121–130 of 131 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The full data are available on Hofstede's site, too http://geert-hofstede.com/countries.html
The differences between Japan and China are truly interesting.
Call me jaded but I am surprised to see the numbers so low for a lot of countries. Perhaps the questions asked how things should be, rather than how things actually are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An influential Dutch researcher in cultural economics identified, in 1981, a cultural dimension he terms "power distance", defined as "the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organisations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally". On PDI, scaled zero to one hundred, the U.S. scores 40 and China scores 80 (Russia scores 93). Another dimension of significance is…
>Note that Russians, in surveys, explicitly prefer social stability to free speech and a free media. I wonder how much this is informed by Russians being conditioned by their media to "prefer social stability to free speech and a free media."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Said torrenting sites are by and large against the laws of the US and many other nations and shouldn't be compared to the NYT.
> torrenting sites are by and large against the laws of the US Right. We have free speech as long as it's legal. Just like the Chinese.
You know I see this a lot: we have valid grievances in the US, absolutely. But we also need to be able to see our own issues within a greater world context. There is a massive spectrum and we should be very grateful for the freedom we have and institutions that enable it. If we conflate what we've got with places that truly have materially less freedom, we risk not being able to fight the most important battles.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have a Bloomberg terminal an article about money accumulation isn't going to be the type of article that would bother you.
But I believe that most Bloomberg terminal subscribers would argue that capitalist-style money accumulation (free markets, etc) is a good thing for an overall population, and that corruption-style money accumulation (which is the implication of the article) is a huge negative for a country.
Indeed, some have argued corruption is a good thing in general because people can buy what they want from the leadership instead of their running rampant over everything, which ameliorates any abuses: see for example Bryan Caplan http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2012/09/incorruptibly_e....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> torrenting sites are by and large against the laws of the US Right. We have free speech as long as it's legal. Just like the Chinese.
Blargh... yes and no. Nothing torrentable is explicitely bannable in the US... it's just that some methods of attaining the media are being banned. I'm not sure but I suspect the Chinese government could ban physical copies of the NYT as well as the web portal and no one would be able to do anything about it. This is not true in the US. You know I see this a lot: we have valid grievances in the US, absolutely. But we…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blargh... yes and no. Nothing torrentable is explicitely bannable in the US... it's just that some methods of attaining the media are being banned. I'm not sure but I suspect the Chinese government could ban physical copies of the NYT as well as the web portal and no one would be able to do anything about it. This is not true in the US. You know I see this a lot: we have valid grievances in the US, absolutely. But we…
The discussion is about attitudes towards censorship. The point of my comment was that Americans are willing to accept censorship, as long as it's "legal". And I think history is on my side. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blargh... yes and no. Nothing torrentable is explicitely bannable in the US... it's just that some methods of attaining the media are being banned. I'm not sure but I suspect the Chinese government could ban physical copies of the NYT as well as the web portal and no one would be able to do anything about it. This is not true in the US. You know I see this a lot: we have valid grievances in the US, absolutely. But we…
The discussion is about attitudes towards censorship. The point of my comment was that Americans are willing to accept censorship, as long as it's "legal". And I think history is on my side. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States
Let's not lose focus of this very drastic difference. Sure 14 is too high, but it's not appropriate to bring it up in the context of China, in my opinion. But then, I shouldn't censor you, should i?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An influential Dutch researcher in cultural economics identified, in 1981, a cultural dimension he terms "power distance", defined as "the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organisations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally". On PDI, scaled zero to one hundred, the U.S. scores 40 and China scores 80 (Russia scores 93). Another dimension of significance is…
Latest PDI and IDV figures: http://www.clearlycultural.com/geert-hofstede-cultural-dimen...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The discussion is about attitudes towards censorship. The point of my comment was that Americans are willing to accept censorship, as long as it's "legal". And I think history is on my side. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States
Press Freedom Index scores: - United States: 14 - China: 136 Let's not lose focus of this very drastic difference. Sure 14 is too high, but it's not appropriate to bring it up in the context of China, in my opinion. But then, I shouldn't censor you, should i?