Not that I would doubt the guy who let Mike Tyson hit him in the head or anything, but don’t we have decades of research showing the negative effects of those?
This hinges on the assumption that economists are correctly accounting for value, which seems unlikely. For example, what's the value of being able to repair your jets in a conflict, because the supply chain is local, and doesn't start in an enemy's factory? Comparative advantage tells us we should trade for things that our economy doesn't do well, but if your rival makes bullets better than you do, you're probably still going to make your own. But how do you value that? Security is an intangible asset that can quickly become pathological, as we see in other areas (too much is never enough, just think of the children).
Industries don't exist in isolation, so these effects propagate. If you can't make cars, you probably won't make good tanks. When we assess the value of a local car industry, how do we account for the "use it or lose it" nature of retaining knowledge built up by industry? Part of learning and skilling up is actually doing the thing you're learning about. It's no surprise that the country the West has skilled up in the pursuit of greater profits is now it's chief rival.
And of course, all of this is before we ask questions like what metric is used to determine the benefit. Efficiency in particular is rife with competing definitions that fit various niche use cases, and for which the underlying assumptions may not be obvious. E.g. thermodynamic efficiency is often calculated using the lower heating value of a fuel, the reasons for which are good, but typically left unstated. A layman comparing thermodynamic efficiencies where differing methods are used might draw an erroneous conclusion if they don't understand that there can be differences.
Yeah, and you’re going to be poorer as a whole. People in backwards places like rural and urban ‘hoods live reasonably well with very low labor productivity relatively speaking.
I don’t think you understand how primitive American society is compared to Asia. Basic survival for rural poor is a car.
When you take away cheap clothes and cheap TVs, all made in modern Asian factories and replace them with shitty American products at 3x the price, the current populist movement will look like a party in comparison.
There are backward rural places in America. However the vast majority of rural people have had reliable electric since the 1950s, along with phone (though those lines may not longer work since everyone has gone cellular). They bought their first color TV in the 1960s like everyone else. They drive cars (the image of a red neck mowing his grass and finding a car - they drove that car 30 years ago, when it wore out they go a different one and quit driving it). Most of the backward in America are groups like the Amish who have every ability to be modern but choose not to.
In rural Asia there are a lot of people who don't have electric, they don't have cars.
Though I don't know why rural is even a topic here. Factories don't exist in rural areas, this exist in cities and towns where the workers live.
>When you take away cheap clothes and cheap TVs, all made in modern Asian factories and replace them with shitty American products at 3x the price, the current populist movement will look like a party in comparison.
Would the rest of the world even care anymore? Everyone from Canada to New Zealand is now making plans for long term disconnection from the US. They will not let the next Trump boss them around like they have been this past year. The reputation is torched and so if the US launches another populist movement that leads nowhere and collapses the country as a result why should the other 95% of the planet care?
The other 95% of the planet has mostly been relying upon the USA as the global hegemon to provide the security guarantees and financial infrastructure necessary for large scale free trade since the end of WWII. If the USA steps back from that then global trade networks will gradually break down because no other country or stable coalition has the desire or resources to step into that role. The situation will revert to something more like what we saw pre-war when most trade was regional. New Zealand in particular is in a weak position as they are heavily reliant on agriculture exports, and lack any ability to project power beyond their own borders.
Access to contemporary luxury does not a genius make. There was that bit in the film, "Goodwill Hunting," about an Indian man who found a math book and went on to define groundbreaking math from what he extrapolated. I don't know the details, but I don't think the film made that up.
I don't necessarily agree with GPs, but I do think we're near the tipping point where the whole Eastern half of Asia combined is nearing or passing the Europe+US on the big progress-o-meter.
Some parts of East and Southeast Asia might have been working on paving roads and building schools even just one generation ago. To think they still are "like that" is legitimately an insult to them. That part is largely done and they're moving on.
Not that I would doubt the guy who let Mike Tyson hit him in the head or anything, but don’t we have decades of research showing the negative effects of those?
This hinges on the assumption that economists are correctly accounting for value, which seems unlikely. For example, what's the value of being able to repair your jets in a conflict, because the supply chain is local, and doesn't start in an enemy's factory? Comparative advantage tells us we should trade for things that our economy doesn't do well, but if your rival makes bullets better than you do, you're probably still going to make your own. But how do you value that? Security is an intangible asset that can quickly become pathological, as we see in other areas (too much is never enough, just think of the children).
Industries don't exist in isolation, so these effects propagate. If you can't make cars, you probably won't make good tanks. When we assess the value of a local car industry, how do we account for the "use it or lose it" nature of retaining knowledge built up by industry? Part of learning and skilling up is actually doing the thing you're learning about. It's no surprise that the country the West has skilled up in the pursuit of greater profits is now it's chief rival.
And of course, all of this is before we ask questions like what metric is used to determine the benefit. Efficiency in particular is rife with competing definitions that fit various niche use cases, and for which the underlying assumptions may not be obvious. E.g. thermodynamic efficiency is often calculated using the lower heating value of a fuel, the reasons for which are good, but typically left unstated. A layman comparing thermodynamic efficiencies where differing methods are used might draw an erroneous conclusion if they don't understand that there can be differences.
I have never had anybody make this reference before!
Way back in the day I used to have the number for his answering machine, which had a ridiculously funny answer message in it.
Sure, decades of research by think-tanks hell-bent on pumping the assets of their sponsors at any cost to others.
"Trade Wars are Class Wars" by Klein and Pettis is a good counterpoint.
Yeah, and you’re going to be poorer as a whole. People in backwards places like rural and urban ‘hoods live reasonably well with very low labor productivity relatively speaking.
I don’t think you understand how primitive American society is compared to Asia. Basic survival for rural poor is a car.
When you take away cheap clothes and cheap TVs, all made in modern Asian factories and replace them with shitty American products at 3x the price, the current populist movement will look like a party in comparison.
>I don’t think you understand how primitive American society is compared to Asia.
>People in backwards places like rural...
That's not actually true. You want to visit rural Asia and compare.
There are backward rural places in America. However the vast majority of rural people have had reliable electric since the 1950s, along with phone (though those lines may not longer work since everyone has gone cellular). They bought their first color TV in the 1960s like everyone else. They drive cars (the image of a red neck mowing his grass and finding a car - they drove that car 30 years ago, when it wore out they go a different one and quit driving it). Most of the backward in America are groups like the Amish who have every ability to be modern but choose not to.
In rural Asia there are a lot of people who don't have electric, they don't have cars.
Though I don't know why rural is even a topic here. Factories don't exist in rural areas, this exist in cities and towns where the workers live.
2 replies →
>When you take away cheap clothes and cheap TVs, all made in modern Asian factories and replace them with shitty American products at 3x the price, the current populist movement will look like a party in comparison.
Would the rest of the world even care anymore? Everyone from Canada to New Zealand is now making plans for long term disconnection from the US. They will not let the next Trump boss them around like they have been this past year. The reputation is torched and so if the US launches another populist movement that leads nowhere and collapses the country as a result why should the other 95% of the planet care?
The other 95% of the planet has mostly been relying upon the USA as the global hegemon to provide the security guarantees and financial infrastructure necessary for large scale free trade since the end of WWII. If the USA steps back from that then global trade networks will gradually break down because no other country or stable coalition has the desire or resources to step into that role. The situation will revert to something more like what we saw pre-war when most trade was regional. New Zealand in particular is in a weak position as they are heavily reliant on agriculture exports, and lack any ability to project power beyond their own borders.
3 replies →
> I don’t think you understand how primitive American society is compared to Asia.
Lol, Asia is a big and diverse place. Are you really claiming that American society is more primitive than that of farmers in the arse end of Gansu?
Hint, one of those areas is more likely to have flush toilets.
Access to contemporary luxury does not a genius make. There was that bit in the film, "Goodwill Hunting," about an Indian man who found a math book and went on to define groundbreaking math from what he extrapolated. I don't know the details, but I don't think the film made that up.
4 replies →
I don't necessarily agree with GPs, but I do think we're near the tipping point where the whole Eastern half of Asia combined is nearing or passing the Europe+US on the big progress-o-meter.
Some parts of East and Southeast Asia might have been working on paving roads and building schools even just one generation ago. To think they still are "like that" is legitimately an insult to them. That part is largely done and they're moving on.
This might be a shocker for you, but flush toilets are really not that big a deal compared to the Asian kind.
[dead]