8 ms·

The next decade or so is going to be very interesting. Western democracies have now overly partisan political system where most of the effort is spent in just c

The next decade or so is going to be very interesting. Western democracies have now overly partisan political system where most of the effort is spent in just cancelling out each other. Whatever remains is typically taken away by lobbyist that only help to further inflate shareholder value, which large majority of population isn’t. On the other hand authoritarian governments are able to move swiftly and decisively on issues and infrastructure. For example, government simply can deny cars with odd numbered license plates to drive on Mondays to reduce traffic and pollution. They are obviously rampant with corruption and bad decisions like creating ghost towns but marginal leftover value that remains seem to be still big enough for actual public works than in highly polarized democracy. I am not favoring one over another but long term consequences of this marginal efficiency could be highly compounding.

lazyjones 8y ago
> On the other hand authoritarian governments are able to move swiftly and decisively on issues and infrastructure. For example, government simply can deny cars with odd numbered license plates to drive on Mondays to reduce traffic and pollution. How is that only available to authoritarian governments? Athens (GR) has had an even/odd number plates policy since the 1980s... It's obviously true that the decision making process is easier in authoritarian regimes, but that's no excuse for the west simply not developing fast enough anymore. No big infrastructure projects (no matter how long decisions would take, nobody even tries), no real visions for Europe's future (Trump has one for the USA, as simple as it may seem, at least it exists). Laissez-faire attitude on unqualified and illegal mass migration (i.e. "come and take our stuff!"). We're so stuck that we won't even notice if one day China decides to wipe us off the face of the earth in order to replace us with a functioning society.
- tmountain 8y ago
  Trump’s “vision” is setting up an isolationist xenophobic plutocracy. I’m not sure if that really qualifies.
  - lazyjones 8y ago
    I was referring to his idea of bringing back manufacturing and jobs in general, his space policy and other such initiatives in the spirit of the 1960s and 1970s.
    - yardie 8y ago
      Except they never went away. Manufacturing is highly automated and specialized. If a highschool dropout could do it then eventually a simple robot will be able to do it. Politicians, executives, and union leaders should be taken to task for letting education and drop training fall so far behind. Until our space program gets out of politics it will continue to be a political football, some politicians will deem it too expensive, others will treat it as a jobs program with no objective. Look at his current cabinet? Do you think any of them will stick around for the next decade to shepherd a successful space program. I don't think any of them have the political capital to finish whatever he may start.
- Legogris 8y ago
  > How is that only available to authoritarian governments? Athens (GR) has had an even/odd number plates policy since the 1980s... Similar policy in Paris, which I don't think anyone could argue falls in the authoritative side of the spectrum. I do think that the poor examples don't take away the overall point they're making though.
the_watcher 8y ago
> that only help to further inflate shareholder value, which large majority of population isn’t. This is incorrect, at least in the US. A majority of Americans are shareholders (Somewhere between 51%[0] and 55%[1]), since if you have a 401k or IRA, you are a shareholder. [0] https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/scf17.pdf https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/scf17.pdf [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/211052/stock-ownership-down-among-older-higher-income.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/211052/stock-ownership-down-amo...
- 49531 8y ago
  While true that about half of Americans own stocks, 84% of all stocks owned by Americans belong to the wealthiest 10 percent of households.
  - lotsofpulp 8y ago
    Via the defined benefit pension promises, all taxpayers are invested in keeping asset prices climbing otherwise they will get wrecked by even higher taxes.
    - johntiger1 8y ago
      Most pensions are moving towards defined contribution plans now, so take that as you will (no promises)
    - TaylorAlexander 8y ago
      About half of Americans are too poor to pay federal income tax.
      - lotsofpulp 8y ago
        Every year, property taxes, vehicle registration fees, business taxes, professional licensing fees, and myriad other government fees keep going up. It's all taxes as far as an individual is concerned.
      - 8y ago
the_watcher 8y ago
> For example, government simply can deny cars with odd numbered license plates to drive on Mondays to reduce traffic and pollution. Isn't this the policy that mainly resulted in increasing the instance of dual car ownership?
- seanmcdirmid 8y ago
  Yes, but then you have to win another plate in a lottery (Beijing) or outbid for it in an auction (Shanghai).
dionian 8y ago
> Western democracies have now overly partisan political system where most of the effort is spent in just cancelling out each other. it is true that without democracy, governments can make a lot more changes a lot more quickly and easily. I prefer the government have to work hard to achieve the will of the people
- TaylorAlexander 8y ago
  Who says we have democracy in the west? The votes of USA’s congress often wildly deviate from public opinion and it seems hard to get anything done without lobbying dollars.
  - cr0sh 8y ago
    I wonder if we're all blinding heading into another "taxation without representation" debacle (aka revolution)? I mean, yeah - we technically have "representation" - but you'd have to be blind and willfully ignorant to believe that's really the truth. Unless "we" is a corporation or business interest, of course. Somehow, these fictional things have got more voice than actual people with voices. At some point in the future, if GAI actually occurs, they will have real voices - and then what? Right now, the claim is "but they are composed of people" - but in reality, even that is a fiction; the majority of the people in most businesses - even small businesses - have no real say in anything about the business or how it operates, or it's politics (or political leanings). People can threaten or actually "walk out" or whatnot, but if the business is large enough, they'll just find themselves out of work and replaced (probably not entirely legal, but the actual litigation of it after the fact can be dragged out for years). So again - just another fiction we tell ourselves for some reason. I'm not sure why we lie to ourselves so much about these things; probably because most people have no stomach for what real change would entail; the sacrifice, the blood, the pain - real pain. Terrible pain. But...if something isn't done...it's going to happen anyway. It always does, as anyone familiar with history knows.
    - rexpop 8y ago
      > Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
pascalxus 8y ago
It also shows what kind of growth and development is possible when a city isn't hamstrung with oppressive NIMBYs and regulations.
samlevine 8y ago
China has a lot of retail politics, it's just in the context of a single-party system. They're able to do a lot of things quickly, but principal–agent problems remain and there is a ton of corruption. Local party cadres are under a ton of pressure and frequently use overly large carrots and sticks to get stuff done. This isn't very efficient. You don't need to be super efficient when you're a developing country, but China is solidly middle-income. The things you need to do to go from 0 to 1 will eventually hurt you, and from their slowing GDP growth it's clear that it's already doing that.
- crimsonalucard 8y ago
  In terms of corruption the US is no different.
  - ha470 8y ago
    Having lived in both India and China for some time, I can assure you that the scale and magnitude is completely different.
    - crimsonalucard 8y ago
      I agree. The corruption in china is more explicit. While the corruption in the US goes through more official channels. It's harder to perceive in the united states. I would argue the net effect is similar though: The more money you have the more influence you have.
      - alehul 8y ago
        When someone says "the scale and magnitude is completely different," they aren't referring to "explicit." I know plenty of people from China who have talked about the crazy levels of corruption there. Some are related to those in power, and they've said it very much goes through 'official channels.'
        crimsonalucard 8y ago
chaostheory 8y ago
There's another bigger weakness for authoritarian governments: it limits innovation. I'm not saying that innovation is impossible in an authoritarian environment. I'm just saying it's much harder to achieve in one. Limits over which ideas everyone is able to share has a cost. Worrying about whether an idea will get you fined, jailed, or worse drains your creativity. The better the government is able to implement censorship, the worse the situation gets.
- wonnage 8y ago
  US is less innovative than China at this point, which disproves this
  - mensetmanusman 8y ago
    So Huawei stopped selling equipment supplied with Cisco manuals?
njepa 8y ago
> Western democracies have now overly partisan political system where most of the effort is spent in just cancelling out each other. I would suggest almost the opposite. I think the West suffers from having too much similar politics. Overall the developments have been largely the same, roughly following the UK and the US. Very few countries stand out, especially not as a result of recent policies. And if they do it isn't a positive thing.
caprese 8y ago
> Whatever remains is typically taken away by lobbyist that only help to further inflate shareholder value I honestly love this. The mechanisms of consensus have never been so unguarded while entrenched interests are guarding polar fringes of every party. This is great, for me. Have fun with the popular vote.
bitwize 8y ago
> Western democracies have now overly partisan political system where most of the effort is spent in just cancelling out each other. The USA was always like this. It was considered a feature, not a bug. A government that makes decisions quickly and executes them smoothly was thought of as very dangerous. > Whatever remains is typically taken away by lobbyist that only help to further inflate shareholder value, which large majority of population isn’t. This remains a problem.

lazyjones 8y ago

> On the other hand authoritarian governments are able to move swiftly and decisively on issues and infrastructure. For example, government simply can deny cars with odd numbered license plates to drive on Mondays to reduce traffic and pollution. How is that only available to authoritarian governments? Athens (GR) has had an even/odd number plates policy since the 1980s... It's obviously true that the decision making process is easier in authoritarian regimes, but that's no excuse for the west simply not developing fast enough anymore. No big infrastructure projects (no matter how long decisions would take, nobody even tries), no real visions for Europe's future (Trump has one for the USA, as simple as it may seem, at least it exists). Laissez-faire attitude on unqualified and illegal mass migration (i.e. "come and take our stuff!"). We're so stuck that we won't even notice if one day China decides to wipe us off the face of the earth in order to replace us with a functioning society.

tmountain 8y ago
Trump’s “vision” is setting up an isolationist xenophobic plutocracy. I’m not sure if that really qualifies.
- lazyjones 8y ago
  I was referring to his idea of bringing back manufacturing and jobs in general, his space policy and other such initiatives in the spirit of the 1960s and 1970s.
  - yardie 8y ago
    Except they never went away. Manufacturing is highly automated and specialized. If a highschool dropout could do it then eventually a simple robot will be able to do it. Politicians, executives, and union leaders should be taken to task for letting education and drop training fall so far behind. Until our space program gets out of politics it will continue to be a political football, some politicians will deem it too expensive, others will treat it as a jobs program with no objective. Look at his current cabinet? Do you think any of them will stick around for the next decade to shepherd a successful space program. I don't think any of them have the political capital to finish whatever he may start.
Legogris 8y ago
> How is that only available to authoritarian governments? Athens (GR) has had an even/odd number plates policy since the 1980s... Similar policy in Paris, which I don't think anyone could argue falls in the authoritative side of the spectrum. I do think that the poor examples don't take away the overall point they're making though.

the_watcher 8y ago

> that only help to further inflate shareholder value, which large majority of population isn’t. This is incorrect, at least in the US. A majority of Americans are shareholders (Somewhere between 51%[0] and 55%[1]), since if you have a 401k or IRA, you are a shareholder. [0] https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/scf17.pdf https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/scf17.pdf [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/211052/stock-ownership-down-among-older-higher-income.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/211052/stock-ownership-down-amo...

49531 8y ago
While true that about half of Americans own stocks, 84% of all stocks owned by Americans belong to the wealthiest 10 percent of households.
- lotsofpulp 8y ago
  Via the defined benefit pension promises, all taxpayers are invested in keeping asset prices climbing otherwise they will get wrecked by even higher taxes.
  - johntiger1 8y ago
    Most pensions are moving towards defined contribution plans now, so take that as you will (no promises)
  - TaylorAlexander 8y ago
    About half of Americans are too poor to pay federal income tax.
    - lotsofpulp 8y ago
      Every year, property taxes, vehicle registration fees, business taxes, professional licensing fees, and myriad other government fees keep going up. It's all taxes as far as an individual is concerned.
    - 8y ago

the_watcher 8y ago

> For example, government simply can deny cars with odd numbered license plates to drive on Mondays to reduce traffic and pollution. Isn't this the policy that mainly resulted in increasing the instance of dual car ownership?

seanmcdirmid 8y ago
Yes, but then you have to win another plate in a lottery (Beijing) or outbid for it in an auction (Shanghai).

dionian 8y ago

> Western democracies have now overly partisan political system where most of the effort is spent in just cancelling out each other. it is true that without democracy, governments can make a lot more changes a lot more quickly and easily. I prefer the government have to work hard to achieve the will of the people

TaylorAlexander 8y ago
Who says we have democracy in the west? The votes of USA’s congress often wildly deviate from public opinion and it seems hard to get anything done without lobbying dollars.
- cr0sh 8y ago
  I wonder if we're all blinding heading into another "taxation without representation" debacle (aka revolution)? I mean, yeah - we technically have "representation" - but you'd have to be blind and willfully ignorant to believe that's really the truth. Unless "we" is a corporation or business interest, of course. Somehow, these fictional things have got more voice than actual people with voices. At some point in the future, if GAI actually occurs, they will have real voices - and then what? Right now, the claim is "but they are composed of people" - but in reality, even that is a fiction; the majority of the people in most businesses - even small businesses - have no real say in anything about the business or how it operates, or it's politics (or political leanings). People can threaten or actually "walk out" or whatnot, but if the business is large enough, they'll just find themselves out of work and replaced (probably not entirely legal, but the actual litigation of it after the fact can be dragged out for years). So again - just another fiction we tell ourselves for some reason. I'm not sure why we lie to ourselves so much about these things; probably because most people have no stomach for what real change would entail; the sacrifice, the blood, the pain - real pain. Terrible pain. But...if something isn't done...it's going to happen anyway. It always does, as anyone familiar with history knows.
  - rexpop 8y ago
    > Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

pascalxus 8y ago

It also shows what kind of growth and development is possible when a city isn't hamstrung with oppressive NIMBYs and regulations.

samlevine 8y ago

China has a lot of retail politics, it's just in the context of a single-party system. They're able to do a lot of things quickly, but principal–agent problems remain and there is a ton of corruption. Local party cadres are under a ton of pressure and frequently use overly large carrots and sticks to get stuff done. This isn't very efficient. You don't need to be super efficient when you're a developing country, but China is solidly middle-income. The things you need to do to go from 0 to 1 will eventually hurt you, and from their slowing GDP growth it's clear that it's already doing that.

crimsonalucard 8y ago
In terms of corruption the US is no different.
- ha470 8y ago
  Having lived in both India and China for some time, I can assure you that the scale and magnitude is completely different.
  - crimsonalucard 8y ago
    I agree. The corruption in china is more explicit. While the corruption in the US goes through more official channels. It's harder to perceive in the united states. I would argue the net effect is similar though: The more money you have the more influence you have.
    - alehul 8y ago
      When someone says "the scale and magnitude is completely different," they aren't referring to "explicit." I know plenty of people from China who have talked about the crazy levels of corruption there. Some are related to those in power, and they've said it very much goes through 'official channels.'
      - crimsonalucard 8y ago

chaostheory 8y ago

There's another bigger weakness for authoritarian governments: it limits innovation. I'm not saying that innovation is impossible in an authoritarian environment. I'm just saying it's much harder to achieve in one. Limits over which ideas everyone is able to share has a cost. Worrying about whether an idea will get you fined, jailed, or worse drains your creativity. The better the government is able to implement censorship, the worse the situation gets.

wonnage 8y ago
US is less innovative than China at this point, which disproves this
- mensetmanusman 8y ago
  So Huawei stopped selling equipment supplied with Cisco manuals?

njepa 8y ago

> Western democracies have now overly partisan political system where most of the effort is spent in just cancelling out each other. I would suggest almost the opposite. I think the West suffers from having too much similar politics. Overall the developments have been largely the same, roughly following the UK and the US. Very few countries stand out, especially not as a result of recent policies. And if they do it isn't a positive thing.

caprese 8y ago

> Whatever remains is typically taken away by lobbyist that only help to further inflate shareholder value I honestly love this. The mechanisms of consensus have never been so unguarded while entrenched interests are guarding polar fringes of every party. This is great, for me. Have fun with the popular vote.

bitwize 8y ago

> Western democracies have now overly partisan political system where most of the effort is spent in just cancelling out each other. The USA was always like this. It was considered a feature, not a bug. A government that makes decisions quickly and executes them smoothly was thought of as very dangerous. > Whatever remains is typically taken away by lobbyist that only help to further inflate shareholder value, which large majority of population isn’t. This remains a problem.