5 ms·

> China has its money where the action is. This has been absurdly obvious for about 3-5 years now. The knowledge of actual hardware creation & manufacturing ha

> China has its money where the action is. This has been absurdly obvious for about 3-5 years now. The knowledge of actual hardware creation & manufacturing has largely migrated to China (hello outsourcing). Costs of living in reasonably stable environments (required for broad innovation) in the US is absurdly high. Government support and funding for innovation - which is required for high value research - has been gutted since the Cold War. These things have a long-term effect. All of the above are USA policies driven by politics. They can all be 100% fixed with political muscle and will. Much like our infrastructure. We can fix it: we choose not to. China's government is not stupid; they can watch the US hamstring itself via libertarian policies and work to avoid such approaches. I don't like their approach to human rights, but they are working very hard to fund innovation and infrastructure.

space_fountain 8y ago
What do you mean by reasonably stable. Suburban Ohio is literally an order of magnitude cheaper than say San Francisco and Cleveland isn't that much more expensive or for that matter unstable.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- aphextron 8y ago
  >Suburban Ohio is literally an order of magnitude cheaper than say San Francisco and Cleveland isn't that much more expensive or for that matter unstable. Do you know what else is within 300 miles of Cleveland Ohio? Absolutely nothing.
  - ghostbrainalpha 8y ago
    New York City, Philidephia, Baltimore, Washington DC, Detroit, Cincinnati, Toronto, Indianapolis, Chicago..... All of these are about 400 miles away, some less than 300. And did you edit your comment, because I think it originally said 500 miles.
  - grandmczeb 8y ago
    > Do you know what else is within 300 miles of Cleveland Ohio? ~50 million people live within 300 miles of Cleveland vs about ~16 million within 300 miles of SF. https://www.freemaptools.com/find-population.htm https://www.freemaptools.com/find-population.htm
    - aphextron 8y ago
      A circular radius of Cleveland is meaningless because half the circle is in Canada. A large portion of that population would be metro Toronto. On top of that the absolute numbers don't matter at all; it's about density.
  - giffarage 8y ago
    This is wrong and condescending.
    - aphextron 8y ago
      Is it? Why? I grew up in Akron, the former Rubber Capital of the World. There is literally nothing in Northeast Ohio but cornfields, soybeans, brutal winters, and rusting artifacts of the 20th century economy. Columbus could be a good choice for growing tech firms to add a second HQ due to OSU being a pretty decent school, but Cleveland really has nothing going for it. The geographical advantages that led to it's existence and growth during the industrial revolution have gone and will never return.
      - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
        South eastern Ohio has some nice nature. And even Toledo isn’t that bad.
      - giffarage 8y ago
        As pointed out in other comments, there are multiple large cities within a 300 mile radius. Even if there weren't, saying there is "nothing" there dismisses the real lives and businesses that are there.
      - space_fountain 8y ago
        When did you move? I'm not going to argue that NE Ohio is the best place to live in the country or something, I was speaking very particularly about the region I was familiar with because it sounded like there were very broad statement being made. You are still speaking a bit too strongly though. There is plenty of things in NEO. For starts world class museums and cultural institutions (having been rich in the past helps).I'm living in San Francisco right now, but I could definitely see myself going back someday
  - sremani 8y ago
    Actually Columbus OH (2 hours from Cleveland) is considered the sweet-spot city, a third of US population lives less than 500 miles away from Columbus, OH.
  - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
    Clean air?
    - aphextron 8y ago
      https://blog.epa.gov/blog/wp-content/uploads/science/2014/04/Air-Quality-Awareness-Week.jpg https://blog.epa.gov/blog/wp-content/uploads/science/2014/04...
      - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
        Hint: America red is not the same as Chinese red. See: http://aqicn.org/map/northamerica/ http://aqicn.org/map/northamerica/ And compare to: http://aqicn.org/map/china/ http://aqicn.org/map/china/
- pnathan 8y ago
  Stable not the best word, apologies. Life stability was in my mind. - stable health insurance and medical coverage. - economy big & stable enough that when one job is lost, another can be found without substantial financial injury. - geographically dense and large network of innovative people (this requires a good university - or two). Essentially you need a place where you can take risks and fail without causing a total life crisis. that is why SV started as a thing: fruit farms with cheap land. Universities were nearby and the Cold War was in full force: a lot of funding was present. The interaction of knowledgeable people is a huge support base for increased research and innovation.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
AnthonyMouse 8y ago
> they can watch the US hamstring itself via libertarian policies The size of the US federal budget has only gone in one direction regardless of which party was in power, and it hasn't been to get smaller. And they keep passing anti-startup garbage like FOSTA or the incredible bureaucracy that de facto prohibits small businesses from participating in the finance or medical industries. These are not libertarian policies. The problem is they're spending trillions on unnecessary wars and buying the elderly vote with outrageously expensive program expansions, and then there is nothing left -- less than nothing, since it's all debt-financed -- to fund the actually-beneficial (and much less expensive) programs that you're asking for.
- SmellTheGlove 8y ago
  > The size of the US federal budget has only gone in one direction regardless of which party was in power, and it hasn't been to get smaller. And they keep passing anti-startup garbage like FOSTA or the incredible bureaucracy that de facto prohibits small businesses from participating in the finance or medical industries. These are not libertarian policies. Yup, all correct. I say this with the slight bias of a dual national, but if you want a glimpse into the future that current US policy gets you, look at Italy. And then keep in mind that Italy still provides education and healthcare. EDIT: Not sure why I'm getting downvoted. I didn't make this comment to be inflammatory, moreso to point out that our policy promotes wealth concentration and erodes middle class opportunities. I'm not suggesting that libertarian policies are a solution, nor that the US has adopted them. Just saying that the Italian regulatory environment favors incumbents and that my take is that we're headed in that direction as well via corporate capture. Italy's not a disaster - it's still the 9th largest economy in the world - but it certainly doesn't live up to its potential following its post-war boom.
- spamizbad 8y ago
  > These are not libertarian policies. The Iraq war had significant buy-in from (some now mainstream) libertarian writers and thinkers. For example, Megan McArdle, under the name "Jane Galt", wrote feverishly in favor of the war on terror and mocked those who opposed it. The libertarian argument was that by toppling dictatorships and theocracies, these "liberated" middle-eastern democracies would all have liberalized economies. I don't want to single out libertarians here though, I just want to point out interventionist policies have widespread support in the United States across the political spectrum (after all "even the liberal New Republic" supported it) and I don't see that trend reversing any time soon.

space_fountain 8y ago

What do you mean by reasonably stable. Suburban Ohio is literally an order of magnitude cheaper than say San Francisco and Cleveland isn't that much more expensive or for that matter unstable.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
aphextron 8y ago
>Suburban Ohio is literally an order of magnitude cheaper than say San Francisco and Cleveland isn't that much more expensive or for that matter unstable. Do you know what else is within 300 miles of Cleveland Ohio? Absolutely nothing.
- ghostbrainalpha 8y ago
  New York City, Philidephia, Baltimore, Washington DC, Detroit, Cincinnati, Toronto, Indianapolis, Chicago..... All of these are about 400 miles away, some less than 300. And did you edit your comment, because I think it originally said 500 miles.
- grandmczeb 8y ago
  > Do you know what else is within 300 miles of Cleveland Ohio? ~50 million people live within 300 miles of Cleveland vs about ~16 million within 300 miles of SF. https://www.freemaptools.com/find-population.htm https://www.freemaptools.com/find-population.htm
  - aphextron 8y ago
    A circular radius of Cleveland is meaningless because half the circle is in Canada. A large portion of that population would be metro Toronto. On top of that the absolute numbers don't matter at all; it's about density.
- giffarage 8y ago
  This is wrong and condescending.
  - aphextron 8y ago
    Is it? Why? I grew up in Akron, the former Rubber Capital of the World. There is literally nothing in Northeast Ohio but cornfields, soybeans, brutal winters, and rusting artifacts of the 20th century economy. Columbus could be a good choice for growing tech firms to add a second HQ due to OSU being a pretty decent school, but Cleveland really has nothing going for it. The geographical advantages that led to it's existence and growth during the industrial revolution have gone and will never return.
    - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
      South eastern Ohio has some nice nature. And even Toledo isn’t that bad.
    - giffarage 8y ago
      As pointed out in other comments, there are multiple large cities within a 300 mile radius. Even if there weren't, saying there is "nothing" there dismisses the real lives and businesses that are there.
    - space_fountain 8y ago
      When did you move? I'm not going to argue that NE Ohio is the best place to live in the country or something, I was speaking very particularly about the region I was familiar with because it sounded like there were very broad statement being made. You are still speaking a bit too strongly though. There is plenty of things in NEO. For starts world class museums and cultural institutions (having been rich in the past helps).I'm living in San Francisco right now, but I could definitely see myself going back someday
- sremani 8y ago
  Actually Columbus OH (2 hours from Cleveland) is considered the sweet-spot city, a third of US population lives less than 500 miles away from Columbus, OH.
- seanmcdirmid 8y ago
  Clean air?
  - aphextron 8y ago
    https://blog.epa.gov/blog/wp-content/uploads/science/2014/04/Air-Quality-Awareness-Week.jpg https://blog.epa.gov/blog/wp-content/uploads/science/2014/04...
    - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
      Hint: America red is not the same as Chinese red. See: http://aqicn.org/map/northamerica/ http://aqicn.org/map/northamerica/ And compare to: http://aqicn.org/map/china/ http://aqicn.org/map/china/
pnathan 8y ago
Stable not the best word, apologies. Life stability was in my mind. - stable health insurance and medical coverage. - economy big & stable enough that when one job is lost, another can be found without substantial financial injury. - geographically dense and large network of innovative people (this requires a good university - or two). Essentially you need a place where you can take risks and fail without causing a total life crisis. that is why SV started as a thing: fruit farms with cheap land. Universities were nearby and the Cold War was in full force: a lot of funding was present. The interaction of knowledgeable people is a huge support base for increased research and innovation.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

AnthonyMouse 8y ago

> they can watch the US hamstring itself via libertarian policies The size of the US federal budget has only gone in one direction regardless of which party was in power, and it hasn't been to get smaller. And they keep passing anti-startup garbage like FOSTA or the incredible bureaucracy that de facto prohibits small businesses from participating in the finance or medical industries. These are not libertarian policies. The problem is they're spending trillions on unnecessary wars and buying the elderly vote with outrageously expensive program expansions, and then there is nothing left -- less than nothing, since it's all debt-financed -- to fund the actually-beneficial (and much less expensive) programs that you're asking for.

SmellTheGlove 8y ago
> The size of the US federal budget has only gone in one direction regardless of which party was in power, and it hasn't been to get smaller. And they keep passing anti-startup garbage like FOSTA or the incredible bureaucracy that de facto prohibits small businesses from participating in the finance or medical industries. These are not libertarian policies. Yup, all correct. I say this with the slight bias of a dual national, but if you want a glimpse into the future that current US policy gets you, look at Italy. And then keep in mind that Italy still provides education and healthcare. EDIT: Not sure why I'm getting downvoted. I didn't make this comment to be inflammatory, moreso to point out that our policy promotes wealth concentration and erodes middle class opportunities. I'm not suggesting that libertarian policies are a solution, nor that the US has adopted them. Just saying that the Italian regulatory environment favors incumbents and that my take is that we're headed in that direction as well via corporate capture. Italy's not a disaster - it's still the 9th largest economy in the world - but it certainly doesn't live up to its potential following its post-war boom.
spamizbad 8y ago
> These are not libertarian policies. The Iraq war had significant buy-in from (some now mainstream) libertarian writers and thinkers. For example, Megan McArdle, under the name "Jane Galt", wrote feverishly in favor of the war on terror and mocked those who opposed it. The libertarian argument was that by toppling dictatorships and theocracies, these "liberated" middle-eastern democracies would all have liberalized economies. I don't want to single out libertarians here though, I just want to point out interventionist policies have widespread support in the United States across the political spectrum (after all "even the liberal New Republic" supported it) and I don't see that trend reversing any time soon.