4 ms·

Is there actual evidence for this? That governments aren't as effective at producing things. This gets bandied about a lot but I'm not sure it's true. I think g

Is there actual evidence for this? That governments aren't as effective at producing things. This gets bandied about a lot but I'm not sure it's true. I think governments can be highly effective at producing things.

DenisM 7y ago
The evidence was presented 50 years ago under the label of Soviet Union. USSR couldn’t produce shit.
- geomark 7y ago
  Yet they somehow beat the US to space. And for some reason the US is still buying rocket engines from Russia.
  - jonathankoren 7y ago
    Rocket engine purchases were/are a strategic decision to keep the rocket scientists employed rather than having them sell there wares on the black market. I thought this was common knowledge for 30 years.
    - geomark 7y ago
      Then why all the angst among US military and government about being unable for so long to produce their own rockets?
      - lightgreen 7y ago
        Why produce something when you can buy it cheaper? Economy 101.
        salawat 7y ago
        Counterpoint: Global geopolitics and Military Logistical Strategy 101: sometimes you can't trust who you're buying that widget from when the widget in question has a significant contribution to maintaining National Security. There are also risks to having someone else manufacture a widget that incorporates technology you'd rather not spread around. This is why there will always be at least one domestic chip foundry, and most of the critical components of ICBM's /nuclear weapons are manufactured domestically as I understand it. Medical equipment also falls under that umbrella. Hell, even taps and dies do. God bless Admiral Rickover in that regard.
      - jonathankoren 7y ago
        This isn’t an opposing point. You want both.
  - redis_mlc 7y ago
    > Yet they somehow beat the US to space. Somehow? With captured German rocket scientists. Same as USA.
    - lightgreen 7y ago
      They actually didn’t. German rocket scientists were smart people and they surrendered to US to avoid horror of dealing with NKVD. That said, there are reasons why USSR was first in space. For example, USSR deliberately ignored human life cost. In particular, they seriously considered first human flight to be a failure, so they announced it publicly only after Gagarin landed successfully.
      - jjeaff 7y ago
        It is well documented that some Nazi scientists worked on Russian rocket programs after ww2.
        lightgreen 7y ago
        Some, yes, but I think most of them went to US.
  - lightgreen 7y ago
    They got first to space, but people were starving, healthcare was shit, there were no freedom (including no freedom of moving within USSR), and generally quality of life was very poor. Hardly an achievement. If these rocket engines are cheaper, why not buy something from someone who is producing them below production cost? Good for US, they save money.
- antpol 7y ago
  During crisis times wild [T-34](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34) appears and overwhelms with numbers and firepower/versatility
  - redis_mlc 7y ago
    Well ... kind of. Stalin fleeced the Kuleks to pay for Americans to build factories just before WW2, after Ford's River Rouge industrial city was completed. He did a good job on T-34 production, but around half of Soviet armaments came from the USA during WW2. The tanks were directly driven to the front - no parking lot needed! :) Stalin is portayed as a monster because he was. But he was also the great leader his country needed at that time.
    - lightgreen 7y ago
      No he wasn’t British Empire and US managed well without such a horrible dictator.
  - lightgreen 7y ago
    Because USSR was doing a huge land war. British empire did war mostly on the sea, so US and British Empire were much better at producing ships, aircrafts, and also radio, radars and other electronics. Tanks is good but it is much less important than strategy, logistics, food, drugs and saving human lives. USSR killed a huge number of own citizens (including execution of so called deserters). Well, good for the rest of allies.
- wwweston 7y ago
  It often couldn't figure out how to produce enough of the right things -- pricing signals were better across a wide variety of consumer goods. It did pretty well at some things. Pricing signals are also bad at some things. Saying "the government is bad at producing things" is an overgeneralization. It'd be bad to put it in charge of producing everything. But putting markets in charge of producing everything has points of failure too, which is why we're having this conversation.
  - lightgreen 7y ago
    > But putting markets in charge of producing everything has points of failure too No it doesn’t. As soon as governments clearly states that they want to purchase a hundred billion masks and ventilators, market will react very quickly. They government did not post that request yet.
jjeaff 7y ago
Read up on Venezuela's oil problem. They seized the oil from private entities and then royally destroyed the entire industry as the equipment fell into disrepair and production efficiency fell until nearly stopping.

DenisM 7y ago

The evidence was presented 50 years ago under the label of Soviet Union. USSR couldn’t produce shit.

geomark 7y ago
Yet they somehow beat the US to space. And for some reason the US is still buying rocket engines from Russia.
- jonathankoren 7y ago
  Rocket engine purchases were/are a strategic decision to keep the rocket scientists employed rather than having them sell there wares on the black market. I thought this was common knowledge for 30 years.
  - geomark 7y ago
    Then why all the angst among US military and government about being unable for so long to produce their own rockets?
    - lightgreen 7y ago
      Why produce something when you can buy it cheaper? Economy 101.
      - salawat 7y ago
        Counterpoint: Global geopolitics and Military Logistical Strategy 101: sometimes you can't trust who you're buying that widget from when the widget in question has a significant contribution to maintaining National Security. There are also risks to having someone else manufacture a widget that incorporates technology you'd rather not spread around. This is why there will always be at least one domestic chip foundry, and most of the critical components of ICBM's /nuclear weapons are manufactured domestically as I understand it. Medical equipment also falls under that umbrella. Hell, even taps and dies do. God bless Admiral Rickover in that regard.
    - jonathankoren 7y ago
      This isn’t an opposing point. You want both.
- redis_mlc 7y ago
  > Yet they somehow beat the US to space. Somehow? With captured German rocket scientists. Same as USA.
  - lightgreen 7y ago
    They actually didn’t. German rocket scientists were smart people and they surrendered to US to avoid horror of dealing with NKVD. That said, there are reasons why USSR was first in space. For example, USSR deliberately ignored human life cost. In particular, they seriously considered first human flight to be a failure, so they announced it publicly only after Gagarin landed successfully.
    - jjeaff 7y ago
      It is well documented that some Nazi scientists worked on Russian rocket programs after ww2.
      - lightgreen 7y ago
        Some, yes, but I think most of them went to US.
- lightgreen 7y ago
  They got first to space, but people were starving, healthcare was shit, there were no freedom (including no freedom of moving within USSR), and generally quality of life was very poor. Hardly an achievement. If these rocket engines are cheaper, why not buy something from someone who is producing them below production cost? Good for US, they save money.
antpol 7y ago
During crisis times wild [T-34](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34) appears and overwhelms with numbers and firepower/versatility
- redis_mlc 7y ago
  Well ... kind of. Stalin fleeced the Kuleks to pay for Americans to build factories just before WW2, after Ford's River Rouge industrial city was completed. He did a good job on T-34 production, but around half of Soviet armaments came from the USA during WW2. The tanks were directly driven to the front - no parking lot needed! :) Stalin is portayed as a monster because he was. But he was also the great leader his country needed at that time.
  - lightgreen 7y ago
    No he wasn’t British Empire and US managed well without such a horrible dictator.
- lightgreen 7y ago
  Because USSR was doing a huge land war. British empire did war mostly on the sea, so US and British Empire were much better at producing ships, aircrafts, and also radio, radars and other electronics. Tanks is good but it is much less important than strategy, logistics, food, drugs and saving human lives. USSR killed a huge number of own citizens (including execution of so called deserters). Well, good for the rest of allies.
wwweston 7y ago
It often couldn't figure out how to produce enough of the right things -- pricing signals were better across a wide variety of consumer goods. It did pretty well at some things. Pricing signals are also bad at some things. Saying "the government is bad at producing things" is an overgeneralization. It'd be bad to put it in charge of producing everything. But putting markets in charge of producing everything has points of failure too, which is why we're having this conversation.
- lightgreen 7y ago
  > But putting markets in charge of producing everything has points of failure too No it doesn’t. As soon as governments clearly states that they want to purchase a hundred billion masks and ventilators, market will react very quickly. They government did not post that request yet.

jjeaff 7y ago

Read up on Venezuela's oil problem. They seized the oil from private entities and then royally destroyed the entire industry as the equipment fell into disrepair and production efficiency fell until nearly stopping.