On that point wizofaus, there's a brilliant article in TIME magazine here:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1684528,00.html

Which essentially focuses on the high welfare, albeit competitive nature of Denmark's economy.

It throws a spanner in the works for free market zealots who are convinced the only manner in which we can lift standards is by reducing government regulation (or in Liberty's lexicon, socialism).

I suppose what bothers me are their assumptions that predatory capitalism won't effectually wreak havoc with the trickle down effect, which is supposed to be the mitigating factor in a pure free market ideology.
The fact of the matter is, this does occur and it's causing a great deal of angst in the united states - a great deal of angst which isn't necessary when there are other, more competitive but also more compassionate models out there.
When this is pointed out however, the free marketeers just scream 'socialist!' from the top of their lungs.
It really is quite frustrating, which is why I'd like to see posters such as Liberty actually make comparisons between places such as Denmark and a pure free market model.

They don't seem to do that, preferring the old socialist v capitalist debate, refusing to budge in the slightest, saying that anything less than pure capitalism is trampling their rights, not recognising that other people don't want that model and in refusing to compromise, they're trampling other people's rights in the same manner.

Which is precisely the kind of empty rhetoric I'm criticising in this thread.

TRTL, an even better example is Finland, who have regularly been rated as one of the most innovative and competitive economies in the world, despite maintaining significant "socialist" aspects and a basic "big government" philosophy (though admittedly less so than 20 years ago).