First, in a decentralized system, errors are by nature smaller. Switzerland is one of the world’s wealthiest and most stable countries. It is also highly decentralized — with 26 cantons that are self-governing and make most of their own budgetary decisions. The absence of a central monopoly on taxation makes them compete for tax and bureaucratic efficiency. And if the Jura canton goes bankrupt, it will not destabilize the entire Swiss economy.
In decentralized systems, problems can be solved early and when they are small; stakeholders are also generally more willing to pay to solve local challenges (like fixing a bridge), which often affect them in a direct way. And when there are terrible failures in economic management — a bankrupt county, a state ill-prepared for its pension obligations — these do not necessarily bring the national economy to its knees. In fact, states and municipalities will learn from the mistakes of others, ultimately making the economy stronger.
It’s a myth that centralization and size bring “efficiency.” Centralized states are deficit-prone precisely because they tend to be gamed by lobbyists and large corporations, which increase their size in order to get the protection of bailouts. No large company should ever be bailed out; it creates a moral hazard.
- Jul 30, ’14 The Best of Peter Drucker
- Jul 23, ’14 For Arab Christians and secular Arab nationalists, Isis may be the death knell
- Jul 19, ’14 British Government Picks Illumina to Sequence 100,000 Genomes
- Jul 18, ’14 Zoella herself barely watches TV: “My generation, at least the ones I know, are like 70-30 YouTube”
- Jul 18, ’14 The news that business doesn’t want to hear