" Countries that have focused solely on fundamentals and invested in education and governance without successfully promoting successful structural change have reaped meager rewards in terms of economic growth. The supply of human capital and good institutions yields litle growth without simultaneous changes on the demand side of the economy, which typically come from the promotion of new, modern economic activities, and the structure of production, which come from [industrial policies] "
You really need to read Super Imperialism by Michael Hudson. The only countries that were allowed to develop were the ones given the green light to by USA. But why China? to show the USSR off. You want o have have a leg up on the development game, it sure helps to murder all the leftists in you country. *Indonesia, South America* Then you can you could count on an untamable whirlwind of FDI to fly through your country and leave just as suddenly. And you can count on any any borrowing you put towards development to come just before a crash so as to force you through a structural adjustment program from the IMF. You would have to be a fool to think of america as anything but a bunch of blood thirsty money hungry psychopaths without one one flinching instinct towards good will, ever.
Your comment about IIT struck home. I live&work in Silicon Valley, with large teams of Desis and smaller crews of Chinese immigrants. To my knowledge, India's primary export to the US has been very smart and competent engineers. This is not how you build home-grown industries!
I had not realized that this was essentially a welfare program for the Brahmin class.
America can peacefully handle Hegemony to another republic, but with the Chinese empire this is impossible. The astoundingly peaceful American Hegemony is the result of nuclear Mutual Assured Destruction and a democratic hegemon (that does not want to annex territories because that would imply integrating foreign populations in participatory internal politics).
China is not democratic, so you do not have Pax Democrática with it.
Eastern Europe is a lot stronger in math knowledge than the Western European cohort, not sure how the difference there can be explained except by capital abundance
This is good! But I think East Asia had a hidden advantage on this front: their history.
China basically invented standardized testing. Literate bureaucrats had huge social power and prestige in all East Asian countries for 1000+ years. All this left East Asia with a culture that values education as the path to social mobility.
As evidence for this, Chinese literacy was miles ahead of India long before the Reform Era. And it wasn't thanks to Chinese script being easy to master...
PS. I think the source might overestimate Chinese "harmonized cognitive skills". Do these include the rural population? The rural Chinese have significantly lower learning outcomes -- tragically so -- but are always neglected from Chinese international comparisons. And they are still almost half of the population.
Check Scott Rozelle's work on this. It's not happy reading (except if you want China to fail.)
Oh interesting. And very surprising. Rozelle, for example, finds a 10-point gap in IQ scores between urban and rural school children (nothing to do with genes). I wonder how his and Schleicher's work relate to each other. The rural areas have a lot of school dropouts, Rozelle finds, so perhaps there is some self-selection in the PISA scores. But I find this still very surprising.
This was a thing of beauty. I guess my question is what was it, then, that made Asian nations not only invest more on education but, at least from where I sit (Panama), get more outta each dollar spent? My guess is different political regimes, ie some were more rent-seeking than others, but would love to hear your thoughts
Great, compelling data. I wonder how the same figures looked at the time when the US rose to its top global position eg US vs UK/FR/DE? If so perhaps there are other factors, perhaps also causal, common to cognitive training and work-occupation value? In any case, I'd say the conclusion stands.
Being quite aware of the situation, the US strategy will be (is already?) to contrive ways to reduce the human development of other countries.
The answers to your questions may lie in the very fact that a "global division of labor" has been pursued in the first place. A planetary division of labor is a paradigm that seeks minimal redundancy and so it will, almost by definition, severely limit development in most places because diversified and heterogenous scientific and industrial ecosystems will not develop and all the second, third, and so on effects that they generate will never occur at all...
" Countries that have focused solely on fundamentals and invested in education and governance without successfully promoting successful structural change have reaped meager rewards in terms of economic growth. The supply of human capital and good institutions yields litle growth without simultaneous changes on the demand side of the economy, which typically come from the promotion of new, modern economic activities, and the structure of production, which come from [industrial policies] "
- A NEW GROWTH STRATEGY FOR DEVELOPING NATIONS
Dani Rodrik and Joseph E. Stiglitz
January 2024
You really need to read Super Imperialism by Michael Hudson. The only countries that were allowed to develop were the ones given the green light to by USA. But why China? to show the USSR off. You want o have have a leg up on the development game, it sure helps to murder all the leftists in you country. *Indonesia, South America* Then you can you could count on an untamable whirlwind of FDI to fly through your country and leave just as suddenly. And you can count on any any borrowing you put towards development to come just before a crash so as to force you through a structural adjustment program from the IMF. You would have to be a fool to think of america as anything but a bunch of blood thirsty money hungry psychopaths without one one flinching instinct towards good will, ever.
Your comment about IIT struck home. I live&work in Silicon Valley, with large teams of Desis and smaller crews of Chinese immigrants. To my knowledge, India's primary export to the US has been very smart and competent engineers. This is not how you build home-grown industries!
I had not realized that this was essentially a welfare program for the Brahmin class.
America can peacefully handle Hegemony to another republic, but with the Chinese empire this is impossible. The astoundingly peaceful American Hegemony is the result of nuclear Mutual Assured Destruction and a democratic hegemon (that does not want to annex territories because that would imply integrating foreign populations in participatory internal politics).
China is not democratic, so you do not have Pax Democrática with it.
The United States is in no wise democratic, in the sense that popular opinion has no impact on government policy.
The American problem is often the opposite: both in politics and high school, popularity is the national obsession.
Oh, a link to a mostly second rate America newpaper trying to make a headline with statistical obfuscation. I rest my case!
www.thenation.com/article/society/cbo-american-wealth-inequality/tnamp/
Eastern Europe is a lot stronger in math knowledge than the Western European cohort, not sure how the difference there can be explained except by capital abundance
This is good! But I think East Asia had a hidden advantage on this front: their history.
China basically invented standardized testing. Literate bureaucrats had huge social power and prestige in all East Asian countries for 1000+ years. All this left East Asia with a culture that values education as the path to social mobility.
As evidence for this, Chinese literacy was miles ahead of India long before the Reform Era. And it wasn't thanks to Chinese script being easy to master...
Yasheng Huang has made me appreciate this fact.
https://onhumans.substack.com/p/read-this-to-understand-china
PS. I think the source might overestimate Chinese "harmonized cognitive skills". Do these include the rural population? The rural Chinese have significantly lower learning outcomes -- tragically so -- but are always neglected from Chinese international comparisons. And they are still almost half of the population.
Check Scott Rozelle's work on this. It's not happy reading (except if you want China to fail.)
Rural PISA results are close to urban, according to the OESD’s Andreas Schleicher
Oh interesting. And very surprising. Rozelle, for example, finds a 10-point gap in IQ scores between urban and rural school children (nothing to do with genes). I wonder how his and Schleicher's work relate to each other. The rural areas have a lot of school dropouts, Rozelle finds, so perhaps there is some self-selection in the PISA scores. But I find this still very surprising.
This was a thing of beauty. I guess my question is what was it, then, that made Asian nations not only invest more on education but, at least from where I sit (Panama), get more outta each dollar spent? My guess is different political regimes, ie some were more rent-seeking than others, but would love to hear your thoughts
Isn't this world bank report on education trustworthy? Sample wise etc.,
Great, compelling data. I wonder how the same figures looked at the time when the US rose to its top global position eg US vs UK/FR/DE? If so perhaps there are other factors, perhaps also causal, common to cognitive training and work-occupation value? In any case, I'd say the conclusion stands.
Being quite aware of the situation, the US strategy will be (is already?) to contrive ways to reduce the human development of other countries.
The answers to your questions may lie in the very fact that a "global division of labor" has been pursued in the first place. A planetary division of labor is a paradigm that seeks minimal redundancy and so it will, almost by definition, severely limit development in most places because diversified and heterogenous scientific and industrial ecosystems will not develop and all the second, third, and so on effects that they generate will never occur at all...