0 sats \ 18 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 17 Sep \ parent \ on: Smashing the Western Illusion of Democracy Politics_And_Law
Centrally directed resource allocations are the opposite of logical, they are arbitrary. I don't know why we need so many examples of this kind of system failing for people to finally get it.
China is about a quarter as prosperous as America (which has many of its own self sabotaging policies) and already struggling under the weight of their capital misallocations.
In the context of competition between states for control of international protocols centrally directed allocations of resources are absolutely imperative.
This is how wars are organised...won or lost.
The wealth of the US is considerably vested in maintaining a global military network and imposing its protocols over all others. The most significant protocol is SWIFT- the protocol controlling the transfer of value between trading nations - which forces all trading nations to hold USD, or be excluded.
US wealth and power is largely based upon its ability to impose its will upon all other nations.
If you do not organise your collective resources as a nation state the most competently and effectively you will be defeated and subjugated as The West has done to most of the worlds nations and peoples over the last 5 centuries.
reply
Europe only became wealthy enough to do that after radically liberalizing their economies. Eventually, the rent seeking parasites who you're praising wasted a bunch of resources on these stupid misadventures.
You have causality exactly backwards.
reply
Nonsense- throughout the history of Europe the competition between states and their ability to combine the deliberate strategy of the government with the interests of private enterprise shows that combination is crucial.
Spain and Portugal lost their dominance and wealth because the Protestant English and Dutch were more innovative and had less corrupt governance.
Wealth and success does almost invariably attract corrupt rentseeking parasites.
So yes, eventually successful governments can easily become infested with self serving rentseeking parasites- as has happened to the corporate sponsored US empire today.
In the US government is directed by capital- that is crony capitalism.
In China the government directs capital toward its Belt and Road program of global resource and protocol hegemony.
reply
Well, we have our predictions. If China ever matches the prosperity of America, without radical market liberalization, feel free to run a victory lap. I'm not holding my breath, though.
reply
Americas wealth is largely now reliant upon its continued domination and control over the international monetary system.
With Iran and Russia already joined to Chinas CBDC Yuan based alternative the decline of US hegemony could be very swift.
Note Iran and Russia are both attacking US allies and costing US economy, while China enjoys the bonus of discounted oil and gas from two now dependent oil producers.
If the Saudis were to join Russia and Iran maybe then you might start to hold your breathe.
I am not sure of any particular outcome but am surprised by the lack of awareness in The West that is is a process that has been and is progressing in the wrong direction if you prefer Western domination of global resources.
reply
You haven't said anything that I'm unaware of. I just think you fundamentally misunderstand economics.
reply
You have not identified any factual error or error in reasoning in my comments.
Now you make a claim that seeks to discredit me while providing no logical factual basis for that claim. Please given credible example of my alleged lack of understanding of economics. I predict you cannot.
The problem instead perhaps is with your ideology Libertarianism and its blindness to the logical and historically self evident crucial determining factor of a states power and strategy being combined with private enterprise in the eternal contest between nation states for resource hegemony.
On that measure today China quite possibly already exceeds to functionality of the USA. That it is a measure you discount the value of but cannot refute speaks volumes.
reply
It's not a claim. It's an opinion.
I did identify your error, though. It's known as post hoc ergo proctor hoc. You're ascribing causality to things that happened after the fact. Markets create prosperity. Rulers funnel some of that prosperity to suit their own ends. The later does not cause the former.
This is less about libertarianism, than it is my training in economics. Your story doesn't make economic sense. Centrally directed resource allocations do not enhance prosperity. They create distortions in the market, known as dead weight losses, that reduce overall well-being.
What you're demonstrating is a light form of Stockholm Syndrome, where you prioritize the preferences of the ruling class over the preferences of yourself and the other captives. (That is my libertarianism speaking.)