Re:China
by kome on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @02:05PM
(#9034845)
The main fallacy in that article is that USA is important because innovation. The conservative solution proposed by the author is to go back to an hypothetical golden age "that encourages investment, welcomes immigrants, rewards risk-taking, hard work, and radical thinking, and minimizes impediments to doing new things", like the good old times before.
My question is: what are you talking about? The "social" America of the '50s and '60s? The America of the technological boom of the 90s?
America is even more innovative today than decades before. More risks are taken today than before (the crisis of 2008 is also proof of that).
Are you sure that lack of innovation is the problem? Do you think that china is getting bigger and bolder because more risk taking? LOL no. They are conservative and fatalistic and hierarchical as ever.
I think that the American disease should be explained in another way.
My question is: what are you talking about? The "social" America of the '50s and '60s? The America of the technological boom of the 90s?
America is even more innovative today than decades before. More risks are taken today than before (the crisis of 2008 is also proof of that).
Are you sure that lack of innovation is the problem? Do you think that china is getting bigger and bolder because more risk taking? LOL no. They are conservative and fatalistic and hierarchical as ever.
I think that the American disease should be explained in another way.