5 ms·

Secondly, there have been calls for a US industrial policy -- that is, for Washington to essentially "pick winners and losers" by promoting some industries that

Secondly, there have been calls for a US industrial policy -- that is, for Washington to essentially "pick winners and losers" by promoting some industries that they feel have a high probability of success. Asian countries have been doing this for years with remarkable success and it is a policy which we clearly need to copy. The market is pretty good at picking winners. Washington likes to take money away from the winners and give it to the incumbent losers that bribe lawmakers.

xanados 17y ago
Yeah, that part seems like it needs more support. The situation for the largest and most diverse economy on the planet is a little bit different than the situation for those Asian countries. Our economy is far too complex for this sort of central planning to be effective. Also, politicians are idiots, and need to secure votes from the workers in industries currently existing, not the industries of the future.
teeja 17y ago
Winners like Goldman and Enron? The government can help by protecting productive concerns from the thieves and pirates. Those "winners" can go to hell.
- jdminhbg 17y ago
  I'm not sure how you saw this sentence: "Washington likes to take money away from the winners and give it to the incumbent losers that bribe lawmakers." and thought that Goldman was an example of the former rather than the latter.
  - aaronwall 17y ago
    "and thought that Goldman was an example of the former" Clearly you didn't see where the AIG bailout money went to at the time, courtesy of then U.S. Treasury secretary Hank Paulson, former CEO of Goldman Sachs.
- richcollins 17y ago
  Unfortunately, the government has just as strong a history of protecting the thieves and pirates from competition as it does protecting others from them. Goldman and Enron are possible because of government intervention in their favor.
rms 17y ago
What you say is true, but reality has also become more complicated than free market good, socialism bad.
- CamperBob 17y ago
  Well, I guess I can take that to the bank.
Kadin 17y ago
Amen. Also, although some of the quasi-planned economies (where "winners" were picked and subsidized) in Asia have been remarkably successful, it doesn't necessarily follow that the relationship is causative, or that they wouldn't have been successful anyway, had that selection process not happened. A lot happened in the 20th century in Asia that keeps it from being a repeatable experiment, much less a model that can be followed elsewhere. The effects of WWII and the consequent rebuilding on Japan, and urbanization and the so-called "demographic dividend" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_dividend http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_dividend) on many other countries in the area, shouldn't be underestimated.
Locke1689 17y ago
Eh. Neither of you cited any empirical evidence for your claims. Jury's still out.
anamax 17y ago
> Asian countries have been doing this for years with remarkable success and it is a policy which we clearly need to copy. Even if Asian countries can consistently do that, which I doubt (there's a serious case of survivor's bias here), that doesn't imply that the US can. The American political class is fundamentally incompetent. After watching the health care discussion on Friday, did anyone think "those are the folks who I want running something important"? Whenever I see a politician, my reaction is thatt I don't want that person in charge of anything having to do with my life.

xanados 17y ago

Yeah, that part seems like it needs more support. The situation for the largest and most diverse economy on the planet is a little bit different than the situation for those Asian countries. Our economy is far too complex for this sort of central planning to be effective. Also, politicians are idiots, and need to secure votes from the workers in industries currently existing, not the industries of the future.

teeja 17y ago

Winners like Goldman and Enron? The government can help by protecting productive concerns from the thieves and pirates. Those "winners" can go to hell.

jdminhbg 17y ago
I'm not sure how you saw this sentence: "Washington likes to take money away from the winners and give it to the incumbent losers that bribe lawmakers." and thought that Goldman was an example of the former rather than the latter.
- aaronwall 17y ago
  "and thought that Goldman was an example of the former" Clearly you didn't see where the AIG bailout money went to at the time, courtesy of then U.S. Treasury secretary Hank Paulson, former CEO of Goldman Sachs.
richcollins 17y ago
Unfortunately, the government has just as strong a history of protecting the thieves and pirates from competition as it does protecting others from them. Goldman and Enron are possible because of government intervention in their favor.

rms 17y ago

What you say is true, but reality has also become more complicated than free market good, socialism bad.

CamperBob 17y ago
Well, I guess I can take that to the bank.

Kadin 17y ago

Amen. Also, although some of the quasi-planned economies (where "winners" were picked and subsidized) in Asia have been remarkably successful, it doesn't necessarily follow that the relationship is causative, or that they wouldn't have been successful anyway, had that selection process not happened. A lot happened in the 20th century in Asia that keeps it from being a repeatable experiment, much less a model that can be followed elsewhere. The effects of WWII and the consequent rebuilding on Japan, and urbanization and the so-called "demographic dividend" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_dividend http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_dividend) on many other countries in the area, shouldn't be underestimated.

Locke1689 17y ago

Eh. Neither of you cited any empirical evidence for your claims. Jury's still out.

anamax 17y ago

> Asian countries have been doing this for years with remarkable success and it is a policy which we clearly need to copy. Even if Asian countries can consistently do that, which I doubt (there's a serious case of survivor's bias here), that doesn't imply that the US can. The American political class is fundamentally incompetent. After watching the health care discussion on Friday, did anyone think "those are the folks who I want running something important"? Whenever I see a politician, my reaction is thatt I don't want that person in charge of anything having to do with my life.