5 ms·

The Future Is Not American

7 points by inetsee 11y ago

richmarr 11y ago
I'm curious, what proportion of readers here think that the US will be able to compete against China over the next, say 50 years?
- rabbyte 11y ago
  I do. You can't underestimate the value of existing infrastructure. Which is the same reason I would say the US, China, and others will never be able to compete with the emergent virtual economy. Everyone is expecting the next dominant power to look like the previous dominant powers, but they never do.
  - sundaeofshock 11y ago
    It's worth pointing out that we are not providing enough funding to maintain our existing infrastructure, while China is spending billions on improving theirs.
    - rabbyte 11y ago
      This is very true though I'm including the social infrastructure. Silicon Valley, NYC, D.C. will have infrastructural value, trusted pathways, despite what anybody does. It can shrink and grow but unlikely to happen fast as there's a practical cap to how fast humans will move or accept changes.
  - richmarr 11y ago
    > ... emergent virtual economy. Virtual economy, like in World of Warcraft? Not sure I follow. Is this a bitcoin reference?
    - rabbyte 11y ago
      I would consider WoW gold and Bitcoin to be mere tokens for the virtual economy. You can bind spatial terms to these tokens but those terms can be as optional as they are incidental to the exchange, we generally don't care where an exchange originates or terminates. Businesses trading internationally using ships and handshakes created the global economy, individuals trading internationally using sites and tokens created the virtual economy.
- Upvoter33 11y ago
  I definitely do. Look at where the world's population goes for higher ed, for low barrier to entry for startups, for a relative lack of political corruption, for a reasonable tax overhead, and where, by simply having kids there, they immediately become Americans. I don't think any other country is close along many (and certainly not all) of these axes.
  - richmarr 11y ago
    To play devil's advocate a bit (because I personally have no clue what might happen)... > Look at where the world's population goes for higher ed... Assuming your point is that US universities are huge drivers of economic growth then that doesn't explain how China is growing far far more quickly than the US. You could argue that China is experiencing 'low end' growth and isn't yet hindered by not having any 'top 10' universities. I'd counter that by saying that the UK funds universities very poorly (and also caps fees) and still manages to have 3 of the top 10 universities. If China wanted to build the best universities in the world they'd probably just do it, as they have the expertise and the money. > relative lack of political corruption True, 17th in the world isn't bad. Could do better. China scores 100th so they are behind on that. > and where, by simply having kids there, they immediately become Americans You might need to explain what your arguement is here. If you mean that it's easier to naturalise your family once you've immigrated then I'm not sure I buy that as a significant driver of GDP. If you mean that it's easier to emmigrate to the US than to elsewhere, then that's demonstrably false, and has the potential to get even worse because some folks in the US think Donald Trump is a good idea. Try applying for an H1B visa, even as a highly skilled individual (with a corporate sponsor) it's a nightmare. > I don't think any other country is close along many (and certainly not all) of these axes. Plenty of countries are ahead of the US on both corruption and acceptance of immigration. Just look at the stats. Take Sweden for example. In the 90s Sweden took 84,000 refugees from the Balkan states, and now they're taking another 65,000 from Syria (I think the US took 10,000). Sweden also freely allows immigration from anywhere in the EU, ranks 13 places higher than the USA on the corruption index, and has great universities and free higher education for all. Take the UK. The UK ranks better than the US on corruption index (14th) and has 3 of the top 10 universities in the world, with only 1/5 of the US population. Admittedly we're being dicks about immigration at the moment, but I'm not convinced any more so than the US. In short I don't think I buy your argument yet. Feel free to have another go if you want.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

7 points by inetsee 11y ago

I'm curious, what proportion of readers here think that the US will be able to compete against China over the next, say 50 years?

rabbyte 11y ago
I do. You can't underestimate the value of existing infrastructure. Which is the same reason I would say the US, China, and others will never be able to compete with the emergent virtual economy. Everyone is expecting the next dominant power to look like the previous dominant powers, but they never do.
- sundaeofshock 11y ago
  It's worth pointing out that we are not providing enough funding to maintain our existing infrastructure, while China is spending billions on improving theirs.
  - rabbyte 11y ago
    This is very true though I'm including the social infrastructure. Silicon Valley, NYC, D.C. will have infrastructural value, trusted pathways, despite what anybody does. It can shrink and grow but unlikely to happen fast as there's a practical cap to how fast humans will move or accept changes.
- richmarr 11y ago
  > ... emergent virtual economy. Virtual economy, like in World of Warcraft? Not sure I follow. Is this a bitcoin reference?
  - rabbyte 11y ago
    I would consider WoW gold and Bitcoin to be mere tokens for the virtual economy. You can bind spatial terms to these tokens but those terms can be as optional as they are incidental to the exchange, we generally don't care where an exchange originates or terminates. Businesses trading internationally using ships and handshakes created the global economy, individuals trading internationally using sites and tokens created the virtual economy.
Upvoter33 11y ago
I definitely do. Look at where the world's population goes for higher ed, for low barrier to entry for startups, for a relative lack of political corruption, for a reasonable tax overhead, and where, by simply having kids there, they immediately become Americans. I don't think any other country is close along many (and certainly not all) of these axes.
- richmarr 11y ago
  To play devil's advocate a bit (because I personally have no clue what might happen)... > Look at where the world's population goes for higher ed... Assuming your point is that US universities are huge drivers of economic growth then that doesn't explain how China is growing far far more quickly than the US. You could argue that China is experiencing 'low end' growth and isn't yet hindered by not having any 'top 10' universities. I'd counter that by saying that the UK funds universities very poorly (and also caps fees) and still manages to have 3 of the top 10 universities. If China wanted to build the best universities in the world they'd probably just do it, as they have the expertise and the money. > relative lack of political corruption True, 17th in the world isn't bad. Could do better. China scores 100th so they are behind on that. > and where, by simply having kids there, they immediately become Americans You might need to explain what your arguement is here. If you mean that it's easier to naturalise your family once you've immigrated then I'm not sure I buy that as a significant driver of GDP. If you mean that it's easier to emmigrate to the US than to elsewhere, then that's demonstrably false, and has the potential to get even worse because some folks in the US think Donald Trump is a good idea. Try applying for an H1B visa, even as a highly skilled individual (with a corporate sponsor) it's a nightmare. > I don't think any other country is close along many (and certainly not all) of these axes. Plenty of countries are ahead of the US on both corruption and acceptance of immigration. Just look at the stats. Take Sweden for example. In the 90s Sweden took 84,000 refugees from the Balkan states, and now they're taking another 65,000 from Syria (I think the US took 10,000). Sweden also freely allows immigration from anywhere in the EU, ranks 13 places higher than the USA on the corruption index, and has great universities and free higher education for all. Take the UK. The UK ranks better than the US on corruption index (14th) and has 3 of the top 10 universities in the world, with only 1/5 of the US population. Admittedly we're being dicks about immigration at the moment, but I'm not convinced any more so than the US. In short I don't think I buy your argument yet. Feel free to have another go if you want.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]