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

41–50 of 279 posts

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

#41

Post by herbst »

324343245 wrote: post #21
nunez wrote: post #4

While I don't think the US is, de jure, a third-world country, I completely believe that it is, de facto, for many. I am on my way back from Memphis and onto Detroit, and both of these cities and their home states have plenty of areas that look unbelievably impoverished. Based on what I've seen from my years of traveling the country, it would not surprise me if most of the country had this problem. It's really sad.

What countries don't have any impoverished neighborhoods?

i would not be aware of one in switzerland

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

#42

Post by golergka »

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…

> Notice how things start to get worse and worse as globalism progresses?

Not for the actual third world countries. I completely agree with your description of the facts on the ground, just completely disagree with what you consider 'bad' or 'good'.

Everybody's talking about US' inequality problem like US is a closed system. It's insane. US elites are _world_ elites, and inequality should be considered in the world scale, not a country scale - and suddenly, the Occupy protesters and american middle class are the rich ones.

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

#43

Post by jacobush »

lyschoening wrote: post #16
MichaelBurge wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it also contained a democratic system (first past the post/two party system) that is mathematically bound to breed divisiveness. It doesn't have anything about parties in it at all, and leaves it up to the states to decide how to choose their electors. If California or any other state wanted a different system, it could decide to use ranked choice voting right now just like Maine chose last election.

That could make a difference in the House, but not in the Senate.

Still, pretty nice though?

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

#44

Post by arethuza »

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…

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

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

#45

Post by fsloth »

324343245 wrote: post #15
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…

> 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…

The claim that globalization is an attempt to help poorer countries is controversial and would require elaboration.

The stereotypical example of a global economic pattern is a t shirt factory providing goods for a western brand that operates in a third world country because the economic equilibrium is such that raw material acquisition, labor and transport to market costs in total are lower than if the factory was situated for example next to the brand owners head office. I don't see where a will to help someone steps in there.

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

#46

Post by thaiphanvevo »

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…

I disagree. I think America started experiencing problems after 9/11 when they went into two expensive and unnecessary wars. Stop invading other countries and you guys can start rebuilding your own!

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

#47

Post by danieltillett »

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…

This is a bit of a hobby horse of mine, but the reason is the number of elected representatives has not kept pace with the population growth. When the USA was founded there were about 20,000 electors per representatives and now in some seats there are over a million.

If you want representation you need to be able to meet and talk to your rep - more importantly they need to be able to acquire your vote without the need for advertising. Remove the need for advertising and you remove the need for money and the corruption that flows.

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

#48

Post by Karellen »

ptaipale wrote: post #39
jameshart wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that globalism is an attempt to 'help' poor countries needs evidence to support it - I think there are plenty of ways in which globalism has benefitted wealthy countries at the expense of poor ones. In fact, the idea that globalism is 'an attempt' to do something, i.e. a conscious agenda to change the world, rather than just something which just emerged out of commercial activity, also seems a bit of a leap.

I think that we can once again be reminded that there is only one thing that is worse for poor nations than being exploited by global capitalism. It's that poor nations are not exploited by global capitalism. Then you can look up TED talks by Hans Rosling, and the follow-up reports for UN millennium development goals.

Can you give a few examples of poor nations that are not being exploited by global capitalism?

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

#49

Post by wcummings »

324343245 wrote: post #15
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…

> 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.

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

#50

Post by jacobush »

golergka wrote: post #42
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…

> Notice how things start to get worse and worse as globalism progresses? Not for the actual third world countries. I completely agree with your description of the facts on the ground, just completely disagree with what you consider 'bad' or 'good'. Everybody's talking about US' inequality problem like US is a closed system. It's insane. US elites are _world_ elites, and inequality should be considered in the world s…

Wait what? So because there are even poorer people on the other sides of the ponds, some of which might actually benefit in some tangential way from globalism, it's OK for the 0.01 % to rob their closest neighbours blind?
Post reply on HN