3 ms·

>Whether an innovation will be a success is uncertain, and it can take longer than traditional banks or venture capitalists are willing to wait. In countries su

by pappyo 13y ago

>Whether an innovation will be a success is uncertain, and it can take longer than traditional banks or venture capitalists are willing to wait. In countries such as the United States, China, Singapore, and Denmark, the state has provided the kind of patient and long-term finance new technologies need to get off the ground. This is the crux of the problem and why the OP makes a compelling argument. We live in a world of "innovation" where the driving force behind it is a conglomerate of VC's whose primary concerns are their multiples and the next fund. They are people without long-term vision. We also live in a world where political are small men and women proposing small ideas because their primary concern is the next election cycle. What ever happen to greatness? "We're putting a man on the moon in 10 years." "We're building a national highway system." "We're building a weapon that will end wars." Where did the will go? Where are the cries of: "We'll be free of fossil fuels in 10 years." "We're sending a person to Mars by 2020." Or if you like wars on abstract combatants that never end: "The war on ignorance" Someone needs some vision. And right now, nobody has it.

DenisM 13y ago
The Chinese Governemnt does. They had a plan to industrialize a country of a billion people, and they are half way through as the plan continues apace. They didn't have a choice - population growth in an agrarian country was a disaster for the country. They had to do something or see their country plunge into famine and chaos. And therein may be your answer - they did it because they had to. Western societies can coast a long way on the momentum they have picked up earlier. Necessity is the mother of innovation.
- samatman 13y ago
  The mode degree of Central Party members is in Engineering. The mode degree of Congress is Law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_(statistics) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_(statistics)
  - chc 13y ago
    That would probably be related to the fact that Congress is s purely legislative body.
- mtts 13y ago
  > Necessity is the mother of innovation. It is, but it is not the driver of it. China was an agrarian country with insane population growth before Deng Xiaoping took office and yet the remedy of the government at that time was to increase population growth even further and spur on the youth in some sort of whack job ideological frenzy. At some point, some people took some responsibility and turned the ship around. To my mind this is the most important thing to keep in mind about the current Chinese government: it may be staggeringly corrupt and have an absolutely frightening human rights record, but for the past thirty years it has done a surprisingly good job in reducing poverty for hundreds of millions of people. This does not mean they should be forgiven their abuses, but their successes definitely deserve credit.
  - DenisM 13y ago
    > Deng Xiaoping took office and yet the remedy of the government at that time was to increase population growth even further and spur on the youth in some sort of whack job ideological frenzy. Can you clarify? Wikipedia does not seem to support your statement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaoping#Re-emergence_post-Cultural_Revolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaoping#Re-emergence_post... Thanks.
    - mtts 13y ago
      Wack job ideological frenzy: the cultural revolution Increase population growth: One of Mao's slogans was "The more people we are, the stronger we are". Some graphs here: http://www.slideshare.net/isc/china-population-policies http://www.slideshare.net/isc/china-population-policies
      - DenisM 13y ago
        But wait, this happened before Deng came to power. Deng oversaw dismantling of he cultural revolution, per above Wikipedia link.
samatman 13y ago
Well, it isn't that nobody has it. Larry Page wants to get us off fossil fuels as fast as possible given that he's basically an advertising executive. Similarly, Elon Musk would like to get us off oil and get us to Mars, but again, he's just a CEO. Having a few billion dollars in your pocket is great, but it's no substitute for controlling the wealthiest and most powerful nation on Earth.
- acjohnson55 13y ago
  The problem is that a large portion of the country thinks that we shouldn't actually leverage that wealth and power to achieve transformative accomplishments anymore. We just don't have a paradigm for this in today's America. We're stuck in a monkey-patched late-18th century system of governance, and we've proven ourselves thoroughly unable to plan for the future and adapt.
bobbles 13y ago
In less than 7 days Australia will essentially be deciding if it gets a National Fibre-to-premesis Broadband Network.. or if it will continue pushing copper and outdated tech for the next 4 years. It terrifies me that the entire murdoch empire is pushing for the latter. ( http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2013/08/rudd-sticks-it-to-biased-murdoch-press/ http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2013/08/rudd-sticks-it-to-bi... ) Edit: More examples - http://i.imgur.com/MyU1MDV.jpg http://i.imgur.com/MyU1MDV.jpg

by pappyo 13y ago

DenisM 13y ago

The Chinese Governemnt does. They had a plan to industrialize a country of a billion people, and they are half way through as the plan continues apace. They didn't have a choice - population growth in an agrarian country was a disaster for the country. They had to do something or see their country plunge into famine and chaos. And therein may be your answer - they did it because they had to. Western societies can coast a long way on the momentum they have picked up earlier. Necessity is the mother of innovation.

samatman 13y ago
The mode degree of Central Party members is in Engineering. The mode degree of Congress is Law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_(statistics) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_(statistics)
- chc 13y ago
  That would probably be related to the fact that Congress is s purely legislative body.
mtts 13y ago
> Necessity is the mother of innovation. It is, but it is not the driver of it. China was an agrarian country with insane population growth before Deng Xiaoping took office and yet the remedy of the government at that time was to increase population growth even further and spur on the youth in some sort of whack job ideological frenzy. At some point, some people took some responsibility and turned the ship around. To my mind this is the most important thing to keep in mind about the current Chinese government: it may be staggeringly corrupt and have an absolutely frightening human rights record, but for the past thirty years it has done a surprisingly good job in reducing poverty for hundreds of millions of people. This does not mean they should be forgiven their abuses, but their successes definitely deserve credit.
- DenisM 13y ago
  > Deng Xiaoping took office and yet the remedy of the government at that time was to increase population growth even further and spur on the youth in some sort of whack job ideological frenzy. Can you clarify? Wikipedia does not seem to support your statement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaoping#Re-emergence_post-Cultural_Revolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaoping#Re-emergence_post... Thanks.
  - mtts 13y ago
    Wack job ideological frenzy: the cultural revolution Increase population growth: One of Mao's slogans was "The more people we are, the stronger we are". Some graphs here: http://www.slideshare.net/isc/china-population-policies http://www.slideshare.net/isc/china-population-policies
    - DenisM 13y ago
      But wait, this happened before Deng came to power. Deng oversaw dismantling of he cultural revolution, per above Wikipedia link.

samatman 13y ago

Well, it isn't that nobody has it. Larry Page wants to get us off fossil fuels as fast as possible given that he's basically an advertising executive. Similarly, Elon Musk would like to get us off oil and get us to Mars, but again, he's just a CEO. Having a few billion dollars in your pocket is great, but it's no substitute for controlling the wealthiest and most powerful nation on Earth.

acjohnson55 13y ago
The problem is that a large portion of the country thinks that we shouldn't actually leverage that wealth and power to achieve transformative accomplishments anymore. We just don't have a paradigm for this in today's America. We're stuck in a monkey-patched late-18th century system of governance, and we've proven ourselves thoroughly unable to plan for the future and adapt.

bobbles 13y ago

In less than 7 days Australia will essentially be deciding if it gets a National Fibre-to-premesis Broadband Network.. or if it will continue pushing copper and outdated tech for the next 4 years. It terrifies me that the entire murdoch empire is pushing for the latter. ( http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2013/08/rudd-sticks-it-to-biased-murdoch-press/ http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2013/08/rudd-sticks-it-to-bi... ) Edit: More examples - http://i.imgur.com/MyU1MDV.jpg http://i.imgur.com/MyU1MDV.jpg