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

191–200 of 279 posts

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

#191

Post by nightski »

accountyaccount wrote: post #166

I definitely support paying more taxes to improve the infrastructure/rural areas of the country, but I also start to think that maybe the country is just too big. Are there any countries that are nearly this large that have a consistent quality of infrastructure for everyone? I live in a large city and it seems that even we have trouble maintaining up our roads/bridges/grid/telecom systems and we pay a lot of state t…

It's amusing there is so much misinformation on rural America on HN. You'd think it was mostly 3rd world by reading most of the comments on this post. I come from ND, which is an extremely sparsely populated state. However, don't let the rural nature fool you - per capita tax revenue was one of the highest in the nation. It's filled with rich farmers making more than many engineers here on HN. Most of the income comes from Oil & Farming but that excess money is being invested in developing a growing technology scene.

I regularly visit CA/SF as I have clients there. It's a beautiful place, but many things about living in ND are much more attractive.

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

#192

Post by naasking »

walshemj wrote: post #165
naasking wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They also need a central place to meet. Not anymore. I'm sure the last 20 years of technological advancement hasn't escaped your notice. I think eliminating colocation is an idea that deserves serious consideration.

Yeh right no offence but face to face debate does not work very well over teleconferences you need to have everyone in the room. Having a president having to do PMQ's and maintaining the confidence of the house and senate might be a good thing.

I don't know know if you've ever watched C-SPAN, but in person debate already doesn't work. In fact, the wisdom of the crowds effect works best when each actor in the crowd makes up their own mind without the influence of external actors.

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

#193

Post by sqeaky »

throwasehasdwi wrote: post #174
CuriouslyC wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen places in Mississippi, Arkansas and West Virginia that looked every bit as third world as rural Philippines/Vietnam. What the US lacks is urban poverty in the form of shantytowns. This is because unlike most third world nations, we quickly raze them when and find excuses to incarcerate the people who live there. If we were more permissive, we'd certainly have them too.

They might look terrible but the utilities work. Biggest differentiator in 3rd world is poverty AND non functioning government. The water, sewer, and electricity work well enough to be relied upon even in the poorest most remote parts of the US. This is not so in any 3rd world country

I am curious about the state of water in Flint, do you know the current status? Do you know how long families had non-potable tap water, even if it is drinkable now?

EDIT - Please reply if you don't like my comment. Just downvotes do not tell me anything. Also, please consider that I just asked questions, I made no statements and I did it that way because I actually seek answers.

If the water in Flint is perfectly fine, then please tell me and explain how public perception got so out of sorts. I would appreciate sources.

I also don't think we are a 3rd world country, but we clearly have more problems than people who believe in American Exceptionalism are willing to accept.

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

#194

Post by tryitnow »

tptacek wrote: post #178
prawn wrote: post #38

Another story about the same person and topic that I found insightful: "America is Regressing into a Developing Nation for Most People" - https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/america-is-r... I have visited the US most years out of the last 5-10, including a trip through 25ish US states a couple of years ago. It's easy to get the impression that competing interests maintain a problematic or worsening status…

Bombay Beach? Wonder Valley? I had to look both of those places up, and both are places with tiny populations. Can you help me understand why I should be thinking about places like those and not, say, Youngstown Ohio?

Good question. I had never heard of Bombay Beach but it's a fascinating story: http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/salton-sea

Having said that, I think it has absolutely nothing to do with the article.

Wonder Valley also has an interesting story: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2014/12/the-last-homesteads-o...

There's a theme here of Southern California desert wastelands.

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

#195

Post by seppin »

mxtt wrote: post #37
324343245 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What countries don't have any impoverished neighborhoods?

https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-slums-in-Switzerland

how is comparing a small affluent country to a large and econ diverse one even remotely fair?

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

#196

Post by sqeaky »

kristofferR wrote: post #112
jasonlfunk wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The constitution we have now isn't the first version. It was created with the ability to be changed with the process of amendments. We have 27 of them so far. More could be added to change the voting system or whatever else, if there was political will to do so; but currently there isn't. (And this is ignoring the idea of the judiciary reading into the constitution new rights that weren't there to begin with.)

My initial instinct were to agree that while changing the voting system is obviously theoretically possible, it would never happen. Why would the parties vote for solutions that would destroy the duopoly they currently enjoy? Then I actually researched it a bit, and it turns out that quite a few countries have actually moved away from FPTP. [1] That's interesting, and something to be hopeful about. [1] https://en.wik…

> Why would the parties vote for solutions that would destroy the duopoly they currently enjoy?

One can a imagine a situation where Democrats think the change will be safe for them and Republicans will be cast into chaos and in that same situation Republicans think they will be safe and Democrats will be cast into chaos.

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

#197

Post by adpirz »

nightski wrote: post #191
accountyaccount wrote: post #166

I definitely support paying more taxes to improve the infrastructure/rural areas of the country, but I also start to think that maybe the country is just too big. Are there any countries that are nearly this large that have a consistent quality of infrastructure for everyone? I live in a large city and it seems that even we have trouble maintaining up our roads/bridges/grid/telecom systems and we pay a lot of state t…

It's amusing there is so much misinformation on rural America on HN. You'd think it was mostly 3rd world by reading most of the comments on this post. I come from ND, which is an extremely sparsely populated state. However, don't let the rural nature fool you - per capita tax revenue was one of the highest in the nation. It's filled with rich farmers making more than many engineers here on HN. Most of the income come…

I feel like ND is a bit of an outlier though, I can try and find the data to back it up. I lived in rural MS for a while, and parts of it felt close to parts of rural India that I've visited.

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

#198

Post by earlyriser »

accountyaccount wrote: post #166

I definitely support paying more taxes to improve the infrastructure/rural areas of the country, but I also start to think that maybe the country is just too big. Are there any countries that are nearly this large that have a consistent quality of infrastructure for everyone? I live in a large city and it seems that even we have trouble maintaining up our roads/bridges/grid/telecom systems and we pay a lot of state t…

Canada is bigger and with just 30 million people and the infrastructure is good. I live in a small city of 30k and sometimes I'm surprised how deteriorated the infrastructure is in big cities like Montreal (I also lived there for some years).

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

#199

Post by arjie »

bigeasy wrote: post #164
arjie wrote: post #102

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…

Rather than setting up your own straw man, why not respond to some of the arguments made in the article? > In the developing countries Lewis studied, people try to move from the low-wage sector to the affluent sector by transplanting from rural areas to the city to get a job. Occasionally it works; often it doesn’t. Temin says that today in the U.S., the ticket out is education, which is difficult for two reasons: yo…

A bit harsh, that accusation, especially when I can't find any of your quoted sentences in the linked article.

For what it's worth, I was talking about this following excerpt:

> In the Lewis model of a dual economy, much of the low-wage sector has little influence over public policy. Check. The high-income sector will keep wages down in the other sector to provide cheap labor for its businesses. Check. Social control is used to keep the low-wage sector from challenging the policies favored by the high-income sector.

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

#200

Post by dgzl »

dcdanko wrote: post #175
tuna-piano wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it would be great if we could sub divide the large country into smaller areas, and give each of those areas control over most of the roads / bridges / etc. If spending and benefits are primarily local, shouldn't the decisions be as well?

You mean like the States?

It's my understanding that, from a constitutionalist perspective, states were meant to be sovereign and the Federal government was meant to have minimal presence. The idea is that states would be responsible for themselves only, through both success and failure.
Post reply on HN