Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Alex DeLarge's avatar

This analysis is based on a lot of very shaky assumptions: e.g., (a) That "start ups" are somehow automatically better than other uses of capital; (b) That smart government employees don't add value to the Chinese economy; (c) That wasting electricity is the best measure of true GDP.

Meanwhile, all the empirical data says that China is miles ahead in manufacturing and infrastructure. If anything, I'd be inclined to believe that GDP methodology overstates the U.S. economy by overvaluing financialization, services, and asset bubbles.

Expand full comment
David's avatar

"China is funneling its best and brightest into government and that makes them weak."

This is a bad take. China is a developing country that depends heavily on state led investment. That requires highly capable people running the government. Having a smart civil service that can put the interests of the development of its people first is how they lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. Compare that to the civil service in Latin America, Middle East, or Africa. Do you think there are enough smart people in government there?

Singapore's civil service is also highly competitive and highly paid. Its ministers are paid millions of dollars comparable to CEOs of private companies. That attracts talents. Now China doesn't pay its ministers millions, but there's a prestige associated being a high rank government official.

Expand full comment
79 more comments...

No posts