Manufacturing is noticeably absent from the list of successes.
But America bet on the winning horse. Manufacturing no longer brings in the big bucks. We are living in the information age. In particular, there is only so much growth that you can have in a well developed industrial sector.
The USA manufactures more than it ever has. The horse we bet on is relying on our tech to automate much of it so factory workers are unbelievably productive. Whatever we can’t automate we ship out to China, etc.
Well, the concepts of regulated free markets, free trade between nations, and generally free immigration have created the single largest increase in human living standards in history.
Check your facts. As much as I am a firm European democrat, you might wanna see what Chinese “state driven capitalist communism” has done between 1975 and today. Again, if the measure is number of people lifted out of poverty, China wins hands down. Now, as much as we can’t consider China’s success without considering the lack of freedoms inscribed within the communist social pact, we can’t take just the good of Amer…
An alternative take would be that China only saw prosperity after partially adopting Western economic values. Additionally, Chinese economic development and Western economic development occurred in vastly different contexts. China had access to Western imports to jump start their industrialization and access to the Western scientific and policy know-how needed to build an advanced economy. The West had to figure things out as they went along. This is obviously a broad generalization, I just want to make the point that China is definitely not a slam dunk counterexample
Well, being the only country left with any manufacturing after a catastrophic world war is one major reason. Also, navigable waterways. Transporting goods by water costs 1/100th what it costs to transport over land. After the US established a corp of engineers to dredge our waterways to make them passable, the ability to transport goods increased substantially, making internal trade extremely cheap.
> Well, being the only country left with any manufacturing after a catastrophic world war is one major reason. This is not the reason. Post WW II Europe was able to rebuild and for a long time they had some of the biggest companies and for a long time EU as a whole was a bigger economy than the US. It's only in the last 2 decades where the US is significantly outpacing the EU. And there are no signs of slow down. WW…
I think it's just luck. In terms of big tech most of the US is like Europe. It's only silicon valley that has this type of innovation.
But the innovation has been around a singular avenue of software. It is a mistake to think that software is the most important driver of economic growth.
Check your facts. As much as I am a firm European democrat, you might wanna see what Chinese “state driven capitalist communism” has done between 1975 and today. Again, if the measure is number of people lifted out of poverty, China wins hands down. Now, as much as we can’t consider China’s success without considering the lack of freedoms inscribed within the communist social pact, we can’t take just the good of Amer…
Check your perspective. Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, Korea all industrialized faster and have a higher standard of living than China. All did it in the 1980s - 40 years ago. All did it without oppressive communism.
Hong Kong has made it to oppressive communism, so that’s going to be interesting to watch going forward (or backwards?).
”Average incomes have grown much faster than in western Europe or Japan. Also adjusted for purchasing power, they exceed $50,000 in Mississippi, America’s poorest state—higher than in France.” The article casually dismisses the counterpoint that the US trades high income for a lower social safety net. The average French person has a life expectancy of 82. In Mississippi it’s 74.9, on par with Lithuania. Even Vietnam…
Life expectancy figures are misleading though. Many people take it to mean "this is how long an average elderly person is likely to live" but is an average of all ages at death meaning more young people dying brings down the number. As the article mentions, the primary cause for lower American life expectancy isn't that its old people are dying younger but rather the violence and drug epidemics causing more young peo…
Either way the point that America is very rich but we do a comparatively terrible job of ensuring our people have long, happy lives is still true. You can pretty much apply https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27No_Way_to_Prevent_This,%27_... to any phenomenon that kills lots of Americans, except cancer and Alzheimer's.
If we are so rich, why can't we provide for the kind of programs that would deal with so many early deaths? Money should be able to deal with the issues at the very bottom of Maslow's hierarchy.
The European approach makes a lot of sense in other stable industries (Automobile/Steel). But in a fast moving quick changing (e.g. Tech) industries, all it does is prevent new risky companies from starting and making it harder for them to adapt. Maybe it is a good thing. But only time can tell that. So far to me it seems like the American approach is winning economy wise.
I think “winning” really depends on your criteria for success. Maybe it’s winning on overall metrics like GDP, but on an individual level, the story is far less clear. Like, is it winning to have the option of starting a company that produces generational wealth for yourself, while living in a city unable to solve its homelessness problem? Is it winning to be a 1%-er but have no safety net so that you're always preca…
> I think “winning” really depends on your criteria for success. Maybe it’s winning on overall metrics like GDP, but on an individual level, the story is far less clear.
This is an excellent point. America does an exceptional job of making rich people richer, but it also ranks poorly in many quality of life metrics. It is now #25 on the social progress index (https://www.socialprogress.org/). If people are richer but their children are more likely to die in child birth (U.S. ranks #50), or be murdered (U.S. ranks #137 in homicide), is that really better?
Well, the concepts of regulated free markets, free trade between nations, and generally free immigration have created the single largest increase in human living standards in history.
Check your facts. As much as I am a firm European democrat, you might wanna see what Chinese “state driven capitalist communism” has done between 1975 and today. Again, if the measure is number of people lifted out of poverty, China wins hands down. Now, as much as we can’t consider China’s success without considering the lack of freedoms inscribed within the communist social pact, we can’t take just the good of Amer…
You're reinforcing my point. China grew so fast due to embracing market capitalism with Deng Xiaoping, whereas Mao before wanted Marxist-Leninist central planning, which predictably failed. There's nothing "capitalist communist" about it, they're not even communist at all since workers don't own the means of production. Now I'm not saying the American model is great either, but market capitalism is an incredible invention.
lower life expectancy in US in general can be attributed to a more unhealthy diet and less walking, which is on the flip side due to US's economic success - affordance for more food and richer food, as well as affordance for car as transportation. Another attribution is the larger amount of immigrants, which as a segment has lower income level and thus lower life expectancy
>affordance for more food and richer food yeah, the U.S eats richer food than the French.
Check your perspective. Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, Korea all industrialized faster and have a higher standard of living than China. All did it in the 1980s - 40 years ago. All did it without oppressive communism.
Hong Kong has made it to oppressive communism, so that’s going to be interesting to watch going forward (or backwards?).
Yes for sure. From China, to free markets, back to China. I think we’re already seeing the effects on Hong Kong. No so great.
As the article points out, immigration is a key factor behind America’s economic performance. Too many people in tech are hostile to immigration out of a misplaced fear of immigrants lowering wages or ‘stealing’ their jobs. Whatever legitimate merits those concerns may have - and research shows them to be few — let’s never forget that the hard work and entrepreneurial spirit of immigrants help create these well-payin…
Let’s make sure we’re distinguishing between immigration of high skilled labor vs sending high skill jobs overseas or hiring high skill workers on low-wage worker visas. I don’t know a single worker in tech that’s hostile to immigration of high skilled labor, nor afraid of said immigrant stealing their job. Most people I know would be grateful for some help. I know plenty of people critical of work visa programs (inc…
For one claiming not wanting to blur a topic, bringing up offshoring jobs — essentially the opposite of immigration — is a rather odd response.