Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Globalization Has Broken the Chain of Responsibility

sapiens.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 105 posts

Re: How Globalization Has Broken the Chain of Responsibility

#31

Post by deregistered »

roenxi wrote: post #11

I'm nowhere near Gladstone, but I have a lot of exposure to the planning & approval process for Australian mines. Firstly, it is unlikely that the mine manger has less power in the modern era than they did in the days of old. Mine managers wield enormous power under law and in practice. Secondly, the real issue here is likely that nobody cares about small limestone mines, but the economies of scale in Gladstone are s…

Seems you haven't put international agreement such TPP and international arbitration into account.

Yes, local goverment still have power and no, the state goverment don't have absolute power when the contract has been deal.

Re: How Globalization Has Broken the Chain of Responsibility

#32

Post by leereeves »

perfmode wrote: post #29
leereeves wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mere existence of nations prevents the free flow of people. "Nationalism" usually means something stronger than the existence of nations, such as "the belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively, emphasizing national rather than international goals".

it is nationalist policy that restricts flow.

All nations do that. A definition of "nationalist" that includes every nation isn't particularly useful for distinguishing the policies of nations.

Re: How Globalization Has Broken the Chain of Responsibility

#33

Post by 3pt14159 »

marcosdumay wrote: post #30
rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And environmental protection laws, and human rights laws, and civil rights laws, you name it, globalization has effectively undermined. The best lie that America ever told the world (best exemplified by the 1939 World’s Fair[1]) was that democracy and capitalism go hand in hand. But when the U.S. blinked after the 1989 Tienanmen Square massacre and kept on buying cheap goods from China, it became clear that the Weste…

That's a point that deserves some consideration. But there's something that always bother me when people start talking about China: Always keep in mind that China is a rather poor country. It's per-capita GDP has just passed above Brazil, and that's mostly because Brazil is facing the biggest crisis in its history. When you claim that China is a successful dictatorship, always remember that it's successful only from…

Some cities are richer than New York. China is more like the Americas: Massive differences in wealth from one place to the next.

Re: How Globalization Has Broken the Chain of Responsibility

#34

Post by Felz »

The article's central point seems to be that it's more difficult to track accountability and causality in an increasingly "overheated" and complicated world. True.

But the major system for addressing that currently seems to be People Getting Upset, and the article proposes more organizations for People Getting Upset. But this isn't very efficient; sometimes the global economy DOES need to make Gladstone a bit less pretty. And people have only a limited amount of Upset within them, not nearly enough to make the system work well.

We need better tools of addressing externalities as a society.

Or maybe just the ability to actually implement those we have. Property rights work pretty well where they can apply. Carbon taxes seem decent, but they usually go straight to government coffers and don't pay out to citizens (that seems like a flaw to me). I'm not an economist, but I'd be interested in better ideas.

Re: How Globalization Has Broken the Chain of Responsibility

#35

Post by TheCoelacanth »

leereeves wrote: post #32
perfmode wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is nationalist policy that restricts flow.

All nations do that. A definition of "nationalist" that includes every nation isn't particularly useful for distinguishing the policies of nations.

All nations are at least a bit nationalistic. If they weren't at all nationalistic, they wouldn't be nations.

Restrictions on the free flow of people are not a binary decision. Countries in the Schengen Area which have almost completely given up the ability restrict movement between their territory and 25 other nations are not restricting the movement of people as much as say North Korea which doesn't even let most of its own citizens travel abroad.

Re: How Globalization Has Broken the Chain of Responsibility

#36

Post by jdietrich »

marcosdumay wrote: post #30
rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And environmental protection laws, and human rights laws, and civil rights laws, you name it, globalization has effectively undermined. The best lie that America ever told the world (best exemplified by the 1939 World’s Fair[1]) was that democracy and capitalism go hand in hand. But when the U.S. blinked after the 1989 Tienanmen Square massacre and kept on buying cheap goods from China, it became clear that the Weste…

That's a point that deserves some consideration. But there's something that always bother me when people start talking about China: Always keep in mind that China is a rather poor country. It's per-capita GDP has just passed above Brazil, and that's mostly because Brazil is facing the biggest crisis in its history. When you claim that China is a successful dictatorship, always remember that it's successful only from…

In 1978, China had about the same GDP per capita as India. Today, China's GDP per capita is more than double that of India. China's economy has dramatically outperformed many democracies over the past few decades. Whatever you might think of the Chinese regime, they're clearly doing something right.

Re: How Globalization Has Broken the Chain of Responsibility

#37

Post by robotomir »

Felz wrote: post #34

The article's central point seems to be that it's more difficult to track accountability and causality in an increasingly "overheated" and complicated world. True. But the major system for addressing that currently seems to be People Getting Upset, and the article proposes more organizations for People Getting Upset. But this isn't very efficient; sometimes the global economy DOES need to make Gladstone a bit less pr…

The article draws very big conclusions out of thin air, four pages of text, two pictures, and a pretentious DNS record.

On the opposite side of the spectrum of journalism was the NY Times article from earlier today, about the Arizona aquifers. Great photography and research. Awesome Web presentation, too. Cheap journalism with big pretenses is a scourge on our society.

Re: How Globalization Has Broken the Chain of Responsibility

#38

Post by stevenhuang »

cryptonector wrote: post #16
jacobolus wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when the U.S. blinked after the 1989 Tienanmen Square massacre and kept on buying cheap goods from China The US did very little trade with China in 1989, though more than a few years earlier. I don’t think Tiananmen Square or its response says much about US internationalism or commitment to whatever abstract principles. You can draw much stronger conclusions from them about internal Chinese politics.

What could the U.S. have done about Tiananmen? Serious question. Military intervention would have been absolutely out of the question. U.S.-China trade back then was very small, so the U.S. had no leverage. The U.S. could not have armed a guerilla either. There was really nothing the U.S. could do about China in 1989.

I believe that was parent poster's point, that there didn't seem to be much that US could have done. Hence it would seem suspect to draw much of a conclusion from as proposed by GP.

Re: How Globalization Has Broken the Chain of Responsibility

#39

Post by mulmen »

robotomir wrote: post #37
Felz wrote: post #34

The article's central point seems to be that it's more difficult to track accountability and causality in an increasingly "overheated" and complicated world. True. But the major system for addressing that currently seems to be People Getting Upset, and the article proposes more organizations for People Getting Upset. But this isn't very efficient; sometimes the global economy DOES need to make Gladstone a bit less pr…

The article draws very big conclusions out of thin air, four pages of text, two pictures, and a pretentious DNS record. On the opposite side of the spectrum of journalism was the NY Times article from earlier today, about the Arizona aquifers. Great photography and research. Awesome Web presentation, too. Cheap journalism with big pretenses is a scourge on our society.

You seem to be suggesting that more words and pretty pictures make an argument at least more compelling if not more substantive. I disagree with that idea because it has nothing to do with the facts.

Re: How Globalization Has Broken the Chain of Responsibility

#40

Post by afterburner »

Felz wrote: post #34

The article's central point seems to be that it's more difficult to track accountability and causality in an increasingly "overheated" and complicated world. True. But the major system for addressing that currently seems to be People Getting Upset, and the article proposes more organizations for People Getting Upset. But this isn't very efficient; sometimes the global economy DOES need to make Gladstone a bit less pr…

Carbon taxes change the profit math for companies, which affects their decisions, that's the biggest change. They have to be high enough to change the decision though.
Post reply on HN