5 ms·

Very interesting. It touches on something I've been thinking about lately. The book Why Nations Fail [1][2] makes an argument very similar to yours that there a

by hencq 9y ago

Very interesting. It touches on something I've been thinking about lately. The book Why Nations Fail [1][2] makes an argument very similar to yours that there are two factors that determine (economic) success of a nation: 1) inclusive economic systems and 2) inclusive political systems. They argue that these can form a virtuous cycle where they enhance themselves. However, if nations don't have inclusive systems, they tend to form a vicious cycle. They give the example of Venice which had (for the time) relatively inclusive systems, allowing a a middle class to rise and generate wealth for the city. This new elite started to limit political inclusiveness to protect their wealth. This tipped the scale back to extractive systems. By the 1500s Venice was in decline. This example makes me wonder if we're headed that way. In Hong Kong -- but also e.g. in the US -- it seems there's a class of mega rich that are moving more and more into rent seeking behavior and greater income inequality. If the book's theory is right this will lead to political systems to become less inclusive over time, which will eventually lead to economic decline. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Nations_Fail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Nations_Fail [2] http://www.economist.com/node/21549911 http://www.economist.com/node/21549911

pm90 9y ago
Yes this is exactly correct. Which is why rising income inequality is hugely bad news for the US. But short of going back to higher taxation, I don't see the situation improving for the US. The rich will Marshall all their significant resources to fight tax increases. Just see the amount of money and effort Koch brothers have put into corrupting the system! It is deeply disturbing. Also, titans of economy should not be given the reins of running the country, no matter how qualified they might be. They already have a lot of power. In poorer countries, political ascendants are shot dead. In the US, you have attack ads, smear campaigns etc.
- dasil003 9y ago
  In the US titans of the economy are given the reins of the country even being totally unqualified. In fact, the anti-intellectual streak is so strong, that incomprehensible slogan babble has proven to be a very successful strategy in convincing the average blue collar worker that the most elite of the elite silver-spoon nepotists will somehow represent their interests. Frankly with the level which facts and reason have been shown to be utterly useless in the political arena, there's no way we'll avoid this fate unless the 1% themselves come to the conclusion that their lobbying and consolidation of power will ultimately destroy the country. However I'm not holding my breath for this to happen since game theory and Upton Sinclair inform us that's not how human interest generally works.
  - jjt-yn_t 9y ago
    Ah, but the economy is in debt, and a few of the persons who make decisions relevant to that factor, are competent to be fair and impartial in a redress of that issue, at least if history is our guide. One may hope. One may hope also for a peaceful outcome for Hong Kong and its peoples, but beyond my expertise to do all but pray within this YN platform, for today at least. Thanks for reading.
  - mistermann 9y ago
    Are you implying the Democrats were at all opposed to the 1%? For many, Trump was a hail mary protest vote, that has failed unfortunately.
tesators 9y ago
But Hong Kong became prosperous during a time when it didn't have either of those. During the booming 70s-90s, just about all high level government officials were appointed by the British. In addition, most of the upper class were British as well. Local Hongkongers were often second class citizens. Likewise, when Singapore, Korea, and Taiwan were booming, they were essentially dictatorships. Heck, compare South Africa and Zimbabwe during the apartheid era to now.
- rangibaby 9y ago
  What do think about Japan? They became the richest country in Asia while being a democracy. Chauvinists don't like to admit it but they are at least partly responsible for the ROC and ROK's success too. > Heck, compare South Africa and Zimbabwe during the apartheid era to now. What happened a shame but the whites in those country are now sleeping in the bed they made.
  - alphonsegaston 9y ago
    Japan has not functionally been a democracy since the 1960s, when US intelligence services funded a right-wing takeover of their government that has, with little interruption, remained in place. Its wealth is largely the product of it being the primary client state of the US empire in SE Asia. The current leader, Abe Shinzo, is actively working on dismantling what little semblance of democracy remains, including silencing the press and passing laws to lock up anyone who "plans to protest" against his government. http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/09/world/cia-spent-millions-to-support-japanese-right-in-50-s-and-60-s.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/09/world/cia-spent-millions-t... https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/05/27/the-silencing-of-japans-free-press-shinzo-abe-media/amp/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/05/27/the-silencing-of-japans... http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/03/21/national/crime-legal/controversial-conspiracy-bill-approved-by-abe-cabinet/ http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/03/21/national/crime-l...
  - vkou 9y ago
    The ROK was a wild economic success when it was a dictatorship that tortured and dissapeared political dissidents. I think economic success has more to do with access to American markets, and being a 'strategic partner' in cold war geo-political games, then it did with your form of government.

by hencq 9y ago

pm90 9y ago

Yes this is exactly correct. Which is why rising income inequality is hugely bad news for the US. But short of going back to higher taxation, I don't see the situation improving for the US. The rich will Marshall all their significant resources to fight tax increases. Just see the amount of money and effort Koch brothers have put into corrupting the system! It is deeply disturbing. Also, titans of economy should not be given the reins of running the country, no matter how qualified they might be. They already have a lot of power. In poorer countries, political ascendants are shot dead. In the US, you have attack ads, smear campaigns etc.

dasil003 9y ago
In the US titans of the economy are given the reins of the country even being totally unqualified. In fact, the anti-intellectual streak is so strong, that incomprehensible slogan babble has proven to be a very successful strategy in convincing the average blue collar worker that the most elite of the elite silver-spoon nepotists will somehow represent their interests. Frankly with the level which facts and reason have been shown to be utterly useless in the political arena, there's no way we'll avoid this fate unless the 1% themselves come to the conclusion that their lobbying and consolidation of power will ultimately destroy the country. However I'm not holding my breath for this to happen since game theory and Upton Sinclair inform us that's not how human interest generally works.
- jjt-yn_t 9y ago
  Ah, but the economy is in debt, and a few of the persons who make decisions relevant to that factor, are competent to be fair and impartial in a redress of that issue, at least if history is our guide. One may hope. One may hope also for a peaceful outcome for Hong Kong and its peoples, but beyond my expertise to do all but pray within this YN platform, for today at least. Thanks for reading.
- mistermann 9y ago
  Are you implying the Democrats were at all opposed to the 1%? For many, Trump was a hail mary protest vote, that has failed unfortunately.

tesators 9y ago

But Hong Kong became prosperous during a time when it didn't have either of those. During the booming 70s-90s, just about all high level government officials were appointed by the British. In addition, most of the upper class were British as well. Local Hongkongers were often second class citizens. Likewise, when Singapore, Korea, and Taiwan were booming, they were essentially dictatorships. Heck, compare South Africa and Zimbabwe during the apartheid era to now.

rangibaby 9y ago
What do think about Japan? They became the richest country in Asia while being a democracy. Chauvinists don't like to admit it but they are at least partly responsible for the ROC and ROK's success too. > Heck, compare South Africa and Zimbabwe during the apartheid era to now. What happened a shame but the whites in those country are now sleeping in the bed they made.
- alphonsegaston 9y ago
  Japan has not functionally been a democracy since the 1960s, when US intelligence services funded a right-wing takeover of their government that has, with little interruption, remained in place. Its wealth is largely the product of it being the primary client state of the US empire in SE Asia. The current leader, Abe Shinzo, is actively working on dismantling what little semblance of democracy remains, including silencing the press and passing laws to lock up anyone who "plans to protest" against his government. http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/09/world/cia-spent-millions-to-support-japanese-right-in-50-s-and-60-s.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/09/world/cia-spent-millions-t... https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/05/27/the-silencing-of-japans-free-press-shinzo-abe-media/amp/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/05/27/the-silencing-of-japans... http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/03/21/national/crime-legal/controversial-conspiracy-bill-approved-by-abe-cabinet/ http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/03/21/national/crime-l...
- vkou 9y ago
  The ROK was a wild economic success when it was a dictatorship that tortured and dissapeared political dissidents. I think economic success has more to do with access to American markets, and being a 'strategic partner' in cold war geo-political games, then it did with your form of government.