The Secret Document That Transformed China • Hacker News Board

Re: The Secret Document That Transformed China

#41

Post by spindritf » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 3:04 PM UTC

weekendlogic wrote: post #32

nextparadigms wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you get a state that is "more powerful" than Corporations? I don't think Government size has anything to do with it. Are you referring to having many strong law enforcement agencies to threaten the corporations? I'd say the US Government already has that, and Corporations still seem to control it. And if you want to give China as an example, that's not an acceptable model. In a democracy, the best way for the…

1. Democracy allows people to control the government. 2. Corporations are people. (In the US) 3. Corporations are the richest, most powerful, psychopathic people. It is not hard to see the problem here.

> 2. Corporations are people. (In the US)

I could never understand that point. Corporations are people everywhere. Corporation is just a group of people (shareholders/owners and management/employees) with a contractual hierarchy owning some property (equity). Same way NGOs are people, HOAs are people, football teams are people... And it's like that everywhere in the world, it's a very basic property of human societies.

That's why corporate donations traditionally include donations from "members" of the corporation as donation from the corporation BTW.

Now, in civilized countries, individuals within these groups are given some legal protection from responsibility for the group's actions. There are certain advantages to that approach (more innovation, risk taking, investment, etc) but most importantly collective responsibility is simply wrong.

Re: The Secret Document That Transformed China

#42

Post by derleth » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 5:19 PM UTC

gphilip wrote: post #28

derleth wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marx also believed that no capitalist country would ever, say, abolish child labor, institute universal education, and create universal health care. He further believed that a government can 'wither away'. Marx has been proven wrong in ways that have nothing to do with how well Communism/Socialism works as a system.

> Marx also believed that no capitalist country would ever, say, abolish child labor, institute universal education, and create universal health care. Could you provide some reference to support that, please?

This is a surprisingly good summary:

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/Marxism.html

Aside from that, you can read Marx in translation or in the original.

Re: The Secret Document That Transformed China

#43

Post by grandpa » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 5:33 PM UTC

derleth wrote: post #26

sliverstorm wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're missing the classic game theory element. If everyone is working hard, everyone gets X. But if I decide to slack off, everyone gets X minus some tiny fraction, including me . Game theory tells us this kind of system will fall apart practically instantly. I forget the details, but I think Marx tried to dismiss that problem through an appeal to nationalism.

Marx also believed that no capitalist country would ever, say, abolish child labor, institute universal education, and create universal health care. He further believed that a government can 'wither away'. Marx has been proven wrong in ways that have nothing to do with how well Communism/Socialism works as a system.

Is it fair to say we have abolished child labor, instituted universal education and created universal health care when our economy relies on manufactured goods made by uneducated children with no health care?

Re: The Secret Document That Transformed China

#44

Post by Tangaroa » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 5:51 PM UTC

spindritf wrote: post #41

weekendlogic wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Democracy allows people to control the government. 2. Corporations are people. (In the US) 3. Corporations are the richest, most powerful, psychopathic people. It is not hard to see the problem here.

> 2. Corporations are people. (In the US) I could never understand that point. Corporations are people everywhere. Corporation is just a group of people (shareholders/owners and management/employees) with a contractual hierarchy owning some property (equity). Same way NGOs are people, HOAs are people, football teams are people... And it's like that everywhere in the world, it's a very basic property of human societie…

The idea of corporations being people goes back to Rome when someone decided that the laws regarding disputes between persons could be applied to an organization as well. Corpus == body, the body of people being treated as a person in considering the accusation. That said, governments have always been able to regulate what corporations can do until the Citizens United decision of 2010. Corporations used to be chartered by the government to meet a specific objective and were only allowed to spend money towards that objective; government regulatory policy was deny-by-default. Aaron Burr's Manhattan Company in 1799 was the first modern corporation in the US that was allowed to spend its money freely.

Re: The Secret Document That Transformed China

#45

Post by tomjen3 » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 6:02 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #40

nextparadigms wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you get a state that is "more powerful" than Corporations? I don't think Government size has anything to do with it. Are you referring to having many strong law enforcement agencies to threaten the corporations? I'd say the US Government already has that, and Corporations still seem to control it. And if you want to give China as an example, that's not an acceptable model. In a democracy, the best way for the…

The simple approach would be limit corporations to 1,000 people in size and prevent them from directly owning or investing in other corporations.

That is a simple but wrong approach, a next generation system would have to be better at creating wealth than capitalism, not worse (you can't have google at that size, nor Intel, nor Amazon).

Re: The Secret Document That Transformed China

#46

Post by kylebrown » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 6:05 PM UTC

For an interesting twist on the tired old communism vs capitalism debate, read Michel Bauwens of the p2p foundation philosophize on how aspects of Marxism were 'ill-conceived' while alternativley, the thriving p2p economy is a viable successor to capitalism.

https://snuproject.wordpress.com/2012/01/03/and-the-debate-b...

Re: The Secret Document That Transformed China

#47

Post by tomjen3 » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 6:05 PM UTC

derleth wrote: post #25

sliverstorm wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

whether socialism is, regardless of inevitability, possible, is a matter of hot debate. I figure the only way to make it possible is through the ability to pick & choose members, and exile members. Not to be elitist, but rather to protect the community from those who would abuse it.

> I figure the only way to make it possible is through the ability to pick & choose members, and exile members. Then you have a dictatorial state socialism, also known as Stalinism, Maoism, and the Khmer Rouge. It's been done.

Not necessarily -- he may have a defense against the inevitable slide into corruptness that happened in those places.

Of course this all depends on who gets to choose to exile members, and getting it to scale.

Re: The Secret Document That Transformed China

#48

Post by reuven » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 6:14 PM UTC

grecy wrote: post #14

I'm getting down voted to oblivion for this... Even in the year 2012, after all these years, Americans still need to hear stories that directly outline why communism doesn't work, and good old competitive capitalism is the way of the future. I wonder how many of you reading this in America even stopped to think about the message you're being fed. I wonder how many of you reading this in America have absolutely no clu…

I have been listening to Planet Money since it first started, several years ago. While the quality and freshness has dropped off somewhat in the last year or so, it remains a great source of insight and reporting into economics.

I don't think that the reporters on this piece were trying to give us any sort of message, other than that China realized that communism -- that is, government ownership and regulation of production, and equal pay no matter how hard you work -- was a failure, and that they had to somehow escape from that system and move toward a more capitalistic one. How that happened is an interesting story, and an important one.

If you think that Planet Money is against communism and in favor of capitalism, then that's probably a safe assumption.

But if you think that they're all rah-rah-USA! in their opinions, then you need to listen to the podcast more regularly. They've done some excellent shows on Denmark (and particularly, now Danes are generally OK with taxes that are beyond the pale for all but the most extreme Americans) and education (and how the US isn't attacking that problem, particularly at the preschool level, an intelligent way). Oh, and their reporting on the American banking system, and the ways in which the US housing crisis occurred, were very well done.

It's something of a cliche to say that reporters tend to be left-of-center, but I definitely get the feeling that this is where the Planet Money is located on the political-economic spectrum. But they're also generally trying to explore topics in greater depth than you'll get elsewhere, and from angles that I definitely don't hear in other places. For that, and for their clear explanations (and willingness to be silly and funny), I give them a huge amount of credit.

Re: The Secret Document That Transformed China

#49

Post by reuven » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 6:19 PM UTC

tnuc wrote: post #18

coryl wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? So you think this is nothing more than propaganda?

Pretty much everything written by one country's media about another country is propaganda. There is just as much propaganda in American media as there is in Chinese Media. Does Rupert Murdoch support SOPA or is it the fine informed editors at the Wall Street Journal? Rupert wouldn't use his media as a propaganda network for his own benefit would he? There is no propaganda in American Media, none at all. It's only the…

I'm not sure how you can say this with a straight face, given the incredible diversity of opinion in the American media. Sure, the US government engages in propaganda. But if you're only listening to the what the government says, or to one take on it, then you're purposely restricting the depth and breadth of opinions that exist.

Re: The Secret Document That Transformed China

#50

Post by Retric » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 6:31 PM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #45

Retric wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple approach would be limit corporations to 1,000 people in size and prevent them from directly owning or investing in other corporations.

That is a simple but wrong approach, a next generation system would have to be better at creating wealth than capitalism, not worse (you can't have google at that size, nor Intel, nor Amazon).

It's a question of tradeoffs. Google, Intel, and Amazon are really several independent company's that feed off each other. Google the search engine vs Google the advertizing company. Intel the Chip manufacturer vs Intel the king of the x86. By splitting them you free the most productive parts of the company to thrive without the temptation to feed all the fluff.

More importantly, you reduce the temptation for bribery etc.