brookings - Post a comment [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
brookings

[ userinfo | sc userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Mar. 2nd, 2017|05:36 pm

begemots
All of the resource acquisition & division social systems can be bad (especially for a given value of "bad", but also in a general way).

Some just seem to be better aligned with certain actual characteristics of humankind than other ones in reference to their supposed ideals and goals.

For example, the socialist system in the USSR was supposed to rest on ideals and goals that were quite reasonable.

However, when added to the political system of particracy and associated lack of free speech and equality, it bred insane amounts of corruption and -- somewhat even more importantly -- lack of concern for the resources.

Stealing from the workplace was ... well... it was THE norm. Because stealing from the State is quite different from stealing from a private owner. In case of private owner, there is somebody who is directly interested in stopping you from stealing. In case of state-owned everything, your boss is in the same boat as you and would be much more persuadable to allow you to continue to steal... as long as you gave him a cut.

As was remarked by some economist(I think) -- one of the main differences between national economies based on natural resources and those on services/industry is that in natural resources economies the good life is for those who operate and control access to the resource. Everybody else in the country is an expense item. In a manufacturing/services-oriented country people are the value.

This, imo, goes a long way to explain why so *few* natural-resource heavily oriented countries are providing quality of life to their population (compared to the income they generate from those resources).

And state-owned resources are like a natural resources in that respect.
link Read Comments

Reply:
From:
( )Anonymous- this user has disabled anonymous posting.
Username:
Password:
Subject:
No HTML allowed in subject
  
Message: