23 ms·

Oh boy, try looking outside America. The US is still the shining example of how to do things. Most of the world, even in Europe, are decades behind.

pretendscholar 7y ago
> Oh boy, try looking outside America. The US is still the shining example of how to do things. Most of the world, even in Europe, are decades behind. I might ask you to try your own advice. By what metric is Europe decades behind?
- hogFeast 7y ago
  The most important difference is management quality, that is generally bad almost everywhere but the US (you may say it isn't measurable, there is data on this and, anecdotally, I have seen the same thing...so I believe it). Others factors vary by country but: regulations on labour, regulations on business formation, regulations/subsidies limiting competition, poor/non-existent capital markets, corporatist industrial policies (i.e. Germany where you have large employers controlling the state and determining policy), regressive tax systems, trade unions (in some areas they work very well, in others they don't e.g. UK where you have a major political party that is controlled by trade unions). I think one important point too: the UK is very bad as well. It is often held up the nation that is closest to the US and this is definitely true in many areas - progressive tax system, low regulations, strong capital markets - but in terms of results it isn't even in the same ballpark. Management quality is a large part of this story (if you can find it online, there is a lot of research on productivity and management quality in the UK). This doesn't mean that every country is poor - Netherlands and Denmark, in particular, do some things very well - but is the whole area anywhere close to the US? No.
  - _1tan 7y ago
    Middle manager in Germany here, curious about what makes management in the US so successful or distinct - are you able to elaborate? I did notice that most of my management knowledge seems to originate in the US; very little original thoughts from other areas.
    - hogFeast 7y ago
      Your tone is indicative of the problem. If you view a good idea as a "US" idea then that is part of the problem. An idea is a good or bad regardless of who said it (I am in the UK, this happens all the time in UK companies...status and rank are everything, junior people can't have good ideas so off the cliff we go). The general difference is, imo, a more meritocratic society (ref the point above) but also a far deeper understanding of a business and what it is for (in the UK, most people who run businesses have no idea...although it is rarer now, I have talked to CEOs of publicly-listed billion pound companies who have no idea how to measure capital in their business, no idea how to measure returns or even what those measures mean...it is a clown show). The latter is a function of MBA training (you can get all this info yourself btw by just reading), lower share of family-owned businesses (this is a correlated factor, family-owned businesses in the US actually tend to be very well run...in Europe, they are far worse), and the importance of capital markets (in somewhere like Germany, all you need to do is impress your banker, most German bankers are clueless, and they will lend to you even if your business in insolvent...unsurprisingly, Germany's banking sector now looks insolvent so that process is inefficient...capital markets don't always work well but they impose far more discipline). Btw, there is a lot of research on this if you Google. Which I am sure is far more insightful than my random anecdotes and generalisations.
      - telotortium 7y ago
        What keywords should I search for? "us vs europe management quality" didn't result in anything obvious.
        hogFeast 7y ago
        https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/speech/2018/the-uks-productivity-problem-hub-no-spokes-speech-by-andy-haldane https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/speech/201... - by the BOE Chief Economist which refs some papers (the BOE also has papers they have done by it will take me a while to dig them out). The family management stuff should be easy to find but - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929119904000252 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092911990... - is an example.
  - theflyinghorse 7y ago
    How does any of this benefit your average American? The way I see it a broken bone or a pregnancy could very easily spell financial ruin for a whole family. Education costs are also off the charts! It's almost as if there are two ways to look at the economy of a country: one looks strictly at how the economy benefits the owners (not sure what the right word here is but I mean Bezos' of the America) and the other looks at the benefit the economy provides to the rest of the people.
    - hogFeast 7y ago
      Ah yes, you are correct. I see it now. Capitalism is weak and decadent. An all-turnip diet will benefit the average American. All power to the Soviets, all power to automotive factory no. 6, all power to our glorious leader, the turnip will bring the heal. The reason you are having this issue is precisely because you are thinking in terms of your two ways: a gain for one group can only come at the expense of another. Ironically, the reason the US is successful (and the reason why some countries in Europe are successful) is because this isn't true. If you think this is true of the US, you have not seen a society where there is actually true (you are just angry because you think everyone should suffer as much as you...unf, this is a common aspect of human nature). Btw, Americans rarely understand the problems that come with other health systems. I am in the UK, I spoke to someone yesterday who has severe mental health problems and they are on a range of drugs...a couple of weeks ago, they turned up to the pharmacy...no drugs. No explanation. Nothing. No drugs. We don't have them. You will have to stop using them. Why? Drug shortages, this happens in the UK because the NHS can't afford to pay the same prices as other countries and the UK market is tiny so we get shortages when prices rise. And some expensive drugs just aren't provided at all. If you have a rare type of cancer, no drugs (we have one of the worst records for cancer survival amongst developed countries). If you have a rare type of epilepsy, no drugs. It is important to actually do the research and look at these issues properly rather than the usual "hurr, bad thing happen...must be dis" (I have a relative with such a condition, the "policy" of the NHS is not to treat her...that is a quote from a doctor, it isn't the policy of the NHS to cure a human being).
  - eduren 7y ago
    Approaching this issue from the perspective of management quality is interesting. I'm curious what metrics/outcomes you are using to make your case. What specific benefits accrue to US corporations due to their advantageous managerial environment? Is it something along the axes of innovation, efficiency, or profitability? Keeping in mind that the article we're discussing already frames the discussion as (paraphrasing): US management and boards are great at their job, but are the assumptions behind corporate governance/stakeholding correct?
swiley 7y ago
Ah yes, Amtrack is an amazing experience compared to the European passenger rail network. US housing also extremely efficient for filtering unwanted people out of populated areas. Europeans could stand to learn a thing or two from that (although I've heard London is doing a good job of emulating us.)
- hogFeast 7y ago
  Ah, so you have actually have places to live in the US? In the UK, there are no new houses at all in most cities and developers aren't allowed to build new ones because of planning regulation (designed by people who already have houses in that area). Also, remember that the UK is a small island with a fairly large amount of people on it (and remember that population density numbers are skewed by Scotland which is the same size as England but has 7% of the population)...that kind of thing isn't obvious when you live somewhere with infinite land. Pointing to one or two things and saying: "Oh this is so terrible, we need to knock it all down" is not a smart approach. Most European countries have experimented with this (the UK went bankrupt doing this), it isn't a good idea (particularly when you have a system that is already the most successful).
  - eli_gottlieb 7y ago
    > Ah, so you have actually have places to live in the US? Only outside the East Coast and California metro areas.
    - snambi 7y ago
      USA has a lot of places. However, everyone wants to live in CA. That doesn't mean other areas are bad. They are very good.
      - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
        > everyone wants to live in CA Except for the people who actually live in CA. They all want to live in Oregon, Colorado or Texas.
mainliningfbs 7y ago
American is shining beacon of corruption and veiled fascism. Sure anyone can make it but it is a culture based on greed and consumerism. America is a one sided affair with the rest of the world. It extracts untold wealth from the rest of the world without facing any consequences. They are not ahead, they are just good at holding others down. Also, it doesn't use the metric system. Nothing ahead about that.
- dang 7y ago
  Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. The comment you replied to was a provocation, but each user here has the responsibility not to react to that by making the thread even worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
dang 7y ago
If you're going to post on a topic like this, please make sure it isn't generic and inflammatory, since that amounts to flamebait and will lead to a worse discussion (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21139182 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21139182). The way to do that is to avoid making grandiose claims on the large topic and instead make more specific statements including good information. Basically: less sugar more fibre. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- hogFeast 7y ago
  Yes, I agree. Definitely try to minimise posts with titles like "The American Corporation Is in Crisis". Stick to the data like: America being one of the productive economies in the world, American management being high-quality, American capital markets being high-quality...srs, it is amazing to me that you think you are being objective. You see this over and over here (probably due to the overrepresentation of engineer-types who don't understand how to argue or what an actual argument is...as in this case), the "wrong" facts being treated as subjective, the "right" facts being treated as objective. Btw, for any avoidance of doubt (because unf, you need to say this kind of thing on here otherwise the neckbeards will get triggered): I have postgrad qualification in studying this (economic history/ipe), I have studied this for most of my adult life, and I have practical knowledge of this analysing companies in Europe and US when I worked as an equity analyst. If you think I said anything subjective or controversial, you shouldn't be correcting other people. Keep doing God's work.

pretendscholar 7y ago

> Oh boy, try looking outside America. The US is still the shining example of how to do things. Most of the world, even in Europe, are decades behind. I might ask you to try your own advice. By what metric is Europe decades behind?

hogFeast 7y ago
The most important difference is management quality, that is generally bad almost everywhere but the US (you may say it isn't measurable, there is data on this and, anecdotally, I have seen the same thing...so I believe it). Others factors vary by country but: regulations on labour, regulations on business formation, regulations/subsidies limiting competition, poor/non-existent capital markets, corporatist industrial policies (i.e. Germany where you have large employers controlling the state and determining policy), regressive tax systems, trade unions (in some areas they work very well, in others they don't e.g. UK where you have a major political party that is controlled by trade unions). I think one important point too: the UK is very bad as well. It is often held up the nation that is closest to the US and this is definitely true in many areas - progressive tax system, low regulations, strong capital markets - but in terms of results it isn't even in the same ballpark. Management quality is a large part of this story (if you can find it online, there is a lot of research on productivity and management quality in the UK). This doesn't mean that every country is poor - Netherlands and Denmark, in particular, do some things very well - but is the whole area anywhere close to the US? No.
- _1tan 7y ago
  Middle manager in Germany here, curious about what makes management in the US so successful or distinct - are you able to elaborate? I did notice that most of my management knowledge seems to originate in the US; very little original thoughts from other areas.
  - hogFeast 7y ago
    Your tone is indicative of the problem. If you view a good idea as a "US" idea then that is part of the problem. An idea is a good or bad regardless of who said it (I am in the UK, this happens all the time in UK companies...status and rank are everything, junior people can't have good ideas so off the cliff we go). The general difference is, imo, a more meritocratic society (ref the point above) but also a far deeper understanding of a business and what it is for (in the UK, most people who run businesses have no idea...although it is rarer now, I have talked to CEOs of publicly-listed billion pound companies who have no idea how to measure capital in their business, no idea how to measure returns or even what those measures mean...it is a clown show). The latter is a function of MBA training (you can get all this info yourself btw by just reading), lower share of family-owned businesses (this is a correlated factor, family-owned businesses in the US actually tend to be very well run...in Europe, they are far worse), and the importance of capital markets (in somewhere like Germany, all you need to do is impress your banker, most German bankers are clueless, and they will lend to you even if your business in insolvent...unsurprisingly, Germany's banking sector now looks insolvent so that process is inefficient...capital markets don't always work well but they impose far more discipline). Btw, there is a lot of research on this if you Google. Which I am sure is far more insightful than my random anecdotes and generalisations.
    - telotortium 7y ago
      What keywords should I search for? "us vs europe management quality" didn't result in anything obvious.
      - hogFeast 7y ago
        https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/speech/2018/the-uks-productivity-problem-hub-no-spokes-speech-by-andy-haldane https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/speech/201... - by the BOE Chief Economist which refs some papers (the BOE also has papers they have done by it will take me a while to dig them out). The family management stuff should be easy to find but - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929119904000252 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092911990... - is an example.
- theflyinghorse 7y ago
  How does any of this benefit your average American? The way I see it a broken bone or a pregnancy could very easily spell financial ruin for a whole family. Education costs are also off the charts! It's almost as if there are two ways to look at the economy of a country: one looks strictly at how the economy benefits the owners (not sure what the right word here is but I mean Bezos' of the America) and the other looks at the benefit the economy provides to the rest of the people.
  - hogFeast 7y ago
    Ah yes, you are correct. I see it now. Capitalism is weak and decadent. An all-turnip diet will benefit the average American. All power to the Soviets, all power to automotive factory no. 6, all power to our glorious leader, the turnip will bring the heal. The reason you are having this issue is precisely because you are thinking in terms of your two ways: a gain for one group can only come at the expense of another. Ironically, the reason the US is successful (and the reason why some countries in Europe are successful) is because this isn't true. If you think this is true of the US, you have not seen a society where there is actually true (you are just angry because you think everyone should suffer as much as you...unf, this is a common aspect of human nature). Btw, Americans rarely understand the problems that come with other health systems. I am in the UK, I spoke to someone yesterday who has severe mental health problems and they are on a range of drugs...a couple of weeks ago, they turned up to the pharmacy...no drugs. No explanation. Nothing. No drugs. We don't have them. You will have to stop using them. Why? Drug shortages, this happens in the UK because the NHS can't afford to pay the same prices as other countries and the UK market is tiny so we get shortages when prices rise. And some expensive drugs just aren't provided at all. If you have a rare type of cancer, no drugs (we have one of the worst records for cancer survival amongst developed countries). If you have a rare type of epilepsy, no drugs. It is important to actually do the research and look at these issues properly rather than the usual "hurr, bad thing happen...must be dis" (I have a relative with such a condition, the "policy" of the NHS is not to treat her...that is a quote from a doctor, it isn't the policy of the NHS to cure a human being).
- eduren 7y ago
  Approaching this issue from the perspective of management quality is interesting. I'm curious what metrics/outcomes you are using to make your case. What specific benefits accrue to US corporations due to their advantageous managerial environment? Is it something along the axes of innovation, efficiency, or profitability? Keeping in mind that the article we're discussing already frames the discussion as (paraphrasing): US management and boards are great at their job, but are the assumptions behind corporate governance/stakeholding correct?

swiley 7y ago

Ah yes, Amtrack is an amazing experience compared to the European passenger rail network. US housing also extremely efficient for filtering unwanted people out of populated areas. Europeans could stand to learn a thing or two from that (although I've heard London is doing a good job of emulating us.)

hogFeast 7y ago
Ah, so you have actually have places to live in the US? In the UK, there are no new houses at all in most cities and developers aren't allowed to build new ones because of planning regulation (designed by people who already have houses in that area). Also, remember that the UK is a small island with a fairly large amount of people on it (and remember that population density numbers are skewed by Scotland which is the same size as England but has 7% of the population)...that kind of thing isn't obvious when you live somewhere with infinite land. Pointing to one or two things and saying: "Oh this is so terrible, we need to knock it all down" is not a smart approach. Most European countries have experimented with this (the UK went bankrupt doing this), it isn't a good idea (particularly when you have a system that is already the most successful).
- eli_gottlieb 7y ago
  > Ah, so you have actually have places to live in the US? Only outside the East Coast and California metro areas.
  - snambi 7y ago
    USA has a lot of places. However, everyone wants to live in CA. That doesn't mean other areas are bad. They are very good.
    - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
      > everyone wants to live in CA Except for the people who actually live in CA. They all want to live in Oregon, Colorado or Texas.

mainliningfbs 7y ago

American is shining beacon of corruption and veiled fascism. Sure anyone can make it but it is a culture based on greed and consumerism. America is a one sided affair with the rest of the world. It extracts untold wealth from the rest of the world without facing any consequences. They are not ahead, they are just good at holding others down. Also, it doesn't use the metric system. Nothing ahead about that.

dang 7y ago
Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. The comment you replied to was a provocation, but each user here has the responsibility not to react to that by making the thread even worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

dang 7y ago

If you're going to post on a topic like this, please make sure it isn't generic and inflammatory, since that amounts to flamebait and will lead to a worse discussion (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21139182 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21139182). The way to do that is to avoid making grandiose claims on the large topic and instead make more specific statements including good information. Basically: less sugar more fibre. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

hogFeast 7y ago
Yes, I agree. Definitely try to minimise posts with titles like "The American Corporation Is in Crisis". Stick to the data like: America being one of the productive economies in the world, American management being high-quality, American capital markets being high-quality...srs, it is amazing to me that you think you are being objective. You see this over and over here (probably due to the overrepresentation of engineer-types who don't understand how to argue or what an actual argument is...as in this case), the "wrong" facts being treated as subjective, the "right" facts being treated as objective. Btw, for any avoidance of doubt (because unf, you need to say this kind of thing on here otherwise the neckbeards will get triggered): I have postgrad qualification in studying this (economic history/ipe), I have studied this for most of my adult life, and I have practical knowledge of this analysing companies in Europe and US when I worked as an equity analyst. If you think I said anything subjective or controversial, you shouldn't be correcting other people. Keep doing God's work.