Live data from Hacker News

The strange case of Britain’s demise

economist.com

51–60 of 584 posts

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#51

Remarkable article. 2000-odd words, goes into great detail talking about politics, psycho-analyzing the Tories...it is all because they went to Eton...of course...the Brexit, the bankers...it is all so simple. A brief sentence is expended on planning, no mention about supply-side problems, the productivity crisis in govt (which is now 50% of the economy)...nothing. I will say this another way, you can measure the int…

>not a failure of voters

I disagree. That Brexit was a massive con was obvious to anyone paying the slightest bit of attention. But the electorate voted for it anyway.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people in the UK have at least some familiarity with European languages. Many civil servants, a point mentioned in the article, studied Classics so are quite familiar with speaking multiple languages (and our diplomatic service doesn't work the same way as the US, so some civil servants come from the diplomatic service knowing 5-10 languages fluently). And in Europe, many people speak English. Proceedings at Bru…

Umm, Rishi Sunak (PM, this month) moved to California to start a hedge fund, had a Green Card, and still has a mansion there …

He didn't move to California to start a hedge fund, he had a Green Card because he went to Stanford, and his wife's family has a house there.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#53
post #40

For Boris Johnson truth was there when convenient, otherwise just lie. He lied to the british people. That's not the problem. The problem was too many people wanted to hear nice things so swallowed what he told them uncritically. Liz Truss... say no more. But she was chosen (by a small subset of the population I agree) but she was chosen. Some people still think her damn-the-torpedoes policies were a good idea, even…

To the downvoters: please complement your downvotes by explaining where I'm wrong in my analysis. In a democracy people get the leaders they deserve (https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Joseph_de_Maistre slightly misquoted but still valid). If true, how can I not take aim at the electorate for their failure?

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#54

As a former inhabitant of England, I always thought that those in charge suffered from a uniquely wide 'competence gap' which I would like to define as the difference between someone's self-perceived competence and someone's actual competence. (The term is probably useful more broadly...) Maybe it is the historically class-based society alluded to in the article, but it always stunned me how those at the top, and in…

A competence gap is a very polite way to put it. In Britain we live in an inverted meritocracy which rewards smug stupidity, elevates bullshit, while punishing and marginalising our most talented people.

I thought this was going to be another cynical Economist hit piece like the earlier "Europe not pulling its weight" [1] but was surprised how on-the-money it is. Some well chosen quotes;

"A family with the wrong members in control" wrote George Orwell of the English.

Or, a country that "institutionalises lying" ruled "by chancers and cranks" sums it up nicely. We've had a profound leadership crisis in Britain for several decades now, and it's not just party politics. It's endemic to all institutions and industry. We positively celebrate corruption because we mistake it for power.

We keep selecting incompetents to lead, in all areas, because we confuse their psychopathic cunning with "leadership". I believe that the recent visibility of "imposter syndrome" is tactical smoke to distract from the fact that there really are an extraordinary number of actual imposters in charge everywhere. Are they're getting scared? Exposure is coming.

George Carlin put it best I think. He said the definition of real terror is waking up in mid-life and realising that all those pricks you went to school with are now running the country. But yes, it's our fault. We built a system that selects for them. And we continue to allow it to stand.

What worries me is that, if tomorrow our country came to its senses and asked genuinely competent people to take the helm, it would already be far, far too late.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=33992393

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#55
There was a previous comment about the "native population" that is now marked dead that I wanted to respond to. The commentator really needs to read Defoe's "True Born Englishman". I offer a quote that is a little longer than the usual given:

The silent nations undistinguished fall,

And Englishman's the common name for all.

Fate jumbled them together, God knows how;

Whate'er they were, they're true-born English now.

The wonder which remains is at our pride,

To value that which all wise men deride.

For Englishmen to boast of generation,

Cancels their knowledge, and lampoons the nation.

A true-born Englishman's a contradiction,

In speech an irony, in fact a fiction.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A brief sentence is expended on planning This has become my gauge of how serious someone is. Planning reform is both incredibly necessary and incredibly unpopular and if you won't talk about it you are just dancing around the edges of the problem.

This planning problem, or probably more accurately rent-seeking by those profiting by scarcity, seems endemic to English language countries for the past 50 years. At least with housing, which is the root of many problems, economically. Edit: and I think that the inability to talk about this is highly connected to the lack of other honesty in politics, as well as the perpetual outrage machine that results in things li…

Because those countries have planning systems which put planning authority in the hands of local govt. It is nothing to do with the language they speak but fairly obvious consequences of how the system is designed.

All the UK needs to do is un-delegate authority for planning to local govt. I think it is accepted, amongst those advocate for this heresy, that local areas need to retain control over the design of houses (this is something that doesn't work today btw). But the structure of the system needs to change: if you buy land, you can build whatever you want on it.

Wherever local govt has had a say on this kind of thing, it has created massive societal costs. The solution is obvious.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#57

There are several obvious culprits, here's the timeline: 1) Promoting the proxy war in Ukraine and impeding diplomatic negotiations, plus pushing for the expansion of NATO, had the result of pushing gas prices through the roof, driving record inflation (and enriching a few gas suppliers). This is the primary cause for the recent economic slump. The Neoconomist magazine is not going to address this issue, however. 2)…

>Promoting the proxy war in Ukraine

Taking a lead in helping the Ukrainians defend themselves seems like about the only laudable thing the UK government has done in a long time.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#58

There are several obvious culprits, here's the timeline: 1) Promoting the proxy war in Ukraine and impeding diplomatic negotiations, plus pushing for the expansion of NATO, had the result of pushing gas prices through the roof, driving record inflation (and enriching a few gas suppliers). This is the primary cause for the recent economic slump. The Neoconomist magazine is not going to address this issue, however. 2)…

> Face reality: the ~40-yr neoliberal program has been an absolute disaster, and should be thrown on the scrap heap of history immediately.

I still prefer NHS waiting lists to breadlines.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#59
post #12

It’s also the heavy manipulation of the free and social press by Murdoch, Paul Darce and state actors.

Do you mean Brexit? Otherwise I don't recall the last time that the Murdoch press has had any influence on any policy in either the EU or the United States.

The Murdoch press was for Sweden-style COVID-19 policies and deescalation in Ukraine. If it had been listened to, we'd have low gas prices and economic prosperity now.

Instead, Biden pumped up the stock market with COVID-19 relief funds handed out to his interest groups and sent Kamala Harris (who did not know what Ukraine was) to the Munich "peace" conference, where liberals Stoltenberg et. al. escalated further.

So, apart from Brexit, which Murdoch opinion has been implemented in the past decade?

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Umm, Rishi Sunak (PM, this month) moved to California to start a hedge fund, had a Green Card, and still has a mansion there …

He didn't move to California to start a hedge fund, he had a Green Card because he went to Stanford, and his wife's family has a house there.

> I can't really think immediately of anyone with strong links to the US in the current govt

> he went to Stanford, and his wife's family has a house there

Post reply on HN