Last modified on 23 October 2014, at 20:15

Anglo-Saxon model

The Anglo-Saxon model or Anglo-Saxon capitalism (so called because it is practiced in English-speaking countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia[1] and Ireland [2]) is a capitalist model that emerged in the 1970s[citation needed], based on the Chicago school of economics[citation needed]. However, its origins date to the 18th century in the United Kingdom under the ideas of the classical economist Adam Smith.

Characteristics of this model include levels of regulation and taxes being low, and the public sector providing fewer services. It can also mean strong property rights, contract enforcement, and overall ease of doing business as well as low barriers to free trade.

Disagreements over meaningEdit

Proponents of the term "Anglo-Saxon economy" argue that the economies of these countries currently are so closely related in their liberalist and free market orientation that they can be regarded as sharing a specific macroeconomic model. However, those who disagree with the use of the term claim that the economies of the these countries differ as much from each other as they do from the "welfare capitalist" economies of northern and continental Europe.

The Anglo-Saxon model of capitalism is usually contrasted with the Continental model of capitalism, known as Rhine capitalism, the social market economy or the German model, and is also contrasted with Northern-European models of capitalism found in the Nordic countries, called the Nordic model. The major difference between these economies from Anglo-Saxon economies is the scope of collective bargaining rights and corporatist policies.

Differences between Anglo-Saxon economies are illustrated by taxation and the welfare state. The UK has a significantly higher level of taxation than the US.[3] Moreover, the UK spends far more than the US on the welfare state as a percentage of GDP and also spends more than Spain, Portugal, or the Netherlands.[4] This spending figure is however still considerably lower than that of France or Germany.

Although the term refers to the macroeconomics of Anglo-Saxon countries, it does not apply exclusively to English-speaking countries. The economies of Spain[dubious ], Greece[dubious ] and some of the newer members of the EU are regarded by some as non-English-speaking examples of "Anglo-Saxon" economies.

In northern continental Europe, most countries use mixed economy models, called "Rhine capitalism"[5][6] (a current term used especially for the macroeconomics of Germany, France, Belgium and the Netherlands), or its close relative the "Nordic model" (which refers to the macroeconomics of Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Finland).

The debate amongst economists as to which economic model is better, circles around perspectives involving poverty, job insecurity, social services, and inequality. Generally speaking, advocates of "Anglo-Saxon capitalism" argue that more liberalised economies produce greater overall prosperity,[7][8] while defenders of continental models counter that they produce lesser inequality and lesser poverty at the lowest margins.[9][10]

See alsoEdit

ReferencesEdit

  1. ^ Mitchell 2006, p.116. Mitchell groups all the preceding countries under a heading "Anglo-Saxon model or liberalist-individualistic model".
  2. ^ Sapir 2006, p.375
  3. ^ Tax as fraction of GDP, UK: 37%; US: 26.8%. From List of countries by tax revenue as percentage of GDP
  4. ^ The UK spends 21.8% of GDP on the welfare state as compared to the US, which spends 14.8%. Data from the article: Welfare state
  5. ^ Richter, Eberhard; Fuchs, Ruth (2003-11-15). "Rhine Capitalism, Anglo-Saxon Capitalism and Redistribution" (Excerpt, English translation of German original). The Future of Social Security Systems (Conference). Indymedia UK. Retrieved 2008-07-04. 
  6. ^ The term was coined by Michel Albert, although can be applied specifically to Germany. See Joerges et al. 2005, p.30.
  7. ^ Dale, 1999
  8. ^ Reinhoudt, 2007
  9. ^ Richter, 2003
  10. ^ Schifferes, 2005

BibliographyEdit

External linksEdit