One Percent Education

[Canuckguy]

<p>

Just because a one party state can govern in a way that is effective at stimulating fast economic growth in a low or middle income country does not necessarily mean that it will. Obviously, some do and some do not.</p>

<p>Of course, the disadvantage of a one party state is that if you are among those who will lose out due to the policies enacted to maximize economic growth, you are less likely to be listened to (or may be punished for complaining).

No argument from me. The question still stands though. Why some do and some don’t? IOW, what are the necessary ingredients for development? </p>

<p>When I looked at this issue couple of decades ago, I could only find 4 countries that were in fact developing. They were and still are as rare as hen’s teeth. What did they have in common? They are small and rather homogeneous, follow capitalism, and have a long culture of discipline and work. (Looking from the other end, I also found 1 country that managed to “undevelop” herself, and the blame can be squarely placed on the leadership).</p>

<p>I think I was only partly correct of course, but it was the work of a college student after all. My fascination of this topic to this day has not changed though: How do you discover, train, and get top talent into power where they can do the most good. I personally do not think we are doing a good job here. Holistic admission, grade inflation, nonspecific admission and such are helping to obliterate the difference between the privileged and the talented, and our ruling class doesn’t want it any other way. The elites are simply handmaiden, to power.</p>

<p>When I see some posters trying to derail me, I know I am hitting some raw nerves. So be it.</p>

<p>Got to go.</p>