The Jewish people for whatever explanation have throughout the course of history been and still remain extraordinarily over-represented in the higher levels and echelons of business, sciences and the arts. For instance, according a source, they have since the year 1901 won at least 22% of all the Nobel prizes that have been awarded, despite the fact that they only make up just approximately 0.2% of the global population. Were they to make an abrupt departure from France as seem likely, it would have dealt a massive blow to its rich human capital and injured its odds of full recovery.
The reality is that the more optimistic are a people’s approach toward business, freedom, and particularly competition and innovation, the additionally prosperous those people are likely to be. True, social security, tax design, as well as budget policy are significant, other than they are become second order matters in contrast issues to culture.
A nation that has an especially inquisitive, industrious and innovative people is going to always fare better. Recorded history is full of examples of nations intentionally or even otherwise, undermining their own national potential through banishing classes or categories of persons having greater potential in serving the greater national economic good.
Possibly Manuel Valls was having his native country of Spain on his mind. While at the crest of bringing in unprecedented mineral wealth from America, King Ferdinand and his Queen Isabella in 1492 did expel their Muslim and Jewish citizens from the newly united country of Spain. For the mere sake of a short lived outpouring of Catholic chest-thumping, the two had by that action, condemned Spain to the 2nd tier of European countries. It can be arguable if really, Spain did ever really recover.
According to Peter Bernstein, an American historian, the Muslims and Jews were extremely educated, acknowledged leaders in scientific and mathematical developments, and were immune from the strictures against usury by the Christian. With the departure of the Muslims and Jews, Spain had lost nearly all of the indigenous class of merchants that was vital during that time of vibrant economic growth and development across Europe.
As a matter of fact, the parliament in Spain Indeed during the 16th century despaired: although our kingdoms ought to be the wealthiest in the planet they in fact are the poorest. They had become only a bridge for the silver and gold going to our enemies’ kingdoms. Spain had frittered away its wealth resource from commerce boom on conspicuous consumption and costly wars.
However examples of such kind are just limited to European countries or to the Jewish populace — pro-business outlooks and attitudes are not determined genetically.
An action of comparable immense stupidity — and that is perhaps less excusable taking into account the more enlightened period — was when French King Louis XIV decided in 1685 on the expulsion of Protestants from France through the revocation of King Henry IV’s commendable Edict of Nantes, which had from 1598 preserved the peace and calm between the minority Huguenots and the Catholics in France in a feud for granting equal worship rights.
The decision made by the King led to about 100,000 academics, Christian skilled artisans from France and merchants to flee France with their money to England. This move supercharged the rise to dominance of England in the late 18th Century and also supplied capital that led to the start of the Bank of England in 1964. This gave Britain the financial power that led to the defeat of France in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Max Weber, the German sociologist was so impressed by the difference that he famously proposed that the industry and thrift so prized by the Protestant denominations could explain the spectacular outperformance of the Christian protestant over the Catholic nations in Europe.
In recent times, the genocide of the Turks’ Armenian population in the late 19th century and onwards finished whatever hope that Ottoman Empire ever had of a new beginning. The expulsion of the Indians who had dominance over the country’s commerce by Idi Amin in the 1970s from Uganda led to poverty in his country.
In economics, understanding why other countries flourish while some don’t is one of the most difficult questions. Economists have increasingly put emphasis on the importance of attitude towards innovation. US economist Deidre McClosckey places the explosion of such wealth in the west is from the 18th Century which she calls the spread and growth of “bourgeois virtues” — the wide acceptance of innovation and capitalism among both North Americans and Europeans.
Winner of the economics 2006 Nobel Prize Edmund Phelps worried the developed world was losing this values thus preferring rent-seeking and bureaucracy. This is concluded by the falling productivity rates, growth and business start-ups decline.
For Australia, those lessons bring up delicate policy questions. To what degree should the nation’s immigration policy look favourably at groups of persons who are more apt to promote and enhance sustainable growth, those who are deemed to be more comfortable with an economy that is dynamic? Doing so may trigger great social offence; however in the same breath bring long-run cohesion and benefit.