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

The Glass Famine

edconway.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 66 posts

Re: The Glass Famine

#11

Post by bluGill »

one33seven wrote: post #5
roenxi wrote: post #2

> It's that it is possible to resuscitate dormant or shrinking sectors. It is possible to re-industrialise quickly. China managed to go from peasantry in the grip of communism to arguably the biggest economy in history over a remarkably short period. And it is hard to get a read on exactly what is going on in that country but that seems to be despite heavy state intervention in the economy and without the benefits of…

Not despite heave state intervention. Because of it!

State intervention has a reasonably good history of getting what the state pushes for. It just has a poor history in everything else the state needs/wants but doesn't realize and so doesn't push for. Also people often miss what the state is pushing for (for example: most of the people pushing transit are really interested in expensive contracts to push money to their friends - any transit that results is a side effect they don't care about. If you are interested in transit most of the people who appear on your side are a long term negative even if you must work with them)

Re: The Glass Famine

#12

Post by JKCalhoun »

ifwinterco wrote: post #7
one33seven wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not despite heave state intervention. Because of it!

Was going to say this. The right form of state intervention can be hugely beneficial

The U.S. will have to come around to that. I'm not sure how low it has to sink relative to China , but there will come a time when it will be seen as the obvious strategy.

Perhaps Great Depression II will be the spark as Great Depression I was the spark for the limited socialism in the U.S.

Re: The Glass Famine

#13

Post by cucumber3732842 »

one33seven wrote: post #5
roenxi wrote: post #2

> It's that it is possible to resuscitate dormant or shrinking sectors. It is possible to re-industrialise quickly. China managed to go from peasantry in the grip of communism to arguably the biggest economy in history over a remarkably short period. And it is hard to get a read on exactly what is going on in that country but that seems to be despite heavy state intervention in the economy and without the benefits of…

Not despite heave state intervention. Because of it!

If I go to the police evidince locker and pick up glawk fawty with the switch used in a drive-by and I put it in the hand of a biathlon athlete will he hit the target or will he spray the crowd? He'll still probably hit the target. He might be a little worse at it but the nature of the tool and the task it's optimized for isn't gonna fundamentally alter what happens because the goal is still the same, hit the target.

Both the US and China engage in copious amounts of "state intervention". They have different characteristics but it's fundamentally the same tool even if they're optimized differently. The US has no problem steamrolling people and interests, it just takes more time and money. At the behest of various interests I will not piss everyone off by naming and shaming because who they are is somewhat beside the point, the US has spend the past 50yr wielding state intervention in pursuit of policies that will kick out industrial activity at the margin. China has intentionally done essentially the opposite in the same time. Both have essentially accomplished what they set out to do.

Cheerleading for "more/cheaper/faster state intervention" is stupid when the goals being pursued are what's responsible for the lion's share of difference in outcome. Giving a glawk fawty to a biathlon athlete isn't gonna make him want to indiscriminately pepper the crowd any more than giving US policy more teeth to tear shit up is going to change the fact that the policy is pursuing de-industrialization.

Re: The Glass Famine

#14

Post by jingpostmedia »

paleotrope wrote: post #3
roenxi wrote: post #2

> It's that it is possible to resuscitate dormant or shrinking sectors. It is possible to re-industrialise quickly. China managed to go from peasantry in the grip of communism to arguably the biggest economy in history over a remarkably short period. And it is hard to get a read on exactly what is going on in that country but that seems to be despite heavy state intervention in the economy and without the benefits of…

It's probably obvious to say, but I think a nation's most important resource is people. And if you can just order them around and kill the dissenters and not care about what individuals want, then you can achieve quite a bit, be it industrialization or war or agricultural surplus.

[flagged]

Re: The Glass Famine

#15

Post by Vasbarlog »

abirch wrote: post #8
paleotrope wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably obvious to say, but I think a nation's most important resource is people. And if you can just order them around and kill the dissenters and not care about what individuals want, then you can achieve quite a bit, be it industrialization or war or agricultural surplus.

I'm not saying that the economy or markets are everything; however, if you don't have dissidents you don't as much friction. If China wants to move your mother's grave for a factory, there's not a lot you can do. Whereas in democracies you can try to draw it out with legal action, etc.

That’s not true at all. China is known for its “nail houses” for example.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/gallery/2014/apr/15/china...

Re: The Glass Famine

#16

Post by Telemakhos »

abirch wrote: post #8
paleotrope wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably obvious to say, but I think a nation's most important resource is people. And if you can just order them around and kill the dissenters and not care about what individuals want, then you can achieve quite a bit, be it industrialization or war or agricultural surplus.

I'm not saying that the economy or markets are everything; however, if you don't have dissidents you don't as much friction. If China wants to move your mother's grave for a factory, there's not a lot you can do. Whereas in democracies you can try to draw it out with legal action, etc.

The phenomenon of "nail houses" testifies against the notion that the Chinese government will expropriate whatever land it wants, although nail houses aren't graves. Graves are less of a concern, because the dead by law must be buried in public cemeteries: isolated rural burials are uncommon.

Re: The Glass Famine

#17

Post by cestith »

raphinou wrote: post #10

I find it interesting that the book is available about everywhere save for North America according to the author, but the first distances in the text are given in yards, mainly used only in North America. Ok, this is not the exact book text, but still, it looks as a misfit to the audience of the book.

The UK wasn’t on the metric system during the first world war.

https://ukma.org.uk/press/metrication-timeline/

Re: The Glass Famine

#18

Post by [deleted] »

A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #9
roenxi wrote: post #2

> It's that it is possible to resuscitate dormant or shrinking sectors. It is possible to re-industrialise quickly. China managed to go from peasantry in the grip of communism to arguably the biggest economy in history over a remarkably short period. And it is hard to get a read on exactly what is going on in that country but that seems to be despite heavy state intervention in the economy and without the benefits of…

> despite heavy state intervention in the economy Arguably because of state intervention in the economy. They give generous cash subsidies across various industrial sectors -- and as "investors" they have a remarkably light touch! Their standard modus operandi is to subsidize a number of competing ventures per sector (which number could be somewhere in the dozens or hundreds) and have competition take care of the res…

[deleted]

Re: The Glass Famine

#19

Post by bmacho »

Vasbarlog wrote: post #15
abirch wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying that the economy or markets are everything; however, if you don't have dissidents you don't as much friction. If China wants to move your mother's grave for a factory, there's not a lot you can do. Whereas in democracies you can try to draw it out with legal action, etc.

That’s not true at all. China is known for its “nail houses” for example. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/gallery/2014/apr/15/china...

Among all these pictures there is exactly 1, the first one that would be an example of someone living in an important place, a middle of a road, and refusing to move.

And the occupied place isn't very important to the state, but rather only to a couple of residents.

All others just show that demolitions have started, and there are houses not yet demolished.

0/1.4 billions of people is actually convincing the other way you intended.

Re: The Glass Famine

#20

Post by mc32 »

roenxi wrote: post #2

> It's that it is possible to resuscitate dormant or shrinking sectors. It is possible to re-industrialise quickly. China managed to go from peasantry in the grip of communism to arguably the biggest economy in history over a remarkably short period. And it is hard to get a read on exactly what is going on in that country but that seems to be despite heavy state intervention in the economy and without the benefits of…

In some ways China acts more like WWII Germany than SU Marxist Leninism or Maoist China. Private enterprise exists and encouraged but the state ultimately dictates what happens and has party members in leadership positions in those companies.
Post reply on HN