6 ms·

China has nothing against innovation. They just want to decide who gets rich with it and how much.

JumpCrisscross 6y ago
> China has nothing against innovation. They just want to decide who gets rich with it and how much. Is this sarcasm? If I am ambitious, why would I be an innovator in this system? Versus the person deciding who gets rich?
- gcatalfamo 6y ago
  It’s a trade off Chinese businessmen have to live with in China. Most medium-big All companies have one or more board members coming from the “party”. It’s not a secret they very calmly tell you the same thing when you visit them in China.
  - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
    > It’s a trade off Chinese businessmen have to live with in China Agree this isn’t news to anyone familiar with China. What led Ma to make the alleged comments is beyond me. That doesn’t invalidate discussing its effects.
- rfoo 6y ago
  > If I am ambitious, why would I be an innovator in this system? Versus the person deciding who gets rich? Why would the person deciding who gets rich let someone else become such person? I mean, it's not impossible, but is certainly very hard, risky and needs some unique skillsets. Sometimes you don't have the choice, no matter how you are ambitious.
  - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
    > Why would the person deciding who gets rich let someone else become such person? No man rules alone. And no man is immortal. If you are smart, ambitious and lucky enough to build a multibillion dollar company, you can put those faculties to work climbing the political ladder.
    - rfoo 6y ago
      I agree, the system certainly encourages you to climb the political ladder, and overall this affects innovation, but things are not binary, what you described may be 100% correct in 60s and 70s, less so in 90s, and during the last 20 years I'd say for those who without background the expected P&L is worse if you play the political game, compared to the entrepreneur route.
- _jal 6y ago
  > why would I be an innovator in this system For the same reasons people build better lives for themselves in places even less hospitable to their personal aims. Lack of resources, family, lack of practical freedom... the list goes on. Hell, some people actually are patriotic. But frankly, I do think this matters much less than people are making this out to be. Larger-than-life superhero CEOs are bullshit. I do not believe you needed Musk or Kalanick to get things that look like their companies. US culture just desperately wants to believe in their homemade gods, so you get conversations like this.
  - nullstyle 6y ago
    "But frankly, I do think this matters much less than people are making this out to be. Larger-than-life superhero CEOs are bullshit. I do not believe you needed Musk or Kalanick to get things that look like their companies. US culture just desperately wants to believe in their homemade gods, so you get conversations like this." hear, hear
  - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
    > Larger-than-life superhero CEOs are bullshit This is well written. Thank you. If you believe in the exceptional, or believe you are exceptional, America will draw you to it. If you don’t believe in exceptionalism, America looks like it incurs costs for no gain. The Chinese system in contrast looks balanced. I believe in exceptional people. Almost every measure of a variety of skills has long tails. In most cases, those tails are developed through working at a skill and are not the sole product of innate talent. Incentivising that development thus makes a civilisation more capable. But I’m not so wedded to this belief as to claim it the only way. If exceptionalism is a fiction, freedom of speech doesn’t make sense: there are no special thoughts which, if extinguished, are unlikely to recur for a long, long time.
    - _jal 6y ago
      > If exceptionalism is a fiction, freedom of speech doesn’t make sense I think this only holds if you take a deeply communitarian outlook, which is somewhat difficult to mesh with a belief in the value of the exceptional individual. I value freedom of speech for the same reason I value other freedoms, for the boringly baseline and everyone else, as well as for instrumental reasons - briefly, freedom is its own good because humans are wired for it; and suppression of speech leads to broken, damaging government. In any case, small clarification - I do believe that exceptional people in the sense we're discussing exist. But they are far rarer, and the Superhero CEOs we're talking about are not those.
- jasonv 6y ago
  I'm sure Jack Ma is still rich. What else are you going to do, not try anything?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

> China has nothing against innovation. They just want to decide who gets rich with it and how much. Is this sarcasm? If I am ambitious, why would I be an innovator in this system? Versus the person deciding who gets rich?

gcatalfamo 6y ago
It’s a trade off Chinese businessmen have to live with in China. Most medium-big All companies have one or more board members coming from the “party”. It’s not a secret they very calmly tell you the same thing when you visit them in China.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > It’s a trade off Chinese businessmen have to live with in China Agree this isn’t news to anyone familiar with China. What led Ma to make the alleged comments is beyond me. That doesn’t invalidate discussing its effects.
rfoo 6y ago
> If I am ambitious, why would I be an innovator in this system? Versus the person deciding who gets rich? Why would the person deciding who gets rich let someone else become such person? I mean, it's not impossible, but is certainly very hard, risky and needs some unique skillsets. Sometimes you don't have the choice, no matter how you are ambitious.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > Why would the person deciding who gets rich let someone else become such person? No man rules alone. And no man is immortal. If you are smart, ambitious and lucky enough to build a multibillion dollar company, you can put those faculties to work climbing the political ladder.
  - rfoo 6y ago
    I agree, the system certainly encourages you to climb the political ladder, and overall this affects innovation, but things are not binary, what you described may be 100% correct in 60s and 70s, less so in 90s, and during the last 20 years I'd say for those who without background the expected P&L is worse if you play the political game, compared to the entrepreneur route.
_jal 6y ago
> why would I be an innovator in this system For the same reasons people build better lives for themselves in places even less hospitable to their personal aims. Lack of resources, family, lack of practical freedom... the list goes on. Hell, some people actually are patriotic. But frankly, I do think this matters much less than people are making this out to be. Larger-than-life superhero CEOs are bullshit. I do not believe you needed Musk or Kalanick to get things that look like their companies. US culture just desperately wants to believe in their homemade gods, so you get conversations like this.
- nullstyle 6y ago
  "But frankly, I do think this matters much less than people are making this out to be. Larger-than-life superhero CEOs are bullshit. I do not believe you needed Musk or Kalanick to get things that look like their companies. US culture just desperately wants to believe in their homemade gods, so you get conversations like this." hear, hear
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > Larger-than-life superhero CEOs are bullshit This is well written. Thank you. If you believe in the exceptional, or believe you are exceptional, America will draw you to it. If you don’t believe in exceptionalism, America looks like it incurs costs for no gain. The Chinese system in contrast looks balanced. I believe in exceptional people. Almost every measure of a variety of skills has long tails. In most cases, those tails are developed through working at a skill and are not the sole product of innate talent. Incentivising that development thus makes a civilisation more capable. But I’m not so wedded to this belief as to claim it the only way. If exceptionalism is a fiction, freedom of speech doesn’t make sense: there are no special thoughts which, if extinguished, are unlikely to recur for a long, long time.
  - _jal 6y ago
    > If exceptionalism is a fiction, freedom of speech doesn’t make sense I think this only holds if you take a deeply communitarian outlook, which is somewhat difficult to mesh with a belief in the value of the exceptional individual. I value freedom of speech for the same reason I value other freedoms, for the boringly baseline and everyone else, as well as for instrumental reasons - briefly, freedom is its own good because humans are wired for it; and suppression of speech leads to broken, damaging government. In any case, small clarification - I do believe that exceptional people in the sense we're discussing exist. But they are far rarer, and the Superhero CEOs we're talking about are not those.
jasonv 6y ago
I'm sure Jack Ma is still rich. What else are you going to do, not try anything?

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]