3 ms·

Transparency and competition drive efficient allocation, which are things encouraged in a _true_ democracy. All other forms of governance are strictly more inef

Transparency and competition drive efficient allocation, which are things encouraged in a _true_ democracy. All other forms of governance are strictly more inefficient.

lifeisstillgood 3y ago
That's more or less my argument in the EU - it's something federal USA has stopped noticing but it's clear in Europe. You can become leader of Hungary by wrapping yourself in the patriotic history of the mid-European medieval struggles - struggles that carry cultural weight in the countries that bore the brunt of the middle ages. But talking about medieval knightly charges just gets a laugh in Sweden whose cultural resonance is more gunpowder and forest rights. Any pan-European agreements need to be appealing to commonly held incentives - those almost always look like "greater common wealth, growth, consumer protection" The Federal US has a similar setup and I think can be found at root of many of the wedge issues troubling the US
WalterBright 3y ago
Democracy is not required for a free market to function well. Running a company as a democracy pretty much requires every employee to be an equal owner of it. That doesn't work well. Sometimes a fearless leader, like Jobs, Gates, or Bezos, who gets things done without endless debate and compromise.
- DarkNova6 3y ago
  Who defines what "functions well"? And how do you define "free market"? I'm not being pedantic, these questions require important distinctions. Arguably, the US has the "freest market" out of all, but it also has rules and is not entirely "free". You can make the case that you only have a "market" if you have transparency, many buyers and many suppliers. Our economy nowadays becomes less and less of a free market. Big companies buy off competition, reduce the amount of suppliers as well as transparency. They don't want an informed customer and they don't like competition. See where it got us. Democracy is absolutely necessary to maintain a market.

Transparency and competition drive efficient allocation, which are things encouraged in a _true_ democracy. All other forms of governance are strictly more inefficient.

lifeisstillgood 3y ago

That's more or less my argument in the EU - it's something federal USA has stopped noticing but it's clear in Europe. You can become leader of Hungary by wrapping yourself in the patriotic history of the mid-European medieval struggles - struggles that carry cultural weight in the countries that bore the brunt of the middle ages. But talking about medieval knightly charges just gets a laugh in Sweden whose cultural resonance is more gunpowder and forest rights. Any pan-European agreements need to be appealing to commonly held incentives - those almost always look like "greater common wealth, growth, consumer protection" The Federal US has a similar setup and I think can be found at root of many of the wedge issues troubling the US

WalterBright 3y ago

Democracy is not required for a free market to function well. Running a company as a democracy pretty much requires every employee to be an equal owner of it. That doesn't work well. Sometimes a fearless leader, like Jobs, Gates, or Bezos, who gets things done without endless debate and compromise.

DarkNova6 3y ago
Who defines what "functions well"? And how do you define "free market"? I'm not being pedantic, these questions require important distinctions. Arguably, the US has the "freest market" out of all, but it also has rules and is not entirely "free". You can make the case that you only have a "market" if you have transparency, many buyers and many suppliers. Our economy nowadays becomes less and less of a free market. Big companies buy off competition, reduce the amount of suppliers as well as transparency. They don't want an informed customer and they don't like competition. See where it got us. Democracy is absolutely necessary to maintain a market.