6 ms·

We can eventually automate our economy by buying software and hardware from China. By electing Trump, we basically missed the chance to lead on anything, and in

We can eventually automate our economy by buying software and hardware from China. By electing Trump, we basically missed the chance to lead on anything, and instead decided to engage full time in trade and culture wars that aren't really going to yield anything. But as long as the work gets done, even if in China, we should be able to enjoy it.

kevin_thibedeau 2y ago
The Romans used to think that way. Their subjects thought otherwise.
- dluan 2y ago
  It's funny you invoke some trad/conservative appeal to tradition, and meanwhile China's imperial history of bureaucratic machinery is never pointed to as an example of "look, technocratic meritocracy works".
  - fancl20 2y ago
    I think it's well documented that modern bureaucracy is at least inspired by China's bureaucratic machinery: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Service_(United_Kingdom) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Service_(United_Kingdom) > Under Charles Grant, the East India Company established the East India Company College at Haileybury near London, to train administrators, in 1806. The college was established on recommendation of officials in China who had seen the imperial examination system. In government, a civil service, replacing patronage with examination, similar to the Chinese system, was advocated a number of times over the next several decades.[10] > William Ewart Gladstone, in 1850, an opposition member, sought a more efficient system based on expertise rather than favouritism. The East India Company provided a model for Stafford Northcote, private Secretary to Gladstone who, with Charles Trevelyan, drafted the key report in 1854.[11] And western countries accepted it as part of the base assumption how government should work, then nobody points to its origin since now it's so obvious (from modern perspective).
    - djtango 2y ago
      I didn't know this and have always wondered why in the UK we didn't have something like the Chinese system for civil service. Ironically the civil service is full of intelligent people and it's a competitive grad programme, but it's also wholly undesirable as a career path for many. I know plenty of smart driven people who want to make a difference who won't go anywhere near the civil service for fear or bureaucracy or salary sacrifice or both. I also know plenty of people who left the civil service jaded by the whole experience. I don't know what the solution is but I'm always a bit saddened that people end up moving money around or optimising clicks because there's no alternative if you don't want to get left behind
      - t-3 2y ago
        In ancient China, power and social status were gained through official positions, and merchants were considered the lowest of respectable occupations. This led to the exams attracting many of the "best and brightest" to government service. In modern western countries, being wealthy is the best way to get respect and adulation. The "best and brightest" spend their education learning how to extract value from the rest.
        seanmcdirmid 2y ago
        China isn't really that different these days. Everyone is thinking about being wealthy, but especially the Chinese. Hopefully the official class evolves to something like what Singapore has, or its going to be a constant brain drain on the government as smart kids continue to prefer the private sector.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - jhbadger 2y ago
      Although it is worth recognizing that although the Imperial Chinese did have an examination-based civil service, it wasn't examinations on anything actually relevant to their jobs as in modern merit-based civil services. Instead, people wanting to enter the Imperial Chinese Civil Service were tested on their ability to recall trivia from classic Chinese literature. Great if the job was Jeopardy! contestant, less so for anything practical. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Books_and_Five_Classics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Books_and_Five_Classics
Joel_Mckay 2y ago
Indeed, no one sane will invest in building factory systems on US soil under a Kakistocracy. Robot platforms are already a difficult business model in the private sector. With the exception of robot vacuums the market just isn't viable in the US yet. Best of luck =3
- rtp4me 2y ago
  It seems Honda just decided to produce the next Civic in Indiana. See [1]. [1] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/honda-produce-next-civic-indiana-not-mexico-due-us-tariffs-sources-say-2025-03-03 https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/honda-...
  - Aromasin 2y ago
    "Just decided" =/= decided today. They decided months if not years ago, after months of negotiations with local authorities. Don't look at plants opening now to judge the current administration. Look at it 2 years from now.
    - dismalpedigree 2y ago
      Its not a new plant. I drove by it several months ago on I-74. Its been there awhile.
    - rtp4me 2y ago
      I don't know - the article specifically said Honda will produce the cars "to avoid potential tariffs". I don't think the Trump tariffs were in place "years ago"...
      - toss1 2y ago
        Of course, a marketing line to fit the current situation (and curry favor with the current vindictive administration) is easily added/updated at press time. This does not mean the making of the deals and building the factory had anything to do with it at the time, but stating that those past decisions also have benefit in today's situation is not surprising. It also does not mean that this has anything to do with the actual reason the deals and investments were made years ago. As you point out, those deals & investments years ago couldn't have anything to do with this week's tariffs.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

kevin_thibedeau 2y ago

The Romans used to think that way. Their subjects thought otherwise.

dluan 2y ago
It's funny you invoke some trad/conservative appeal to tradition, and meanwhile China's imperial history of bureaucratic machinery is never pointed to as an example of "look, technocratic meritocracy works".
- fancl20 2y ago
  I think it's well documented that modern bureaucracy is at least inspired by China's bureaucratic machinery: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Service_(United_Kingdom) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Service_(United_Kingdom) > Under Charles Grant, the East India Company established the East India Company College at Haileybury near London, to train administrators, in 1806. The college was established on recommendation of officials in China who had seen the imperial examination system. In government, a civil service, replacing patronage with examination, similar to the Chinese system, was advocated a number of times over the next several decades.[10] > William Ewart Gladstone, in 1850, an opposition member, sought a more efficient system based on expertise rather than favouritism. The East India Company provided a model for Stafford Northcote, private Secretary to Gladstone who, with Charles Trevelyan, drafted the key report in 1854.[11] And western countries accepted it as part of the base assumption how government should work, then nobody points to its origin since now it's so obvious (from modern perspective).
  - djtango 2y ago
    I didn't know this and have always wondered why in the UK we didn't have something like the Chinese system for civil service. Ironically the civil service is full of intelligent people and it's a competitive grad programme, but it's also wholly undesirable as a career path for many. I know plenty of smart driven people who want to make a difference who won't go anywhere near the civil service for fear or bureaucracy or salary sacrifice or both. I also know plenty of people who left the civil service jaded by the whole experience. I don't know what the solution is but I'm always a bit saddened that people end up moving money around or optimising clicks because there's no alternative if you don't want to get left behind
    - t-3 2y ago
      In ancient China, power and social status were gained through official positions, and merchants were considered the lowest of respectable occupations. This led to the exams attracting many of the "best and brightest" to government service. In modern western countries, being wealthy is the best way to get respect and adulation. The "best and brightest" spend their education learning how to extract value from the rest.
      - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
        China isn't really that different these days. Everyone is thinking about being wealthy, but especially the Chinese. Hopefully the official class evolves to something like what Singapore has, or its going to be a constant brain drain on the government as smart kids continue to prefer the private sector.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
  - jhbadger 2y ago
    Although it is worth recognizing that although the Imperial Chinese did have an examination-based civil service, it wasn't examinations on anything actually relevant to their jobs as in modern merit-based civil services. Instead, people wanting to enter the Imperial Chinese Civil Service were tested on their ability to recall trivia from classic Chinese literature. Great if the job was Jeopardy! contestant, less so for anything practical. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Books_and_Five_Classics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Books_and_Five_Classics

Joel_Mckay 2y ago

Indeed, no one sane will invest in building factory systems on US soil under a Kakistocracy. Robot platforms are already a difficult business model in the private sector. With the exception of robot vacuums the market just isn't viable in the US yet. Best of luck =3

rtp4me 2y ago
It seems Honda just decided to produce the next Civic in Indiana. See [1]. [1] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/honda-produce-next-civic-indiana-not-mexico-due-us-tariffs-sources-say-2025-03-03 https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/honda-...
- Aromasin 2y ago
  "Just decided" =/= decided today. They decided months if not years ago, after months of negotiations with local authorities. Don't look at plants opening now to judge the current administration. Look at it 2 years from now.
  - dismalpedigree 2y ago
    Its not a new plant. I drove by it several months ago on I-74. Its been there awhile.
  - rtp4me 2y ago
    I don't know - the article specifically said Honda will produce the cars "to avoid potential tariffs". I don't think the Trump tariffs were in place "years ago"...
    - toss1 2y ago
      Of course, a marketing line to fit the current situation (and curry favor with the current vindictive administration) is easily added/updated at press time. This does not mean the making of the deals and building the factory had anything to do with it at the time, but stating that those past decisions also have benefit in today's situation is not surprising. It also does not mean that this has anything to do with the actual reason the deals and investments were made years ago. As you point out, those deals & investments years ago couldn't have anything to do with this week's tariffs.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]