5 ms·

so what are you suggesting causes, for example, the French to strike more often than other Western countries? or Japan to typically have particularly low inflat

so what are you suggesting causes, for example, the French to strike more often than other Western countries? or Japan to typically have particularly low inflation? or Argentina to typically have particularly high inflation?

noobermin 1y ago
Waiting for the country of people who fly out of their mother's wombs or whom are born in a sack on their father's backs and further those who mentally convince themselves to pass through walls.
- permo-w 1y ago
  so there not being the difference between a human and a kangaroo or a frog and a bat means that the difference between an Argentine and a Japanese person isn't real either? literally meaningless analogy
rixed 1y ago
Unless we disagree on the meaning of "national character", isn't that easy to come up with 100 other reasons to explain those economic/political differences?
- permo-w 1y ago
  what is your definition of "national character"?
  - rixed 1y ago
    That would be a trait of character that most inhabitants of a country acquire by education, mimetism or mere abituation, that distinguish them from inhabitants of most other countries; Like a taste for some kind of food or music, a respect (or lack thereof) for some social rules like the patience or reluctance to wait in line, etc. I don't believe this kind of trait can influence economics or politics in any significant measure.
    - permo-w 1y ago
      such a bizarre thing to think. politics and even more so economics are literally made up of the way people act I know it's a bit rude to say this, but I don't believe deep down you actually think this. more likely you've just got a funny idea about what's offensive or prejudiced that's blocking you from looking at this rationally
      - rixed 1y ago
        Err, no. Politics is the art of manipulating people so they act differently than what they would be inclined to. Modern politics is made possible by psychology and sociology (that and the more traditional use of violence of course), and a lot of work goes into it. Regarding economics, I don't know where to start. Economy is global and its laws are the same everywhere; certainly national policies influence it, but the idea that it is chiefly influenced by the individual characters of the inhabitants sounds like a fantasy to me; maybe a fantasy useful to justify some privileges (you know, like protestantism favoring business etc) but apart from those sociological theories it does sound very idealistic to me. Maybe you could give your own definition of national character and show how it relates to the economy? That would help me figure out if I've been overlooking something obvious, or if you are indeed content with the idealistic fantasies i alluded to above. It would also be a more honest contribution to the discussion than just dismissing what I've said as bizarre and irrational.
        permo-w 1y ago
        the reason I'm finding this hard to engage with in an ideal manner is because what you're saying feels so far from reality that I struggle to proportion my response properly. the implication of what you're suggesting is that people's actions, personalities and personal choices do not make up their economic choices, and/or economic choices do not make up a large proportion of the economy. - the level of private consumption in a country is in massive part dictated by how much people choose to consume vs save. this is quite obviously a choice based on personality and norm - the price level of goods is in large part dictated by what business owners believe people will pay, and how much people are willing to pay. again, both in large part dictated by personality and culture and norm - wage rates are in large part dictated by what people demand for those jobs, and what business owners are willing to pay. both of these things are in large part dictated by average of people's personality traits in that country more specifically, let's look at a classic economic case study, Argentina vs Japan: https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/b6q69y/the_economist_how_argentina_and_japan_continue_to/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/b6q69y/the_econo... this is a perfect case of two countries trying not to have their economics dictated by national character, and failing anyway. essentially what you're trying to claim is that culture and personality does not affect how people act economically. weird and provably wrong principles someone made up one day like "Economy is global and its laws are the same everywhere" is a key example of why economics is not a science, and economists are generally not trusted
shermantanktop 1y ago
History? Geography? Specific laws? Particular parties in power? There are a lot of things to look at alongside mystical notions of a collective national character of a people, especially now that most of these countries have significant immigration and exposure to ideas from elsewhere.
- permo-w 1y ago
  all of the things you listed make up or result from national character. besides some short interludes, for example, Japan has had the same party in power since 1955. it's a weird thing to deny the existence of. different nations act differently. it's not heresy to make generalisations, particularly in the age of nationalism when many/most people actively try to set and follow their country's norms
  - computerthings 1y ago
    [dead]
  - shermantanktop 1y ago
    Isn’t that a thing called culture? National character could be another word for it, except “nation” is a modern concept and is highly volatile. Check out what’s happened to the borders of Germany over the last few hundred years.
    - permo-w 1y ago
      okay then, call it culture, call it national character, it changes nothing. culture affects--dictates, even--the politics and economics of a country massively

noobermin 1y ago

Waiting for the country of people who fly out of their mother's wombs or whom are born in a sack on their father's backs and further those who mentally convince themselves to pass through walls.

permo-w 1y ago
so there not being the difference between a human and a kangaroo or a frog and a bat means that the difference between an Argentine and a Japanese person isn't real either? literally meaningless analogy

rixed 1y ago

Unless we disagree on the meaning of "national character", isn't that easy to come up with 100 other reasons to explain those economic/political differences?

permo-w 1y ago
what is your definition of "national character"?
- rixed 1y ago
  That would be a trait of character that most inhabitants of a country acquire by education, mimetism or mere abituation, that distinguish them from inhabitants of most other countries; Like a taste for some kind of food or music, a respect (or lack thereof) for some social rules like the patience or reluctance to wait in line, etc. I don't believe this kind of trait can influence economics or politics in any significant measure.
  - permo-w 1y ago
    such a bizarre thing to think. politics and even more so economics are literally made up of the way people act I know it's a bit rude to say this, but I don't believe deep down you actually think this. more likely you've just got a funny idea about what's offensive or prejudiced that's blocking you from looking at this rationally
    - rixed 1y ago
      Err, no. Politics is the art of manipulating people so they act differently than what they would be inclined to. Modern politics is made possible by psychology and sociology (that and the more traditional use of violence of course), and a lot of work goes into it. Regarding economics, I don't know where to start. Economy is global and its laws are the same everywhere; certainly national policies influence it, but the idea that it is chiefly influenced by the individual characters of the inhabitants sounds like a fantasy to me; maybe a fantasy useful to justify some privileges (you know, like protestantism favoring business etc) but apart from those sociological theories it does sound very idealistic to me. Maybe you could give your own definition of national character and show how it relates to the economy? That would help me figure out if I've been overlooking something obvious, or if you are indeed content with the idealistic fantasies i alluded to above. It would also be a more honest contribution to the discussion than just dismissing what I've said as bizarre and irrational.
      - permo-w 1y ago
        the reason I'm finding this hard to engage with in an ideal manner is because what you're saying feels so far from reality that I struggle to proportion my response properly. the implication of what you're suggesting is that people's actions, personalities and personal choices do not make up their economic choices, and/or economic choices do not make up a large proportion of the economy. - the level of private consumption in a country is in massive part dictated by how much people choose to consume vs save. this is quite obviously a choice based on personality and norm - the price level of goods is in large part dictated by what business owners believe people will pay, and how much people are willing to pay. again, both in large part dictated by personality and culture and norm - wage rates are in large part dictated by what people demand for those jobs, and what business owners are willing to pay. both of these things are in large part dictated by average of people's personality traits in that country more specifically, let's look at a classic economic case study, Argentina vs Japan: https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/b6q69y/the_economist_how_argentina_and_japan_continue_to/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/b6q69y/the_econo... this is a perfect case of two countries trying not to have their economics dictated by national character, and failing anyway. essentially what you're trying to claim is that culture and personality does not affect how people act economically. weird and provably wrong principles someone made up one day like "Economy is global and its laws are the same everywhere" is a key example of why economics is not a science, and economists are generally not trusted

shermantanktop 1y ago

History? Geography? Specific laws? Particular parties in power? There are a lot of things to look at alongside mystical notions of a collective national character of a people, especially now that most of these countries have significant immigration and exposure to ideas from elsewhere.

permo-w 1y ago
all of the things you listed make up or result from national character. besides some short interludes, for example, Japan has had the same party in power since 1955. it's a weird thing to deny the existence of. different nations act differently. it's not heresy to make generalisations, particularly in the age of nationalism when many/most people actively try to set and follow their country's norms
- computerthings 1y ago
  [dead]
- shermantanktop 1y ago
  Isn’t that a thing called culture? National character could be another word for it, except “nation” is a modern concept and is highly volatile. Check out what’s happened to the borders of Germany over the last few hundred years.
  - permo-w 1y ago
    okay then, call it culture, call it national character, it changes nothing. culture affects--dictates, even--the politics and economics of a country massively