4 ms·

I agree, without holding their people as slave workers they will not be able to compensate the lack of efficiency in resource allocation in the long run. People

I agree, without holding their people as slave workers they will not be able to compensate the lack of efficiency in resource allocation in the long run. People are accepting this right now because there is so much progress but if that progress stalls for a couple of years, because of some economic cycle e.g. they might lose their patience. This will be answered with more force/control of the government which in turn kills even more of the efficiency. In my view this is the most probable scenario but there are also some advantages they have. One I find particularly valuable is that most of its government is constituted of engineers (70% if I remember correctly) vs. in the US most are some sort of Lawyers (?). It is really interesting how this will play out in the mid/long term. I am kind of bullish on the western countries though they are all (especially here in europe) shooting their own feet by killing their most valuable asset: their free markets.

repolfx 7y ago
I don't think engineers have any special insight into running governments, or are even particularly likely to beat lawyers at running governments. I know it's tempting to believe this, given how many of us here are engineers, but I suspect the mentality of lawyers might be better suited to being democratic politicians than engineers and democratic politicians are clearly better suited to running countries than dictators - history is very clear on that point. What matters in a politician is primarily gathering wisdom from around the population and combining, synthesising it into policy. Reality is complex, nobody can see the big picture, there are millions of factors that can affect any nation-level decision. See it as hand-crafted logic (dictatorship/engineers) vs machine learning (votes/lawyers). Lawyering is likely especially suited to creating decent leaders because the heart of being a (trial) lawyer is debate and being able to represent people who you may not only disagree with, but actively suspect are criminals. You have to do your best to be the devils advocate anyway - which is a good skill to have if your job is or should be primarily implementing the decisions of the electorate.

repolfx 7y ago

I don't think engineers have any special insight into running governments, or are even particularly likely to beat lawyers at running governments. I know it's tempting to believe this, given how many of us here are engineers, but I suspect the mentality of lawyers might be better suited to being democratic politicians than engineers and democratic politicians are clearly better suited to running countries than dictators - history is very clear on that point. What matters in a politician is primarily gathering wisdom from around the population and combining, synthesising it into policy. Reality is complex, nobody can see the big picture, there are millions of factors that can affect any nation-level decision. See it as hand-crafted logic (dictatorship/engineers) vs machine learning (votes/lawyers). Lawyering is likely especially suited to creating decent leaders because the heart of being a (trial) lawyer is debate and being able to represent people who you may not only disagree with, but actively suspect are criminals. You have to do your best to be the devils advocate anyway - which is a good skill to have if your job is or should be primarily implementing the decisions of the electorate.