Very nice. I sure wish they’d left the United States out of all their comparisons, however. People will make special arguments for the US — it has natural resources, ocean boundaries, good luck, whatever — and then argue it distorts the averages a lot. Had they specifically excluded the US it would have been more impressive.
But, Carl, I thought that crowd detested the idea of “American Exceptionalism.” Why would they bring it up simply because it’s convenient to do so?
They believe in American exceptionalism to the extent it has nothing to do with Americans, TQ. If it only comes from the continent itself, the tree and rivers and underground oil and stuff, they’re all for it.
Anyway, I was thinking not of the orcs at the core, but some of their soft-shelled soft adherents, such as youngsters just emerging from 12 years of groupthink indoctrination, who, with the first faint stirrings of thinking for one’s self might be inclined to ponder the data objectively if it didn’t instantly trigger the rote lessons absorbed in Ms. Sander’s 8th grade World Cultures class.
I wish someone would forcefully address that famous “rich-poor gap.” Would you rather be a poor person in a country with a huge rich-poor gap, earning $24,000 a year? Or would you rather be a poor person in a country with a quite small rich-poor gap, earning $24 a year? And if you would rather see others have less than yourself have more — what does that say about you?
I do think there is a little sociological cause/effect action behind the success of America. I would argue though that these are not purely related to resources – there are vastly more abundant locales than North America. I would relate them to ‘opportunity’, refering to both resources and the frontier effect as a limiter on government control of resources. So, you could argue that economic freedom was possible in America because of a vast frontier that made economic control difficult. However, conceding this does basically concede the overall point about the economic benefit of economic freedom.
In this sense, natural constraints do affect societal organization, but as much through constraints on political control over resources as the resource constraints themselves.
Anyway, digressing…
I notice the one outlier – Venezuela. I imagine that points move left and right faster than up and down. I don’t know how long VZ will be ‘up there’. And Hong Kong is interesting because it is so small. But doesn’t that prove the point?
Another observation: the wealthier nations pull the curve left. If you imagine a best-fit for the mass of the less wealthy nations you’d find out that much of the ‘developed’ world is left of the curve.
Again, it is easier to move left and right than down. How long until we move down?
Very nice. I sure wish they’d left the United States out of all their comparisons, however. People will make special arguments for the US — it has natural resources, ocean boundaries, good luck, whatever — and then argue it distorts the averages a lot. Had they specifically excluded the US it would have been more impressive.
But, Carl, I thought that crowd detested the idea of “American Exceptionalism.” Why would they bring it up simply because it’s convenient to do so?
They believe in American exceptionalism to the extent it has nothing to do with Americans, TQ. If it only comes from the continent itself, the tree and rivers and underground oil and stuff, they’re all for it.
Anyway, I was thinking not of the orcs at the core, but some of their soft-shelled soft adherents, such as youngsters just emerging from 12 years of groupthink indoctrination, who, with the first faint stirrings of thinking for one’s self might be inclined to ponder the data objectively if it didn’t instantly trigger the rote lessons absorbed in Ms. Sander’s 8th grade World Cultures class.
I wish someone would forcefully address that famous “rich-poor gap.” Would you rather be a poor person in a country with a huge rich-poor gap, earning $24,000 a year? Or would you rather be a poor person in a country with a quite small rich-poor gap, earning $24 a year? And if you would rather see others have less than yourself have more — what does that say about you?
I do think there is a little sociological cause/effect action behind the success of America. I would argue though that these are not purely related to resources – there are vastly more abundant locales than North America. I would relate them to ‘opportunity’, refering to both resources and the frontier effect as a limiter on government control of resources. So, you could argue that economic freedom was possible in America because of a vast frontier that made economic control difficult. However, conceding this does basically concede the overall point about the economic benefit of economic freedom.
In this sense, natural constraints do affect societal organization, but as much through constraints on political control over resources as the resource constraints themselves.
Anyway, digressing…
I notice the one outlier – Venezuela. I imagine that points move left and right faster than up and down. I don’t know how long VZ will be ‘up there’. And Hong Kong is interesting because it is so small. But doesn’t that prove the point?
Another observation: the wealthier nations pull the curve left. If you imagine a best-fit for the mass of the less wealthy nations you’d find out that much of the ‘developed’ world is left of the curve.
Again, it is easier to move left and right than down. How long until we move down?