21–30 of 116 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The pro-Trump tech folks are 90% about crypto. It's single-issue politics, like abortion or gun rights. Scratch the surface on a SV Trump supporter like Marc Andreessen, and you'll find a big bag of crypto that they want to keep dumping on retail investors.
Which crypto Bill Ackman is trying to dump on retail?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read the summary from the review and I am not convinced that neoliberal US and EU have a less extractive governance structure than China has, as the authors seem to claim. It's been a decade since the book was published and China is still going strong. We will see.
China has become more and more authoritarian under Xi, its GDP growth stats may be dodgy, and recently its housing bubble has popped big-style. It could go the way of Japan. I agree with your last sentence, all the same.
I don’t want to single this out but tangible proof of a net increase in ‘authoritarian’ decision making, compared to say a decade ago, has never been posted on HN, as far as I know.
Most of the in depth analysis I’ve seen suggests that although enforcement actions have become stricter over the past decade, the actual number of new laws and regulations has gone down.
And more importantly, the number of contradictory laws and regulations (between central authorities, and between the centre and provinces) has gone way way down.
So there’s much less leeway to punish on a whim or trap someone in a double bind, compared to a decade ago. Which suggests a net decrease, if anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
China has become more and more authoritarian under Xi, its GDP growth stats may be dodgy, and recently its housing bubble has popped big-style. It could go the way of Japan. I agree with your last sentence, all the same.
How do you know this? I don’t want to single this out but tangible proof of a net increase in ‘authoritarian’ decision making, compared to say a decade ago, has never been posted on HN, as far as I know. Most of the in depth analysis I’ve seen suggests that although enforcement actions have become stricter over the past decade, the actual number of new laws and regulations has gone down. And more importantly, the num…
Which is why the pro-Trump tech folks are playing with fire. Exchanging potentially faster approvals/lower regulation for favored projects, for an environment where rule of law and institutions are weakened.
The slow and messy process of reaching consensus (or close) via a complex web of institutions help “western” (in the sense that Kotkin uses) societies avoid really bad policy and adapt to mistakes. Some people are frustrated by this and think it would be much better to substitute their judgment for this process. They don’t necessarily hold this view selfishly or maliciously, they are just short sighted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know this? I don’t want to single this out but tangible proof of a net increase in ‘authoritarian’ decision making, compared to say a decade ago, has never been posted on HN, as far as I know. Most of the in depth analysis I’ve seen suggests that although enforcement actions have become stricter over the past decade, the actual number of new laws and regulations has gone down. And more importantly, the num…
It depends on if you’re talking about authoritarianism as it relates to the average person or the political and ruling class. There have been a lot of reports of Xi getting rid of a lot of potential adversaries when he announced himself ruler for life and the imprisonment of Jack Ma and stripping him of his wealth for making challenging statements against Xi seems pretty authoritarian.
Since they pretty much all have party cards already. And the moment they give it up means they’re kicked out from any decision making, from what I understand.
Yes internal factions within the party can arbitrarily punish each other for made up reasons all day long, every day of the year.
So in a sense it was already authoritarian without limit.
But that’s not new, nor different from any other big political party.
I strongly recommend Acemoglu, Robinson classic book "Why Nations Fail" https://www.amazon.com/Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity/d... It's very accessible, no economics background required. Along with Krugman and Kahneman, one of the few economics scholars that take the time to write a book for layman.
I read the summary from the review and I am not convinced that neoliberal US and EU have a less extractive governance structure than China has, as the authors seem to claim. It's been a decade since the book was published and China is still going strong. We will see.
Regardless, even if China does today the explanation still holds considering China only transformed a few decades before the book was written.
Branko Milanovic has aptly and rather amusingly defined Acemoglu's naive theorizing as "Wikipedia entries with regressions" https://glineq.blogspot.com/2014/08/my-take-on-acemoglu-robi... and he is right.
Acemoglu's strand of institutional social science is known to be painfully racist and clueless about realities on the ground https://africasacountry.com/2016/09/africa-why-western-econo... The narrative that you can get economic growth with "good institutions" is a fable, and cases like China are also completely outside their narrative. Not only is their narrative historically inaccurate, if not ideological, it can't explain why Western economies like the US have prospered despite being as corrupt as China is today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It depends on if you’re talking about authoritarianism as it relates to the average person or the political and ruling class. There have been a lot of reports of Xi getting rid of a lot of potential adversaries when he announced himself ruler for life and the imprisonment of Jack Ma and stripping him of his wealth for making challenging statements against Xi seems pretty authoritarian.
Does it makes sense to discuss it relative to the ‘political and ruling class’? Since they pretty much all have party cards already. And the moment they give it up means they’re kicked out from any decision making, from what I understand. Yes internal factions within the party can arbitrarily punish each other for made up reasons all day long, every day of the year. So in a sense it was already authoritarian without…
Well deserved. Acemoglu is the economist everyone respects. Very technical, but not for the sake of mathiness. His models have a meaning. They clarify thought and ideas. https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=l9Or8EMAAAAJ&hl=en
I strongly recommend Acemoglu, Robinson classic book "Why Nations Fail" https://www.amazon.com/Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity/d... It's very accessible, no economics background required. Along with Krugman and Kahneman, one of the few economics scholars that take the time to write a book for layman.
Not sure I'd spend time on a Krugman book. He predicted in 1998 that the internet would cease having an economic impact by 2005 and that it would be no greater than fax machines. He's like the Neil deGrasse Tyson of economics.