3 ms·

> The tools of extractive economic institutions include abolition or severe limits on private property, state-run enterprises, excessive regulation and taxation

> The tools of extractive economic institutions include abolition or severe limits on private property, state-run enterprises, excessive regulation and taxation, and more. > Acemoglu and Robinson acknowledge that, under some conditions, growth can occur under extractive political institutions as in the case of China. So I suppose that's not a very good definition of "extractive political institutions," then, is it? Perhaps wealth extraction can even occur in countries that claim to be for free market capitalism.

AnimalMuppet 6y ago
First, "extractive" isn't a binary, it's a continuum. All economies are extractive to some degree - everybody's got taxes. But some are considerably more extractive than others. Second, China. China's economy was very extractive under Mao. (If you don't like the term "extractive", call it "state dominated" instead.) Under Deng, they became less so, and the economy prospered. If there's enough latent potential in the economy, you don't have to go all the way to "100% non-extractive" to tap it. Just less extractive will get you some of the gains. Now, I grant you that the results are not a good definition of "extractive". But "abolition or severe limits on private property, state-run enterprises, excessive regulation and taxation" are in fact a reasonably good definition.
- asdfman123 6y ago
  I'm just anticipating the ideological implications there: once again conflating reasonable goventment solutions with radical socialism. Obviously authoritarianism is bad, especially when it does not care for economic realities, but does that really mean anything for western democracies?
  - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
    It means: Don't become authoritarian. Don't ignore economic realities. That applies to both the government, and (since it's a democracy) to the people.

3 ms·

> The tools of extractive economic institutions include abolition or severe limits on private property, state-run enterprises, excessive regulation and taxation

by asdfman123 6y ago

AnimalMuppet 6y ago
First, "extractive" isn't a binary, it's a continuum. All economies are extractive to some degree - everybody's got taxes. But some are considerably more extractive than others. Second, China. China's economy was very extractive under Mao. (If you don't like the term "extractive", call it "state dominated" instead.) Under Deng, they became less so, and the economy prospered. If there's enough latent potential in the economy, you don't have to go all the way to "100% non-extractive" to tap it. Just less extractive will get you some of the gains. Now, I grant you that the results are not a good definition of "extractive". But "abolition or severe limits on private property, state-run enterprises, excessive regulation and taxation" are in fact a reasonably good definition.
- asdfman123 6y ago
  I'm just anticipating the ideological implications there: once again conflating reasonable goventment solutions with radical socialism. Obviously authoritarianism is bad, especially when it does not care for economic realities, but does that really mean anything for western democracies?
  - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
    It means: Don't become authoritarian. Don't ignore economic realities. That applies to both the government, and (since it's a democracy) to the people.