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

Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore

palladiummag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 262 posts

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore

#141

Post by selimthegrim »

leafboi wrote: post #117
sam_lynx wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "failed" is subjective, what we should really be looking at is whether they provide for their citizens the best -- which democracy does.

All the civilizations I mentioned were authoritarian. Egyptian Pharaohs, Roman Caesars, Chinese Emperors. The history of all great civilizations is by a huge majority created and maintained through authoritative rule. In fact, modern anthropological theory states that the first step in the formation of a big civilization requires central authorities to form first. >what we should really be looking at is whether they…

Yes and how useful was that hospital? How much of that construction equipment moving about on the drone videos was just for show vs actually contributing to its construction?

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore

#142

Post by ValentineC »

baybal2 wrote: post #45
xuki wrote: post #19

The article failed to mention 1 important thing: LKY built an incorruptible government. With all the power he had, he could have done so much better for his family if he just tried, but that wouldn't necessarily be good for the country. A lot of countries want to be Singapore, but few have a leader of his caliber.

> LKY built an incorruptible government Google Temasik Holdings

Ah, the Nassim Jade scandal might be more apt: https://jesscscott.wordpress.com/2014/02/20/nassim-jade-scan...

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore

#143

Post by wenc »

hellofunk wrote: post #137
leafboi wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think because HN's audience is mostly US based there's a high level of bias towards democratic governments. I think if we all take a look at it from a unbiased angle it's all really apples and oranges. A bad dictator is not so different from a democracy electing bad leaders and a good dictator is not so different from a democracy electing good leaders. The thing with a democracy is that you have a lot of checks and…

This is somewhat of a naive view -- the risks of any kind of dictatorship far outweigh any slight chance of good.

I tend to agree -- it seems to me that democracy creates ecological conditions favorable to long-term survival, because the risk of destruction under dictatorship is asymmetric with respect to the probability of prosperity.

Democratic checks-and-balances assume the inescapability of despotic buffoons who rise to power either through force or sometimes even through the people's choice (while it's good to believe in the wisdom of crowds, one must always account for its lapses). I think these are very realistic assumptions.

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore

#144

Post by sudosysgen »

mobilefriendly wrote: post #138
mattkrause wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current administration has certainly done some damage but: - the NIH is one of the biggest drivers of biomedical research in the world, both in terms of extramural funding and intramural research. The NSF, NASA, and the research arms of the DoD and DoE (etc) are also world-class. - Hurricane Dorian nonsense aside, the weather and ocean forecasts from NOAA/NWS are well-regarded. - the FAA and FDA have kept flying,…

The FDA blocked private testing at a critical point early in the coronavirus. The FDA keeps many lifesaving treatments out of the US, at a large and unseen cost. For example, the FDA blocked UVB sunscreens for a decade after they were permitted in Europe. Those extra US skin cancer deaths are "unseen" but are casualties of the FDA. In turn, the FAA allowed Boeing to "self-regulate" approvals of the MAX and after the…

US institutions have a huge issue with regulatory capture

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore

#145

Post by ValentineC »

fakedang wrote: post #12
pydry wrote: post #7

There are a few key things to bear in mind about Singapore's growth model and success: * The proximity of power to population because it is a tiny city state. Singaporean governance is under extreme pressure to be effective because if it fails it cannot hide. This is a systemic issue that can be seen all around the world and is probably why some countries moved their capitals AWAY from population centres (e.g. brazil…

I was going to type a disagree until you edited that last bit. I don't mind the authoritarianism, since the authorities seem very proactive towards encouraging foreign tech startups, but creativity is near zero and heavily sanitized, and most devs are poorly treated, I guess due to the massive glut of technical folks for the tiny population it has. Singapore feels so artificial, just like another Dubai. Going to Lond…

> Singapore feels so artificial, just like another Dubai. … Compare that to SG or DXB, where the homeless are stashed away/deported so that the tourists don't see them.

Singaporean here. The central touristy area is artificial, but the public housing areas surrounding it are slightly more organic — with a fair share of homeless people who sleep on benches at night, too.

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore

#146

Post by ValentineC »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #14
pydry wrote: post #7

There are a few key things to bear in mind about Singapore's growth model and success: * The proximity of power to population because it is a tiny city state. Singaporean governance is under extreme pressure to be effective because if it fails it cannot hide. This is a systemic issue that can be seen all around the world and is probably why some countries moved their capitals AWAY from population centres (e.g. brazil…

I live in Vietnam and I've always been surprised at the large number of Singaporean tech companies that open up development offices in Vietnam. And it isn't (just) to save money on salaries. The average quality of a Singaporean developer is shockingly bad for such an educated, developed country. And saying that Vietnam has more creativity isn't exactly a high bar given the similar values of Confucian hierarchy here!

> And saying that Vietnam has more creativity isn't exactly a high bar given the similar values of Confucian hierarchy here!

I'd suggest that it's because the "happy path" for most residents in Singapore is ridiculously straightforward to navigate, so people don't need to be resourceful to accomplish things.

As a Singaporean, I've travelled to Vietnam multiple times, and have worked with Vietnamese on projects before. The Vietnamese usually get my admiration for being highly resourceful and entrepreneurial. They're really good at hustling and improvising.

Lots of working-class Singaporeans aren't raised like that, because the first 18 to 20 years of their lives have been laid out for them.

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore

#147

Post by bllguo »

hellofunk wrote: post #137
leafboi wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think because HN's audience is mostly US based there's a high level of bias towards democratic governments. I think if we all take a look at it from a unbiased angle it's all really apples and oranges. A bad dictator is not so different from a democracy electing bad leaders and a good dictator is not so different from a democracy electing good leaders. The thing with a democracy is that you have a lot of checks and…

This is somewhat of a naive view -- the risks of any kind of dictatorship far outweigh any slight chance of good.

Hand-waving things away with your absolutist statement is what truly seems naive. IMO there is far more nuance than you suggest.

Democracy seems to work well for some types of problems but not others. What happens to democracies when faced with threats that manifest over very short timescales? They aren't nimble enough to respond in time. This is most evident in larger democracies; look at US/India responses to COVID. Countries like Taiwan are democratic and still succeeded, but they are small and they utilized methods that would be characterized as authoritarian here in the US.

What about problems where the consequences of decisions have a large time-lag? There is no incentive for democratic policymakers to address them. Global warming is the obvious example.

I question whether democracies can handle these kinds of issues. More worryingly, I think that as humanity's capabilities continue to increase, these kinds of problems are going to be more and more frequent.

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore

#148

Post by dddw »

leafboi wrote: post #112
ergocoder wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. It's one flaw of democracy. In a dictatorship, if the leader is great, it will grow like crazy... It's like a startup with great founders. On the other hand, the problem will come when a hand-off needs to happen. Singapore is clever enough to keep the democratic process, so it has some decent hand-off process.

Don't think that the democratic process guarantees a good hand off... it's still a crap shoot and a lucky draw. See current President Camacho of the United States. Unlike a dictator, the aggregate will of the people never serves the self interest of a single individual. The issue with majority rule is that the aggregate intelligence/judgement of the people is likely not matched with what is required to select a good…

Love the idiocracy reference there

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore

#149

Post by blindspot557 »

leafboi wrote: post #108
jackcosgrove wrote: post #103

> Yet history is littered with the failures of authoritarian modernist regimes. Indeed, the record of utopian schemes to improve the human condition is dismal in the 20th century. In the Soviet Union, Stalin’s plan to transform “small, backward and scattered peasant farms to amalgamated, large scale socialized farms” led to brutality and starvation for millions. In China, Mao’s Great Leap Forward propelled the nation…

Obviously the world is a super simple place with super simple answers to seemingly complex questions. When I asked my friend which is better authoritarianism or democracy he told me the answer is complicated. I told him to look at the evidence: Almost Every civilization in history: egyptians, romans, greeks, China was more or less some form of authoritarian government. They all failed. Basically every single civiliza…

Lol. I think you should give US more time to fail? (I guess). It's only 260 so years. That's too short if you place it into human history.

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore

#150

Post by nicholasluimy »

jb1991 wrote: post #135
ergocoder wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. It's one flaw of democracy. In a dictatorship, if the leader is great, it will grow like crazy... It's like a startup with great founders. On the other hand, the problem will come when a hand-off needs to happen. Singapore is clever enough to keep the democratic process, so it has some decent hand-off process.

> Singapore is clever enough to keep the democratic process Mainly it appears to be a democracy. Speak to any of the cab drivers there who feel somewhat liberated to talk safely with a foreigner who is on the way to the airport, and they will tell you something about Singapore's democracy.

Not sure if that's a fair judgement - It seems particularly endemic that it's almost a meme/stereotype in itself in Singapore; that all cab drivers are discontent with the government
Post reply on HN