Comments on: Cold Turkey

By: spandrell

spandrell — Thu, 20 Jun 2013 12:22:39 +0000

The families would fight each other ruthlessly. The economy would grow, but the cohesion of China as a whole would disappear quite fast.

A marvelous scenario as I see it, but not likely.

By: admin

admin — Thu, 20 Jun 2013 06:12:18 +0000

It’s an attractive vision — my guess is that the handing “ownership to the princelings themselves” part is where things could get politically uncomfortable. Humans aren’t wired to accept the logic that it’s better for someone — anyone — to own and run something well, if the alternative is collective incompetence. The whole King Solomon baby-chopping threat seems kind of relevant to the psychological obstacles. (Moldbug’s formalist restoration would suffer from the same irrational resistances.)

By: Manjusri

Manjusri — Thu, 20 Jun 2013 03:59:32 +0000

Right… this is why a system more like that of South Korea (families own the companies and are responsible for losses, and the government tells them what to do) might be more appropriate to a Confucian culture, and why it would be better to hand ownership to the princelings themselves rather than throw everything on the stock market. Opacity is only part of the problem, and probably not the biggest; the biggest is lack of a sense of individual responsibility. If the family name is riding on the success or failure of the organization, that’s much more impetus to run it well. While civic duty may work in a country with a healthy European style civil society (note that I say healthy; this doesn’t apply to many countries these days), without it you have to appeal to clan duty.

Do this, and China will produce ten times as many major international brands as SK within a decade and a half. May 100 Samsungs bloom…

By: admin

admin — Thu, 20 Jun 2013 03:33:07 +0000

That sounds sensible, but tricky. The Western presumption in favor of transparency doesn’t necessarily travel very well. Opacity can be a survival strategy, especially in China. The ‘tall poppy syndrome’ is one reflection of that.

By: Manjusri

Manjusri — Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:18:29 +0000

That’s true… China has a different problem: extreme moral hazard.

If you notice how Chinese invest, when it comes to personal investments, they tend to be ultra-conservative and take a very long view; put them in charge of a company or a government office, though, and they’ll spend like there’s no tomorrow. This is because, as far as they’re concerned, there might not be a tomorrow for them- they can lose everything overnight by government fiat, so they have to act fast to grab their share. The only exceptions are the real private businessmen who have built empires so large that they’re more or less out of the danger zone- Jack Ma, Wang Chuanfu, etc.

If the Sinosphere outside of the mainland is any indication, replacing the current state property regime with a real property regime, and handing out the remaining government shares of the SOEs to the princeling families that have de facto control, could change this orientation dramatically.

A Chinese Chaebol system, essentially.

By: admin

admin — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:44:52 +0000

More non-encouragement.

By: northanger

northanger — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:59:21 +0000

we’re done!

By: admin

admin — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:12:20 +0000

@ Northanger, Fotrkd
Can you guys please shift this lively conversation to the right comment thread?

By: northanger

northanger — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 09:55:11 +0000

John Brown (Discourses and Sayings of Our Lord Jesus Christ, p.403): ‘Ye shall show that ye are my disciples.'[30]

[30] “ἐμοί—mehi vel mei. Fundamentum Christianismi, fieri discipulum Christi; fastigium, esse discipulum Christi.”—Bengel [Gnomon Novi Testamenti]

“fieri discipulum” only appears once in “The Pauline Formula”, p. 15.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realized_eschatology

Realized eschatology is a Christian eschatological theory popularized by C. H. Dodd (1884–1973) that holds that the eschatological passages in the New Testament do not refer to the future, but instead refer to the ministry of Jesus and his lasting legacy.[1] Eschatology is therefore, not the end of the world but its rebirth instituted by Jesus and continued by his disciples, a historical (rather than transhistorical) phenomenon. Those holding this view generally dismiss “end times” theories, believing them to be irrelevant. They hold that what Jesus said and did, and told his disciples to do likewise, are of greater significance than any messianic expectations.

apologies for putting this in the wrong post.

By: northanger

northanger — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 09:20:47 +0000

don’t know transversal of Genesis 3:21 — John 15:4 maybe. anyway, the most amazing bell curve ever.

The foundation of Christianity in a man is for him to become a disciple of Christ: its complete superstructure is to be a disciple of Christ. —Johann Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament [John XV.8]