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

MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

theintellectualist.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 279 posts

Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

#101

Post by unityByFreedom »

alistairSH wrote: post #91
unityByFreedom wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By co-locating them all in Washington we enable destructive lobbying while keeping them away from the people they are supposed to represent Representatives do spend time in their own states. They also need a central place to meet. No country or system does this differently. > The party system is also destructive - I advocate against any legal recognition of political parties and against campaign ads funded by anyon…

In addition to rolling back Citizens United would be to re-introduce pork-barrel spending. With changes to the legislative process in the 90s, Congressional leaders lost a strong carrot to keep the rank-and-file members playing along. In the current system, with no carrot, legislators are more inclined to follow the wishes of their constituents. And with extreme gerrymandering, those constituents can be very extreme.

Pork barrel spending is special interest funding. It's not viewed as a good thing

Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

#102

Post by arjie »

I don't buy it. The last election saw relatively wealthy cities voting to increase taxes, increase equity, and make life better for the poor. And rural areas voting the opposite way with national identity, lower taxes, and lower community spending being their important things.

This is very different from third world nations where the middle class wants lower taxes and the poor vote for more spending but don't succeed.

Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

#103

Post by bobbington »

The problem is that America has become a socialist country which is a recipe for poverty. It wastes such an insane amount of money paying people to not work, to not contribute to society. we pay well over 200 billion dollars a year in just interest on the debt

"The inherent flaw of capitalism is that some are rich and some are poor. The inherent flaw in communism is that all are poor"

Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

#104

Post by Brakenshire »

Kaizyn wrote: post #84
kristofferR wrote: post #2

Am I wrong in attributing/connecting most of Americas problems with its flawed constitution/democratic system? The first version of something is rarely the best version, and while the US constitution contained a lot of fantastic elements and freedoms that every educated American knows about, it also contained a democratic system (first past the post/two party system) that is mathematically bound to breed divisiveness…

First of all, it is a republic and not a democracy. The difference is quite important. Secondly, to attribute the problems to the constitution is mistaken. That founding document is the only thing standing in the way of a complete and total disaster for the country. Nearly all the problems can be traced back to where politicians are ignoring the constitution in part or in full and thereby eroding the public protectio…

On the other hand, the US has a legalistic style of politics which you could blame on people relying too much on the constitution. The US is like an oppositional court room, with each side tearing at each other to get as much benefit as they can. It does diminish the shared duty to do what is right and good for the country and the democracy.

Although of course the US is also a relatively fractured country by its nature, so perhaps can't rely on a vague, shared sense of what is good and decent, in the same way as a small European country, with more or less a common ethnic and cultural identity.

Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

#105

Post by arethuza »

s_kilk wrote: post #93
arethuza wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK seems to having similar problems - so I don't think it is related to the specifics of the constitution/democratic system.

And what's the common denominator? Neoliberal Capitalism.

Indeed, and a slavish adherence to Neoliberal Capitalism as the ideological answer to all questions.

Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

#106

Post by sharemywin »

wcummings wrote: post #49
324343245 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Am I wrong in attributing/connecting most of Americas problems with its flawed constitution/democratic system? Almost certainly. The US was doing fine for most of the 20th century. Globalism is what has brought wages down. Globalism combines the economies of the richest countries with the economies of the poorest in an attempt to "help" poor countries. As rich countries and poor countries combine economies, they mo…

Globalism doesn't "attempt" anything, its not designed and it doesn't have agency.

I don't 100% agree with that. doesn't have agency true. not designed not so sure. There are plenty of treaties and other contracts between countries that effect how money etc. flows to countries. world bank and others.

Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

#107

Post by adamnemecek »

bcook wrote: post #95
adamnemecek wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also a cultural aspect. E.g. Note how people in the us don't protest much, much to their detriment.

Aren't there better ways than protesting to affect change?

There actually aren't. Not as immediate and direct. Occupy Wall Street made a lot of people in power really uncomfortable. Also see the recent president Park protests in South Korea.

Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

#108

Post by unityByFreedom »

makosdv wrote: post #71
unityByFreedom wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At some point, it's simply impossible to have a whole population which is both properly educated and able to voice it's opinion Are, it's impossible to have that at all points. The point is to strive for it, not achieve perfection. If we don't strive, then with people like DeVos in charge of federal funding, public schools will be gutted and the problem worsens.

The vast majority of education funding comes from the states, so cutting federal funding won't really have much impact. "That means the Federal contribution to elementary and secondary education is about 8 percent" - https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/role.html It really makes me wonder what we need the Department of Education for...

> It really makes me wonder what we need the Department of Education for...

According to DeVos, we need it to undermine public schooling by directing tax money to private schools.

Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

#109

Post by lottin »

324343245 wrote: post #17

Notice how things start to get worse and worse as globalism progresses? Things were great in the 90's, then we signed NAFTA and that's when everything started going to shit. Globalism is what has brought wages down. Globalism combines the economies of the richest countries with the economies of the poorest in an attempt to "help" poor countries. As rich countries and poor countries combine economies, they move toward…

Globalism isn't so much about helping poor countries as it is a matter of self-interest. First, most nations are not self-sufficient in terms of natural resources, thus they need to trade. Second, productive specialisation and trade results in larger economic output and higher standards of living than could be achieved by not trading and producing everything locally.

Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations

#110

Post by unityByFreedom »

yorwba wrote: post #35
unityByFreedom wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> while the US constitution contained a lot of fantastic elements and freedoms that every educated American knows about, it also contained a democratic system (first past the post/two party system) that is mathematically bound to breed divisiveness. Disagreement is a human condition, not a democratic one. Democracy is just a way to let some ideas win some of the time. There isn't a system in the world that's freed pe…

Disagreement != divisiveness. E.g. I disagree with you on that point, but I'm not using my hypothetical army of sock puppets to downvote every single of your comments into oblivion from now to eternity. Sometimes, US politics feels more like the latter.

You're splitting hairs. They're related terms

I have no control over an army. I just have me and my own opinion

Post reply on HN