An economic balance is needed
There is a misconception among many, including Martin Baker and Doug Ford, that a regime of low taxes and limited spending will produce general prosperity. The thought there is that lower taxes will mean more private money to spend on local businesses, who will then expand and hire more workers, putting more money in circulation, and so on. This is fantasy! Instead of spending locally, people today are just as likely to buy a car made in Japan, or a TV from Korea or take a Norwegian cruise to Alaska. Instead of hiring, businesses are likely to robotize their process or reward CEOs bigtime. Historically, this is a regime that hasn’t produced general prosperity anywhere, for any length of time, in all of the thousands of years that it’s been used.
Socialism is even worse, as, without the profit motive, employers fly away like the golden goose — and they take their money and jobs with them, making everyone poor. As Bernard Shaw said, “Anyone who doesn’t believe in socialism when they’re 20 has no heart. Anyone who still believes in socialism when their 40 has no brain”. (Sorry, my dear socialist friends. I love you but I’m afraid you have no brain.)
A quick Google search will yield a list of the world’s most prosperous economies: Norway, New Zealand, Finland, Switzerland, Denmark and Sweden. What do these have in common? All enjoy a mixed economy, well-balanced between socialism and capitalism. I think it’s easy to understand why this works: general prosperity doesn’t come from promoting either the poor or the rich: it comes from a prosperous middle class. We need both capitalism AND socialism, but in good balance.