Singapore has been under one guy for decades.

The problem with authoritarianism is transfer of power.

You can get an enlightened ruler once in a while (the expected value of competence is still a lot lower than in a democracy). But long run it devolves like other despotic countries

Kinda, Lee Kuan Yew was prime minister from 1959 to 1990 (and died in 2015, RIP). Goh Chok Tong took over in from 1990 to 2004, and Lee Hsien Loong has been in power since. It's been 30 years since Lee Kwan Yew left office.

Is Lee fils really so different from Lee père? I mean, he's probably a better mathematician, but has he done anything one couldn't imagine his father having done?

There was a TV interview in mid-00s in which the airhead interviewing LHL was really curious about how mad he must have been that Goh had led Singapore for a few years before he took over, and he grew more and more embarrassed as he assured her repeatedly that no, it hadn't been any sort of insult. Hilarious.

> Is Lee fils really so different from Lee père? I mean, he's probably a better mathematician, but has he done anything one couldn't imagine his father having done?

Lee Hsien Loong has been trying to soften his image since he took office.

Two examples: the press ceasing use of military ranks for all politicians (I remember him being addressed as Brigadier-General (Ret.) before), and his wearing of soft pink business shirts whenever he has to make an address.

You have to looks things in perspective. He did way better in almost every metrics as compare to neighboring countries. Show me which EU countries did better in Covid. I would like to see your benchmark.

Taiwan, Vietnam, and Thailand are neighboring, and they've had fewer deaths per capita. (Taiwan has had seven deaths on a 24M population!) [0] But that isn't the point I made. Do you think Singapore under LKY would have performed significantly differently in its response to such a health crisis? I don't.

[0] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

"Neighboring countries" is not the EU. You also can't compare island countries with smaller populations to large land locked ones. Taiwan and New Zealand are probably the best comparisons

vietnam n thailand did way better...

Lee Kuan Yew stayed on as a senior minister in Goh Chok Tong's cabinet, and Lee Hsien Loong is Lee Kuan Yew's son (as I'm sure you know).

So although Lee Kuan Yew left office 30 years ago, his influence has been present ever since.

Stability is good for business.

> Stability is good for business.

For existing business, not new one

Disagree in the general case. Instability costs money, and incumbent players with better access to capital can survive more easially. On the other hand, stability in regulations make it easier for a start up to derisk themselves as there will be a well built up series of case law around the relevant regulations.

Now, if you mean technology instability, completely agreed. That's where innovation comes from.

I think Uber's a perfect example. Taxi regulations either have been stable or essentially unenforced for decades in most places. This gave them the opening. However, everyone getting a smartphone in 2010-2011 is what really blew the doors open.

At the risk of moving the goalposts, if what you're saying is true, then I disagree with the premise that "stability is good for business" is a good thing. This kind of "stability" leads to stagnation and ossification, which I consider to be negatives in any society.

You’re thinking of a different kind of stability. I think OP was referring to thinks like a stable financial system, legal and law enforcement and economic policy.

Those are generally good for new businesses too. Who wants to start a new business when someone comes by and changes all the rules suddenly?

Are we really having a Ferengi _Rules of Acquisition_ thread now?

> War is good for business