• rood_sandstorm@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s what happens when there’s no bureaucracy and regulations standing in the way of progress. But there’s a cost

    • Whiskeypants17@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bureaucracy and regulation that help corporate greed are bad, sure, but bureaucracy and regulations that help the consumer are good things for progress.

      For example, the usa homeownership rate was in the 40% range until programs post ww2 boosted it up into the 60% range. Great Britain was even worse. Some economist somewhere decided homeownership was good, and now usa/canada/aus/gb all put programs in place that boosted their numbers to the 60-70 range we see today.

      Compared to china’s 90% it is not as high, but there were some costs to that as well.

      • TPatS@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think he means that in China, if the government decides something happens, it happens. For example, with China’s rapid expansion of their high speed rail network, environmental concerns were often ignored and consultation with local residents near the proposed tracks often did not take place or was brushed aside to get the project underway as quickly as possible. Compare this to a western country where a project like a high speed train line would spend years getting bogged down in environmental consultations and feedback loops from stakeholders.

        • stav_and_nick@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Which is hilarious because Chinese provincial bureaucracy is legendary for its pettiness and slow movement

          Honestly, what’s funny is that American and Chinese online bitching about their governments’ bureaucracies are practically identical. People call them lazy, low paid and relient on good benefits, too obsessed with affirmative action, etc