, because Biden did it first.
Sarc doesn't have any logic behind his anti-Trump rants so the jokes on you.
Sarc, logic? Maybe if that's the name of the wine cooler he's currently imbibing.
You keep hearing about Trump and tariffs because Trump brags about how wonderful tariffs are every time he opens his mouth, and news outlets talk about what Trump is talking about.
You don’t hear about Biden’s tariffs because Biden doesn’t go around bragging about them every time he opens his mouth, and news outlets don’t talk about what Biden is not talking about.
The conclusion I draw is that you infer based upon what is not said rather than on what is said, which means your conclusions are based solely on your imagination and the voices in your head, and that you could benefit from the same medication Jesse doesn’t take for his severe mental illness.
You are not his imagination and the voices in your head.
"You don’t hear about Biden’s tariffs because Biden doesn’t go around bragging about them"
Apparently "bragging about them", not quietly doubling or tripling them, is the real sin for Sarckles. It's okay if they're snuck in on the downlow.
Are you sure that's not just the bottle of absinthe talking to you, Sarc?
You don’t hear about Biden’s tariffs because Biden doesn’t go around bragging about them every time he opens his mouth, and news outlets don’t talk about what Biden is not talking about.
LOL
So according to Sarc, if the President doesn't talk about it then it's not newsworthy regardless of the impact and journolists can't be expected to do independent research or form independent opinions. Totally not a leftist
Many people prefer having the government tell them what to do and how to run their lives. To them, economic backwardness is an acceptable tradeoff. It's the free spirit, ambitious entrepreneurs that are thorns in the sides of the entrenched ruling regimes.
"Equal Poverty and Oppression for all!!!!!", Every Democrat that ever campaigned.
Not as-if *EARNING* was ever suppose to be a part of that wealth equation anyways... /s