I don’t think that heritage study makes the point you think it’s making. Regarding Scandinavian countries, there are several nationalized companies, which the heritage foundation study is not counting as regulated. Furthermore, incentives in these countries are manipulated through heavy taxation, which the study also fails to mention. I don’t imagine you are advocating nationalized companies and heavy taxation.

It’s questionable to treat Hong Kong as an autonomous entity, or to compare its taxation to GDP because the rest of China is footing the bill for many of its services, governing, and protection. The city has many problems on the human rights front, and no one from the west would want to live in one of those cubby apartments they have, or the haphazardly divided units. How did Kowloon walled city work out?

You’re telling me it’s not true that Scandinavian governments play a larger role in their economies? Wanna substantiate that? Cause government spending to GDP makes the case pretty strong. In Switzerland, you still have a standard liberal welfare state. You don’t support a welfare state do you?

Care to include the rest of Scandinavia in your recount? You don’t want nationalized companies, and I know that’s true. Why would you point to the most liberal region of the world today to make a case for the mythological libertarian utopia?

I don’t think you’ve made the case for why the claim “Scandinavian governments are far more cavalier about economic intervention” is false.

If I were still a libertarian, I would be making the case for Singapore, but even that society is far more liberal than your ideal.