4 ms·

> I now use it as a rebuttal to the stock assumption that Western-style democracy, capitalism, and individualism are the only route to prosperity. There are ma

> I now use it as a rebuttal to the stock assumption that Western-style democracy, capitalism, and individualism are the only route to prosperity. There are many paths to prosperity. Are you suggesting it's preferable to forsake democracy, capitalism, and individualism and implement a system of governance that encourages mass murder [0], famine [1], human rights abuses [2], industrial espionage [3], unsafe goods [4], and scientific fraud [5]? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_China [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine [2] https://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/china/ https://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/china/ [3] https://www.newsweek.com/china-involved-90-percent-economic-espionage-and-industrial-secrets-theft-1255908 https://www.newsweek.com/china-involved-90-percent-economic-... [4] https://qz.com/1133484/buying-infant-milk-powder-is-still-a-really-scary-thing-in-china/ https://qz.com/1133484/buying-infant-milk-powder-is-still-a-... [5] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/13/world/asia/china-science-fraud-scandals.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/13/world/asia/china-science-...

beat 8y ago
Why are you assuming I'm "suggesting it's preferable"? Put down the pitchfork for a moment! I'm not arguing that Chinese-style communism is a better system. I'm arguing that the belief that western values and economics are the only path to prosperity is incorrect. I'd rather live in the American system. I'm sure there are a lot of people who grew up in China and would rather live in the Chinese system. As for your laundry list of "China bad!", I could come up with counterexamples of the US doing the exact same things at various points in our history. Chill.
- nickles 8y ago
  > Why are you assuming I'm "suggesting it's preferable"? I asked a question for clarification, beginning by agreeing with your comment about paths to prosperity. What pitchfork? As to why I sought clarification, you are claiming that China's prosperity is independent from Western values. However, much of China's success comes from theft of Western intellectual property. This IP was not produced in a vacuum; it is a product of Western values. In fact, some have argued the Age of Enlightenment occurred due to these values, which produced a remarkable (and lasting) acceleration in GDP growth. > As for your laundry list of "China bad!", I could come up with counterexamples of the US doing the exact same things at various points in our history. Here you engage in the logical fallacy of 'whataboutery'. First and foremost, I did not mention the United States in my comment, so I'm not sure why you invoke its history of misdeeds in the past. The United States has absolutely enforced abhorrent policy in the past. Without attempting to enumerate all: genocide, slavery, detonation of nuclear weapons, forcible sterilization, concentration camps, unethical medical experimentation. Now that we've gotten that out of the way, what bearing does this have on the fact that China is currently doing horrific things at a scale far greater than atrocities perpetrated by the US? If, instead of relying solely on GDP per capita, we factored human costs into our assessments, we might see that the economic picture is not quite as rosy. To clarify, suppose a human life is worth $8mm [0] and a closed economy that has only two people. If one were to kill the other and use the deceased's skin to make a tent, GDP (and GDP per capita) would have increased due to the production, but the value of human capital in the economy declined by $8mm. > Chill. It's not really necessary to write things like this, as it seems like you're trying to avoid the content of the discussion by (incorrectly) labeling me as upset or agitated. Also, I'd request that you stop downvoting me simply because you disagree. However, I assume that your (self-described) "progressive politics" [1] are motivating your decision to downvote more than the content, so I'm not holding out much hope. [0] https://www.theglobalist.com/the-cost-of-a-human-life-statistically-speaking/ https://www.theglobalist.com/the-cost-of-a-human-life-statis... [1] https://twitter.com/davestagner https://twitter.com/davestagner
  - beat 8y ago
    >Also, I'd request that you stop downvoting me simply because you disagree. However, I assume that your (self-described) "progressive politics" [1] are motivating your decision to downvote more than the content, so I'm not holding out much hope. I'm not downvoting you. I can't downvote you, per how HN software works - you can't downvote replies to your own comments. Sorry, you'll just have to figure out why you're alienating people other than me.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - beat 8y ago
    As for the rest of your arguments... >Here you engage in the logical fallacy of 'whataboutery'. I'm not the one who started it. I simply brought up China's remarkable economic success, and you responded with a laundry list of "China Bad!" that mostly had nothing to do with economics. >If, instead of relying solely on GDP per capita, we factored human costs into our assessments Sauce for the goose. Rather than the abstract theoretical exercise you presented, you should offer a measurable scale, so we can compare China to western nations. Otherwise, it's meaningless. Otherwise, I'll see your human costs and raise you a slavery. If you'd stop thinking about why China is more evil than the west for a bit and step back, you might see that economic acceleration from agrarian poverty to modern middle class is a widespread phenomenon that seems to happen to nations regardless of their history, language, culture, government, etc. A bad social structure eventually falls away and is replaced by a better one, and over the course of a couple of generations, the nation accelerates radically. It happened in China, in Iran, in Ireland, and many other seemingly unlikely places. Read Factfulness. It'll change your life.
    - nickles 8y ago
      > I simply brought up China's remarkable economic success, and you responded with a laundry list of "China Bad!" that mostly had nothing to do with economics. You're right that I insufficiently explained what I meant with the links. I'll break down how I felt the list had economic relevance: [0][1] ~55mm people died or were killed during the Great Leap Forward and the Chinese famine likely stemmed from it as well. Looking at a series of historical Chinese GDP data, you can see that these policies caused economic contraction of -26.6% at their peak. If evaluating the merits of economic systems, this is a clear failure. [2] China uses its human rights abuses to further its economy. Consider the harvest and sale of human organs [`]. That's clearly economic activity. It's also mortifying. Ultimately though, I'd say it's relevant to the discussion. [3] Industrial espionage has everything to do with economics. There's no doubt that China is the largest perpetrator of industrial espionage in the world. If you want to demonstrate that Western values aren't necessary to develop prosperity, it doesn't help to steal so much IP from the West. [4] Chinese consumers do not trust many consumable Chinese goods. That's certainly related to economics. In fact, it indicates weakness in the Chinese regulatory regime. I'm not informed enough to posit why this is, but my understanding is that foreign consumable goods command a premium because of it. [5] Science and technology are major drivers of economic growth. Fraudulent research undermines trust in the published body of research, making it more difficult to perform science in the future. Hopefully you can see the economic relevance now. I'm happy to make lists of problems with Western economies, of which there are many, but I won't pretend China is a paragon of economic development. > Sauce for the goose. Rather than the abstract theoretical exercise you presented, you should offer a measurable scale, so we can compare China to western nations. Otherwise, it's meaningless. Otherwise, I'll see your human costs and raise you a slavery. The exercise was simply to demonstrate that an economy is more than just GDP. As for hard numbers, consider the 55mm killed in the Great Leap Forward. Although I had already mentioned slavery as an atrocity perpetrated by the US, I'll provide numbers. In 1860 there were 3.9mm slaves in the United States. Approximately 12.5mm slaves landed in the US during the slave trade [^]. Since we live in the present and not history, let me provide some current statistics. 1mm - 3mm people are currently in concentration camps in Xinjiang [!]. 70mm Falun Gong practitioners are prohibited from their beliefs [~]. Your argument still engages in whataboutism. In July you tweeted [#]: > Whataboutism is a lazy and uninteresting argument. It’s what you use when you don’t like someone’s point, but don’t have a solid argument against it. If you’re using “But what about...?” as the basis of a rebuttal, check and make sure you’re not just being dumb. And you are attempting to put words in my mouth here: > If you'd stop thinking about why China is more evil than the west I never stated that I believe China to be evil or western countries to be good. In fact, I consider China's economic development to be a phenomenal advancement for human welfare. However, that is not what's being discussed. We are considering whether China's prosperity could have occurred without the existence of Western values. > A bad social structure eventually falls away and is replaced by a better one, and over the course of a couple of generations, the nation accelerates radically. Ideally this is what happens. Economic growth models (like Solow) indicate that this is an expected outcome over time. However, there are no guarantees. Structural phenomena impact this quite a bit. Countries with better infrastructure, physical, legal, and otherwise, should enjoy higher rates of growth. Yet many developing countries have less developed infrastructure. This serves as an impediment to such economic convergence. > seems to happen to nations regardless of their history, language, culture, government This is obviously not true. Corruption appears to harm economic growth (most strongly in the medium term) [<]. Argentina, had the largest economy in the world in 1895. Poor decisions on the part of the government caused a century of economic turmoil. My understanding that corruption is simultaneously a government and a cultural phenomenon, so you can see that history, culture, and government can have measurable impacts on economic growth. [`] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Gong_practitioners_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Go... [^] https://www.theroot.com/slavery-by-the-numbers-1790874492 https://www.theroot.com/slavery-by-the-numbers-1790874492 [!] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps [~] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_Gong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_Gong [#] https://twitter.com/davestagner/status/1021810579890159616 https://twitter.com/davestagner/status/1021810579890159616 [<] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1331677X.2016.1169701 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1331677X.2016.11... [>] https://panampost.com/marcelo-duclos/2018/04/14/in-1895-argentina-had-the-worlds-highest-gdp-per-capita-what-went-wrong/?cn-reloaded=1 https://panampost.com/marcelo-duclos/2018/04/14/in-1895-arge...

beat 8y ago

Why are you assuming I'm "suggesting it's preferable"? Put down the pitchfork for a moment! I'm not arguing that Chinese-style communism is a better system. I'm arguing that the belief that western values and economics are the only path to prosperity is incorrect. I'd rather live in the American system. I'm sure there are a lot of people who grew up in China and would rather live in the Chinese system. As for your laundry list of "China bad!", I could come up with counterexamples of the US doing the exact same things at various points in our history. Chill.

nickles 8y ago
> Why are you assuming I'm "suggesting it's preferable"? I asked a question for clarification, beginning by agreeing with your comment about paths to prosperity. What pitchfork? As to why I sought clarification, you are claiming that China's prosperity is independent from Western values. However, much of China's success comes from theft of Western intellectual property. This IP was not produced in a vacuum; it is a product of Western values. In fact, some have argued the Age of Enlightenment occurred due to these values, which produced a remarkable (and lasting) acceleration in GDP growth. > As for your laundry list of "China bad!", I could come up with counterexamples of the US doing the exact same things at various points in our history. Here you engage in the logical fallacy of 'whataboutery'. First and foremost, I did not mention the United States in my comment, so I'm not sure why you invoke its history of misdeeds in the past. The United States has absolutely enforced abhorrent policy in the past. Without attempting to enumerate all: genocide, slavery, detonation of nuclear weapons, forcible sterilization, concentration camps, unethical medical experimentation. Now that we've gotten that out of the way, what bearing does this have on the fact that China is currently doing horrific things at a scale far greater than atrocities perpetrated by the US? If, instead of relying solely on GDP per capita, we factored human costs into our assessments, we might see that the economic picture is not quite as rosy. To clarify, suppose a human life is worth $8mm [0] and a closed economy that has only two people. If one were to kill the other and use the deceased's skin to make a tent, GDP (and GDP per capita) would have increased due to the production, but the value of human capital in the economy declined by $8mm. > Chill. It's not really necessary to write things like this, as it seems like you're trying to avoid the content of the discussion by (incorrectly) labeling me as upset or agitated. Also, I'd request that you stop downvoting me simply because you disagree. However, I assume that your (self-described) "progressive politics" [1] are motivating your decision to downvote more than the content, so I'm not holding out much hope. [0] https://www.theglobalist.com/the-cost-of-a-human-life-statistically-speaking/ https://www.theglobalist.com/the-cost-of-a-human-life-statis... [1] https://twitter.com/davestagner https://twitter.com/davestagner
- beat 8y ago
  >Also, I'd request that you stop downvoting me simply because you disagree. However, I assume that your (self-described) "progressive politics" [1] are motivating your decision to downvote more than the content, so I'm not holding out much hope. I'm not downvoting you. I can't downvote you, per how HN software works - you can't downvote replies to your own comments. Sorry, you'll just have to figure out why you're alienating people other than me.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- beat 8y ago
  As for the rest of your arguments... >Here you engage in the logical fallacy of 'whataboutery'. I'm not the one who started it. I simply brought up China's remarkable economic success, and you responded with a laundry list of "China Bad!" that mostly had nothing to do with economics. >If, instead of relying solely on GDP per capita, we factored human costs into our assessments Sauce for the goose. Rather than the abstract theoretical exercise you presented, you should offer a measurable scale, so we can compare China to western nations. Otherwise, it's meaningless. Otherwise, I'll see your human costs and raise you a slavery. If you'd stop thinking about why China is more evil than the west for a bit and step back, you might see that economic acceleration from agrarian poverty to modern middle class is a widespread phenomenon that seems to happen to nations regardless of their history, language, culture, government, etc. A bad social structure eventually falls away and is replaced by a better one, and over the course of a couple of generations, the nation accelerates radically. It happened in China, in Iran, in Ireland, and many other seemingly unlikely places. Read Factfulness. It'll change your life.
  - nickles 8y ago
    > I simply brought up China's remarkable economic success, and you responded with a laundry list of "China Bad!" that mostly had nothing to do with economics. You're right that I insufficiently explained what I meant with the links. I'll break down how I felt the list had economic relevance: [0][1] ~55mm people died or were killed during the Great Leap Forward and the Chinese famine likely stemmed from it as well. Looking at a series of historical Chinese GDP data, you can see that these policies caused economic contraction of -26.6% at their peak. If evaluating the merits of economic systems, this is a clear failure. [2] China uses its human rights abuses to further its economy. Consider the harvest and sale of human organs [`]. That's clearly economic activity. It's also mortifying. Ultimately though, I'd say it's relevant to the discussion. [3] Industrial espionage has everything to do with economics. There's no doubt that China is the largest perpetrator of industrial espionage in the world. If you want to demonstrate that Western values aren't necessary to develop prosperity, it doesn't help to steal so much IP from the West. [4] Chinese consumers do not trust many consumable Chinese goods. That's certainly related to economics. In fact, it indicates weakness in the Chinese regulatory regime. I'm not informed enough to posit why this is, but my understanding is that foreign consumable goods command a premium because of it. [5] Science and technology are major drivers of economic growth. Fraudulent research undermines trust in the published body of research, making it more difficult to perform science in the future. Hopefully you can see the economic relevance now. I'm happy to make lists of problems with Western economies, of which there are many, but I won't pretend China is a paragon of economic development. > Sauce for the goose. Rather than the abstract theoretical exercise you presented, you should offer a measurable scale, so we can compare China to western nations. Otherwise, it's meaningless. Otherwise, I'll see your human costs and raise you a slavery. The exercise was simply to demonstrate that an economy is more than just GDP. As for hard numbers, consider the 55mm killed in the Great Leap Forward. Although I had already mentioned slavery as an atrocity perpetrated by the US, I'll provide numbers. In 1860 there were 3.9mm slaves in the United States. Approximately 12.5mm slaves landed in the US during the slave trade [^]. Since we live in the present and not history, let me provide some current statistics. 1mm - 3mm people are currently in concentration camps in Xinjiang [!]. 70mm Falun Gong practitioners are prohibited from their beliefs [~]. Your argument still engages in whataboutism. In July you tweeted [#]: > Whataboutism is a lazy and uninteresting argument. It’s what you use when you don’t like someone’s point, but don’t have a solid argument against it. If you’re using “But what about...?” as the basis of a rebuttal, check and make sure you’re not just being dumb. And you are attempting to put words in my mouth here: > If you'd stop thinking about why China is more evil than the west I never stated that I believe China to be evil or western countries to be good. In fact, I consider China's economic development to be a phenomenal advancement for human welfare. However, that is not what's being discussed. We are considering whether China's prosperity could have occurred without the existence of Western values. > A bad social structure eventually falls away and is replaced by a better one, and over the course of a couple of generations, the nation accelerates radically. Ideally this is what happens. Economic growth models (like Solow) indicate that this is an expected outcome over time. However, there are no guarantees. Structural phenomena impact this quite a bit. Countries with better infrastructure, physical, legal, and otherwise, should enjoy higher rates of growth. Yet many developing countries have less developed infrastructure. This serves as an impediment to such economic convergence. > seems to happen to nations regardless of their history, language, culture, government This is obviously not true. Corruption appears to harm economic growth (most strongly in the medium term) [<]. Argentina, had the largest economy in the world in 1895. Poor decisions on the part of the government caused a century of economic turmoil. My understanding that corruption is simultaneously a government and a cultural phenomenon, so you can see that history, culture, and government can have measurable impacts on economic growth. [`] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Gong_practitioners_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Go... [^] https://www.theroot.com/slavery-by-the-numbers-1790874492 https://www.theroot.com/slavery-by-the-numbers-1790874492 [!] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps [~] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_Gong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_Gong [#] https://twitter.com/davestagner/status/1021810579890159616 https://twitter.com/davestagner/status/1021810579890159616 [<] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1331677X.2016.1169701 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1331677X.2016.11... [>] https://panampost.com/marcelo-duclos/2018/04/14/in-1895-argentina-had-the-worlds-highest-gdp-per-capita-what-went-wrong/?cn-reloaded=1 https://panampost.com/marcelo-duclos/2018/04/14/in-1895-arge...