top | item 41837848

(no title)

cjalmeida | 1 year ago

I strongly recommend Acemoglu, Robinson classic book "Why Nations Fail"

https://www.amazon.com/Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity/d...

It's very accessible, no economics background required. Along with Krugman and Kahneman, one of the few economics scholars that take the time to write a book for layman.

discuss

order

omnee|1 year ago

The rule of law is a key part of a nations success as argued by AJR. A very good exposition for the layman on the rule of law provided by Tom Bingham in the eponymous 'The Rule of Law):https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7734691-the-rule-of-law

While the above is informed by the UK's constitutional arrangement, the 8 principles are near universal when considering nations that have or aim for The Rule of Law.

The principles are:

(1) The law must be accessible and so far as possible intelligible, clear and predictable.

(2) Questions of legal right and liability should ordinarily be resolved by application of the law and not the exercise of discretion.

(3) The laws of the land should apply equally to all, save to the extent that objective differences justify differentiation.

(4) Ministers and public officers at all levels must exercise the powers conferred on them in good faith, fairly, for the purpose for which the powers were conferred, without exceeding the limits of such powers and not unreasonably.

(5) The law must afford adequate protection of fundamental human rights.

(6) Means must be provided for resolving, without prohibitive cost or inordinate delay, bona fide civil disputes which the parties themselves are unable to resolve.

(7) The adjudicative procedures provided by the state should be fair.

(8) The rule of law requires compliance by the state with its obligations in international law as in national law.

fekunde|1 year ago

After reading "Why Nations Fail", which I really enjoyed, I wondered whether we could develop an LLM with a wide enough context window where I could input the lessons from such books along with data and metrics about a specific country. Then, the AI could prescribe tangible solutions and policy recommendations tailored to that nation's unique situation. I'm curious what an AI system like that might look like. I also wonder if it's possible to experiment with a smaller-scale version of this concept using today's technology.

JetSpiegel|1 year ago

I thought the Chicago School had already proved blindly applying "policy recommendations" from on high was a receipt for disaster and misery, but sure, let's do the same with AI, this time it will surely work.

nradov|1 year ago

What's the point? We generally know what economic policies work. But they aren't put into effect due to ideology or special interests. This isn't a problem with a technical solution.

Eumenes|1 year ago

> Krugman

Not sure I'd spend time on a Krugman book. He predicted in 1998 that the internet would cease having an economic impact by 2005 and that it would be no greater than fax machines. He's like the Neil deGrasse Tyson of economics.

CyberRymden|1 year ago

Krugman is controversial at times, but he is a serious economist. The quote is also taken out of two important contexts. 1. It was not a serious academic prediction but rather part of a fluff piece by the Times about future precitions. 2. The quote also exists in the context of a debate that was raging during the advent of the internet whether or not the internet would hyper charge productivity and economic growth. In hindsight, especially after the late 1990s, the truth is far closer to the fax machine rather than a new era of prosperity. The lack of visible productivity growth from a technology that has so visibly transformed our society is one of the bigger questions in economics today.

ninjagoo|1 year ago

> He predicted in 1998 that the internet would cease having an economic impact by 2005 and that it would be no greater than fax machines

The future is hard to predict. Using that as a reason to discount a Nobel-prize economist's economics-related work sounds like a gap in logic.

js8|1 year ago

I read the summary from the review and I am not convinced that neoliberal US and EU have a less extractive governance structure than China has, as the authors seem to claim. It's been a decade since the book was published and China is still going strong. We will see.

dash2|1 year ago

China has become more and more authoritarian under Xi, its GDP growth stats may be dodgy, and recently its housing bubble has popped big-style. It could go the way of Japan. I agree with your last sentence, all the same.

jltsiren|1 year ago

You have a short-term perspective. All kinds of governance structures can work for a single human lifetime, if they manage to get the right people to the right places. But those people will eventually retire and die. Good institutions make it more likely that their replacements will also be competent and have the right motivations and incentives.

PRC has enjoyed ~45 years of stability and economic growth under four leaders. Until now, the leaders have retired voluntarily, and there has been an ordered transition of power to the successor. But Xi Jinping is clinging to power in a way his predecessors didn't. If he stays beyond 2027, it will be interesting to see if China can survive his death.

CyberRymden|1 year ago

Do you actually think China has fairer courts, more open financial markets, and better business environment than the EU or US? For the longest time Hong Kong had to fill those gaps for China in order for the country to attract capital.

Regardless, even if China does today the explanation still holds considering China only transformed a few decades before the book was written.