Full summary with key concepts highlighted: economic development innovation + patents incentives positive externalities economic potential extractive v inclusive economic systems centralized government + political systems globalization + trade quality of life infrastructure Technology drives economic development and benefits countries' quality of life. However, some nations are organized in a way that hinders economic development often through Incentives and opportunities. For example, while innovation is good and creates a spillover effect of positive externalities, innovation is disincentivized by monopolies and antitrust laws in certain countries decreasing national economic potential. This is highlighted by Gambia where extraction is indeed incentivized over an inclusive economy. In Gambia, one has little incentive to go into the business industry because this would intentionally create positive externalities (jobs). Why would one do this when they can simply take all the wealth for themselves? The limited centralized government has much to do with the incentives for this extractive economy. With a weak centralized government, not much funding goes into public goods/services (so fewer positive externalities are created). Now, Gambia has horrible roads which are only worsening. Poor infrastructure and limited funding from a centralized government hinders the trade of ideas and technology, thus hindering economic growth potential. A Nation must have inclusive economic institutions to bring the economy to its full potential. This is demonstrated through the US patent system created by the founding fathers to incentivize an inclusive economy. With centralized power, the government had the ability to create an equitable patent process that protects innovators and therefore incentivizes innovation, thus emphasizing the desire for an inclusive economy. However, in order to create an inclusive economy, one needs an inclusive political system. Despite the Zimbabwe people wanting a more inclusive economy, their political system is extractive, and therefore not inclusive. Policies are made on behalf of what would give the politicians more money instead of serving the people. The same thing happened in China after the Cultural revolution. The government pushed for a more inclusive economy, yet the politicians maintained an extractive agenda. In fact, even now, the country is divided between “individuals” and “the elite”. The Communist government restricts the flow of ideas, therefore restricting innovation. For example, if journalists are censored, change (instability) will be less likely to occur. Throughout history, many countries such as China intentionally hindered economic potential and trade, instead valuing national stability and tradition. Although ancient China was thought to be super ahead of the game, it was only due to the free flow of ideas into the country at the time. This has changed in the last 100 years or so. Some dictator countries did economically well, not because of their specific government, but despite it. For example, Russia and Singapore were just lucky enough to have massive reserves of natural resources. Overall, a democracy serves in the best interest of the people through ideological globalization and an inclusive economy. These factors boost economic potential and a nation's quality of life. So what's the key to a more inclusive economy? The talk said representative politicians can create policies reflecting the people’s values, but I disagree. The cultural shift comes first in my mind. Because why would I elect a politician who doesn't reflect my views? Actually, this seems more complicated. Not sure. In the Q&A, the author mentions a Botswana success story which I want to dig into more. The author describes how Botswana was able to maintain a centralized government even through being colonized by the British. Bozwana skillfully kept the best of both the traditional Botswana system and the British political system, merging it into one inclusive economic system. Huh. the talk was from 2015 so I wonder how that's working out now.
Thanks for the presentation. In Sri Lanka during the colonial period before independence, the country was under total authority of the British colonial masters. Legality was upheld and free entrepreneurships were at their best. So country was second only to Japan in Asia (53 countries) before the independence. With its freedom, got the democracy and local politicians destroyed the state structure to manipulate all affairs on their whims and fancies. Now legality at its worst. Politically affiliated members to the ruling party can act disregarding the law. Favoritism is rampart. Now the country is in a real mess. Apparently two basic criteria for success are legality and free enterprises. So, democracy seems to be immaterial, I feel. Democracy without legality is worse than dictatorships, if uphold the legality. Thank you!
Great point. West coast American cities are technically democratic but have stopped enforcing many laws leading to chaos, businesses leaving, and stifled entrepreneurship. At the same time they have extremely overbearing housing policies and governance for law abiding citizens, stifling development with the exact opposite problem when they exert too much control. There’s a balance where people are free but society is regulated to avoid intrusions on innovation by both criminals and power obsessed governments. Having the right to vote is little solace when it’s dangerous walk down the street and when the government is constantly trying to punish you at the same time. And it is indeed possible to democratically elect such a stupid government when the minds of the people become sufficiently degraded. Democracy is the only POTENTIALLY free system but it requires constant vigilance and high levels of responsibility from a critical mass of citizens to actually work. Americans in large numbers are forgetting this.
It's interesting to point out that South Africa's current corruption points to extractive institutions: it's not about the colour of people's skin. It's about incentives and checks & balances to power.
Very good book. Changed my view in many subjects and areas. I'd like you to dissect what those institutions are and what specific purposes they must fulfil.
My new friends, the scholars using their Creation's gift to face the truth, study history, produce knowledge, share with the world and make this place more informed so that people can make better, prior and informed decisions. Acemoglu, Robinson and Johnson are my new friends in this journey of history and global economics...
Summery Successful contries take advantage of innovation Successful countries are economic inclusive Economic inclusion and political inclusion are correlated You can't have have economic inclusive economy with extractive political institutions
I'm agree with every word that sounds here and in my opinion if "we" have some inclusive institutions now and "we" can to achieve inclusive full institutions in the world
The way he took China as Soviet Union really shows his ignorance on this topic... I guess he got nothing better to explain China as an excursion in his theory...
One thing that can be noted is democracy itself does not grant a country success. What you need more than political freedom is economic freedom and clear rules, rule of law, good judicial system etc. Even an authoritarian country can achieve good results if those who want to invest and start a business know the rules and they know that the rules will not change and their investments will not be taken away by some populist who comes to power. That is why China can be successful or Singapore in the first decades of its existence. Of course it is hard to get an authoritarian ruler (group of rulers) who understands this, who also promotes and works to increase level of education in the country, battles tribalism (if it exists in the country), permits some pluralism of opinions just to know what the people want and what are the possible futures etc., but sometimes it is also hard to do it in democracy like India, where there are a lot of various groups each having their own interests... You can be a rather decent democracy by region standards, like India or Ukraine, but it does not guarantee economic success if corruption is rampant and politicians do not care about state interests
To me it's simple. Dictatorship develops good economy if the dictator is good. That;s why auth countries are all over the place, while democraies have slower but steady and predictable development. An example of how Chinese political system hinders development is recent flooding which was caused by local politicians spending money on luxurious cars rather than on fixing the dams.
Eh, Bill Gates also made his money with practical monopolies and he destroyed several innovative companies (bought their innovations, took them innovations the market) and MS was investigated for unfair use of monopoly power in several cases (US and EU). And Carlos Slim made his money by buying off politicians, bribing local officials and working with the organized crime families in Mexico. Patents also cause barriers to entry, slow down dissemination of innovation, restrict competition and slow down efficiency gains. Not very inclusive that. China doesn't really bow to patents that much, but they are still innovating (and yes, copying furiously). But it somehow doesn't fit Robinson's "nice thesis" about US system being the superior inclusive economy. All in all, sounds like cherry-picking reasoning to me. Just picking ideas that support your own thesis. One good reason why even resource rich nations with good enough education fail is the US/IMF/WB meddling along with disaster-indebting and economic hitmen (re: Perkins). Then again, this doesn't fit any nice and clean academic model, but it is based on real, actual case studies from the real world.
+nanomyou5 And he doesnt seem to mention the whole global nuclear powered millitary controlling the distribution of energy and resources.... Blockades, assassinations, embargos, "international law" & permenant member states, ETC ETC ETC... Im sure if North Korea had hundreds of millions of people and a gigantic territory like the US or China or Russia does, they would be able to trade more freely with the rest of the world...
Many people thought about USSR like you, you know what happened, communists did really similar like Chinese today, they took all their technology from mainly Germany and inflated production, China has qualities like that it depends how they change
That's why small countries are the richest in the world per capita I suppose... and in general it is EASIER not to be poor when you have small territory and population, countless examples@@gummipalle
China is the most capitalist country in the world to has such progress and strong economy. Also the technology china is developing is breathtaking. Democratic countries,or western countries can't even make semiconductors to supply their industries which have been shut down for three years now. This guy has not much knowledge about china and he must travel there to see what is happening there. Here in U.S. is extremely hard to find a job in engineering field because nothing is made in here at all. You can successfully find a job at McDonald's in a very democratic way!
I do hope people in China, especially those who make decisions, do not think like you do because in that case China will never achieve its full potential.
"bill gates made his money by innovating" Pffffff that's bullshit. Maaaybe at first the spark that started it all was innovation. That's debatable, however let's concede that the guy is a top-notch-one-in-a-million innovator. Ok, cool. Later on, the bulk of his money was made from monopolic practices. Still is. Carlos Slim has always been an I-make-money-owning-stuff bussinessman, just like Bill's pal, the guy who made it all possible: Steve Ballmer.
@@Andrii87 one reason being he stood for his people, in Zimbabwe Europeans were taking majority of the assets and natives were struggling to build their own wealth
For what I've seem in this video he has some patriotic irrational bias. Most big US technological advances was forced by the government. US also played a big role on undermining other nations growth with "big stick" policy.
he,s wrong about mugabie oor any dictatatr ship deeply , history plays a huge role colonisation , imperalsim , please learn more then say what you think why some are poor I moslty found poor countries are imperail exploaition , more then any thing and is always exploited by empire as middle east by non call USA empire
How does that contradict his conclusions? Private or state driven innovations, USA and Canada have been more successful than other countries in Americas, due to their political buildup. However, as capital gets concentrated into the hands of smaller and smaller group of elites in US, and lack of easily accessible healthcare and education becomes an obstacle, also IS political system has been downgraded in ratings from "democracy" to "flawed democracy" even before Trump, so US might start to lag behind the rest of the West.
@@TotalRookie_LV this guy is dumb, he laughed at the idea that China would have an economy bigger than the one of the US, happened 2 years after this talk. He can't predict or understand shit, he is just talking stuff that make people happy and motivated but reality doesn't work that way, the truth will often left you nothing but frustations.
In his book he acknowledges that while US and western societies are relatively inclusive, leading to greater prosperity, they also set up or empowered extractive colonial institutions in other countries that formed the power structures that keep them poor, even to this day. And regarding the fact that many technologies were driven by war and the US Government: the incentives for innovation were still there. People who created the advances sponsored by the government were generally rewarded financially, so the incentives were still there. Additionally, in his book he points out that even in heavily centralized extractive societies, some innovation is possible as it can benefit those in power directly, but innovation that disrupts the extractive power structure is restricted. This means that extractive societies can generate growth, but it is limited by the political actions of the elites who don’t want to lose power.
Hello world! If you want to get a clear and detailed summary of "Why Nations Fail" by Daron Acemoğlu & James A. Robinson + the critics of the book, I just made this animated video that may be of help for you : ruclips.net/video/rNSna19Iwcg/видео.html
He ignored to raise an important point which is that some nations fail because of U.S. sanctions e.g. North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Iraq. Also, some nations prosper because of U.S. support e.g. Israel and Ukraine. Moreover, Western European countries, especially Great Britain, prospered because of their invasion of many Indian and African countries leaving those disadvantaged countries to famine and economic collapse.
I feel like his approach is a bit shallow, but very flexible and powerful, and a great place to start when looking at societal issues in a given country or city. Often the best theories and approaches feel like they should be obvious, so may feel more shallow than they actually are.
It seems like he is afraid of saying capitalism. And the oposit of e tractive is not working inclusive. Seems strand a solar is struggling with oposit and wields. 😂😂😂 He is funny every comunist idiology is not working nut not because it is comunist but because it is not inclusive 😂😂but inclusulcivety is the faudation of cunism Good work but really strange choice of words
the analysis of these economists in this book is purely scientific , it leaves out human vices like greed and will power . Africa is not rich because of climate ? or geography ? that's wrong because it has the best of these and all resources the world needs , Africa is poor because of European greed and neocolonialism !!!
And because locals were all too happy to serve Arab and European colonisers and sell off their own people, thus turning slave trade into their main industry for several centuries.
@@larrykemet6709 That's plain distilled bullshit. I come from what is *now* again part of the West - a poor European ex-Soviet country. What do we have to do with "keeping Africa poor"? Is that what made us much more wealthier than during Soviet era? No and no!
@@TotalRookie_LV clearly you from Soviet nation, you are not part of those European nation which loot africa dry and clearly I see you not even aware that European nations loot africa since its scramble . you are from a communist country suffering from the the ails of communism . which made the poverty you experience
P.S. A simple test. If keeping someone poor was the way to prosperity, we should see growing numbers of poor as there is a growing number of wealthy people. Is that the case? No! On contrary - poverty is at it's lowest in whole history, so much so, obesity on average has become a bigger problem than starvation.
I'd have asked this speaker 2 questions; 1. Who is the Finance Minister of North Korea? 2. What is the GDP per capita of North Korea? I will bet my life's worth this guy would not have known the answer to these two questions. Then, I'd have said how he could have doctored those pictures, or maybe taken those pictures when North Korea intentionally had a power outage for example. How is this even a premise of an academic study? These guys know nothing about North Korea, or Iran or any other country. Just make crap up to sell some books. Survivor bias all along. I hope Google wouldn't invite hacks like this back.
If you are a foreigner, an acid test is to contrast their views, and based on what arguments regarding your own country, not only with your own perception but of those on whom there is a consensus. How can they hold Great Britain was not an extractive and deprading power?
he,s wrong about mugabie oor any dictatatr ship deeply , history plays a huge role colonisation , imperalsim , please learn more then say what you think why some are poor I moslty found poor countries are imperail exploaition , more then any thing and is always exploited by empire as middle east by non call USA empire
He talks about this in his book. Colonial institutions were extractive and kept countries poor, and when the colonial powers left, often local politicians simply took over the extractive institutions rather than reform them and make them more inclusive. Corruption and extractive institutions are the main issue in Nigeria and Mexico for example, not so much colonialism. Now I do think you have a point: he does underemphasize modern neocolonial empires like the US which sometimes extract resources from other countries unfairly. However, these thing happen through local extractive institutions: local dictators and corrupt politicians benefit from the extractive set up and are a big factor into why their countries remain poor.
Full summary with key concepts highlighted:
economic development
innovation + patents
incentives
positive externalities
economic potential
extractive v inclusive economic systems
centralized government + political systems
globalization + trade
quality of life
infrastructure
Technology drives economic development and benefits countries' quality of life. However, some nations are organized in a way that hinders economic development often through Incentives and opportunities. For example, while innovation is good and creates a spillover effect of positive externalities, innovation is disincentivized by monopolies and antitrust laws in certain countries decreasing national economic potential.
This is highlighted by Gambia where extraction is indeed incentivized over an inclusive economy. In Gambia, one has little incentive to go into the business industry because this would intentionally create positive externalities (jobs). Why would one do this when they can simply take all the wealth for themselves? The limited centralized government has much to do with the incentives for this extractive economy. With a weak centralized government, not much funding goes into public goods/services (so fewer positive externalities are created). Now, Gambia has horrible roads which are only worsening. Poor infrastructure and limited funding from a centralized government hinders the trade of ideas and technology, thus hindering economic growth potential.
A Nation must have inclusive economic institutions to bring the economy to its full potential. This is demonstrated through the US patent system created by the founding fathers to incentivize an inclusive economy. With centralized power, the government had the ability to create an equitable patent process that protects innovators and therefore incentivizes innovation, thus emphasizing the desire for an inclusive economy.
However, in order to create an inclusive economy, one needs an inclusive political system. Despite the Zimbabwe people wanting a more inclusive economy, their political system is extractive, and therefore not inclusive. Policies are made on behalf of what would give the politicians more money instead of serving the people.
The same thing happened in China after the Cultural revolution. The government pushed for a more inclusive economy, yet the politicians maintained an extractive agenda. In fact, even now, the country is divided between “individuals” and “the elite”. The Communist government restricts the flow of ideas, therefore restricting innovation. For example, if journalists are censored, change (instability) will be less likely to occur. Throughout history, many countries such as China intentionally hindered economic potential and trade, instead valuing national stability and tradition. Although ancient China was thought to be super ahead of the game, it was only due to the free flow of ideas into the country at the time. This has changed in the last 100 years or so.
Some dictator countries did economically well, not because of their specific government, but despite it. For example, Russia and Singapore were just lucky enough to have massive reserves of natural resources. Overall, a democracy serves in the best interest of the people through ideological globalization and an inclusive economy. These factors boost economic potential and a nation's quality of life.
So what's the key to a more inclusive economy? The talk said representative politicians can create policies reflecting the people’s values, but I disagree. The cultural shift comes first in my mind. Because why would I elect a politician who doesn't reflect my views? Actually, this seems more complicated. Not sure.
In the Q&A, the author mentions a Botswana success story which I want to dig into more. The author describes how Botswana was able to maintain a centralized government even through being colonized by the British. Bozwana skillfully kept the best of both the traditional Botswana system and the British political system, merging it into one inclusive economic system. Huh. the talk was from 2015 so I wonder how that's working out now.
globalization？诺贝尔奖也很水，作者太武断了，非黑即白，难道就 没有50% inclusive + 50% extractive political system？
Thanks for the presentation. In Sri Lanka during the colonial period before independence, the country was under total authority of the British colonial masters. Legality was upheld and free entrepreneurships were at their best. So country was second only to Japan in Asia (53 countries) before the independence. With its freedom, got the democracy and local politicians destroyed the state structure to manipulate all affairs on their whims and fancies. Now legality at its worst. Politically affiliated members to the ruling party can act disregarding the law. Favoritism is rampart. Now the country is in a real mess. Apparently two basic criteria for success are legality and free enterprises. So, democracy seems to be immaterial, I feel. Democracy without legality is worse than dictatorships, if uphold the legality. Thank you!
Great point. West coast American cities are technically democratic but have stopped enforcing many laws leading to chaos, businesses leaving, and stifled entrepreneurship. At the same time they have extremely overbearing housing policies and governance for law abiding citizens, stifling development with the exact opposite problem when they exert too much control. There’s a balance where people are free but society is regulated to avoid intrusions on innovation by both criminals and power obsessed governments. Having the right to vote is little solace when it’s dangerous walk down the street and when the government is constantly trying to punish you at the same time. And it is indeed possible to democratically elect such a stupid government when the minds of the people become sufficiently degraded. Democracy is the only POTENTIALLY free system but it requires constant vigilance and high levels of responsibility from a critical mass of citizens to actually work. Americans in large numbers are forgetting this.
@@doinitforthestreets Yes ❤️👍
It's interesting to point out that South Africa's current corruption points to extractive institutions: it's not about the colour of people's skin. It's about incentives and checks & balances to power.
Very good book. Changed my view in many subjects and areas. I'd like you to dissect what those institutions are and what specific purposes they must fulfil.
My new friends, the scholars using their Creation's gift to face the truth, study history, produce knowledge, share with the world and make this place more informed so that people can make better, prior and informed decisions. Acemoglu, Robinson and Johnson are my new friends in this journey of history and global economics...
Check out Jonathan Haidt too! He’s a great sociologist, and my favorite intellectual right now.
It is awesome to find that Econometrician like Acemoglu wrote a book of development economics without single Greek letter.
Congrats on noble prize
very informative and thought provoking speech.
Summery
Successful contries take advantage of innovation
Successful countries are economic inclusive
Economic inclusion and political inclusion are correlated
You can't have have economic inclusive economy with extractive political institutions
What do you want - a medal?
@@adielstephenson2929 Appreciation would be enough.
It's for personal reference to review later
Lol. "Please welcome me in joining..." Poor guy probably knew he screwed that up the second after he said it.
Lol I was like huh?
Google hires a lot of Lysdexics since we're smart very.
@@cybervigilante I see what you did there
This guy probably wakes up at night thinking about this every night.
You are small for being happy to point where the doer of a deed erred. You should be ashamed of ur self. Lol
Would love to see him in conversation with Jared Diamond
I'm agree with every word that sounds here and in my opinion if "we" have some inclusive institutions now and "we" can to achieve inclusive full institutions in the world
the other Author of the book Daron Acemoglu is a genius.. i highly recommend his speeches ..
The way he took China as Soviet Union really shows his ignorance on this topic... I guess he got nothing better to explain China as an excursion in his theory...
36:32 no kidding. I actually bought an old economics book to see how Soviet Union was shown to be such a successful case
One thing that can be noted is democracy itself does not grant a country success. What you need more than political freedom is economic freedom and clear rules, rule of law, good judicial system etc. Even an authoritarian country can achieve good results if those who want to invest and start a business know the rules and they know that the rules will not change and their investments will not be taken away by some populist who comes to power. That is why China can be successful or Singapore in the first decades of its existence. Of course it is hard to get an authoritarian ruler (group of rulers) who understands this, who also promotes and works to increase level of education in the country, battles tribalism (if it exists in the country), permits some pluralism of opinions just to know what the people want and what are the possible futures etc., but sometimes it is also hard to do it in democracy like India, where there are a lot of various groups each having their own interests... You can be a rather decent democracy by region standards, like India or Ukraine, but it does not guarantee economic success if corruption is rampant and politicians do not care about state interests
The economic fate of a nation is determined by their institutions.
To me it's simple.
Dictatorship develops good economy if the dictator is good. That;s why auth countries are all over the place, while democraies have slower but steady and predictable development.
An example of how Chinese political system hinders development is recent flooding which was caused by local politicians spending money on luxurious cars rather than on fixing the dams.
I bought the book...its large book..🇸🇴🇸🇴
It’s a great book!
Bro somalis need to learn this glad u are learning i am also doing this
Very accurate reference of Chile at. 1:00:36
16:45 Blocking talent & creativity.
My favourite part 36:36
Tough crowd
31:00-32:45 system of life, goal tell you, your system.
Economic growth in the Soviet Union: Work more hours a week!
Ofcourse Monopoly makes you wealthy in EVIL way
Better to be intelectual monopoly
Eh, Bill Gates also made his money with practical monopolies and he destroyed several innovative companies (bought their innovations, took them innovations the market) and MS was investigated for unfair use of monopoly power in several cases (US and EU).
And Carlos Slim made his money by buying off politicians, bribing local officials and working with the organized crime families in Mexico.
Patents also cause barriers to entry, slow down dissemination of innovation, restrict competition and slow down efficiency gains. Not very inclusive that. China doesn't really bow to patents that much, but they are still innovating (and yes, copying furiously). But it somehow doesn't fit Robinson's "nice thesis" about US system being the superior inclusive economy.
All in all, sounds like cherry-picking reasoning to me. Just picking ideas that support your own thesis.
One good reason why even resource rich nations with good enough education fail is the US/IMF/WB meddling along with disaster-indebting and economic hitmen (re: Perkins).
Then again, this doesn't fit any nice and clean academic model, but it is based on real, actual case studies from the real world.
+nanomyou5 And he doesnt seem to mention the whole global nuclear powered millitary controlling the distribution of energy and resources.... Blockades, assassinations, embargos, "international law" & permenant member states, ETC ETC ETC...
Im sure if North Korea had hundreds of millions of people and a gigantic territory like the US or China or Russia does, they would be able to trade more freely with the rest of the world...
Many people thought about USSR like you, you know what happened, communists did really similar like Chinese today, they took all their technology from mainly Germany and inflated production, China has qualities like that it depends how they change
That's why small countries are the richest in the world per capita I suppose... and in general it is EASIER not to be poor when you have small territory and population, countless examples@@gummipalle
Zine ceva și de economia României el Robinson!
China is the most capitalist country in the world to has such progress and strong economy.
Also the technology china is developing is breathtaking.
Democratic countries,or western countries can't even make semiconductors to supply their industries which have been shut down for three years now.
This guy has not much knowledge about china and he must travel there to see what is happening there.
Here in U.S. is extremely hard to find a job in engineering field because nothing is made in here at all.
You can successfully find a job at McDonald's in a very democratic way!
I do hope people in China, especially those who make decisions, do not think like you do because in that case China will never achieve its full potential.
for real!
hm.. I thought ur last name was what you also had in common with Edison?
28:00-30:00 deep problem rigfht there
the problem of the Congo is that they dont have a estate ???? are you crazy?
You missed the point, there are other videos where he explains it much better
I've read his book. He seems to be a terrible public speaker, his ideas are alot more clear and thought through in the book.
Oh come on it wasn't that bad. Maybe slow start, but great speaker for an economist. And don't forget that such books get professional editing.
Wonder how this applies to large companies
Satya Komatineni startups (inclusive) to large companies (extractive) . More equal you can make an organization the more innovative they will be
"bill gates made his money by innovating"
Pffffff that's bullshit.
Maaaybe at first the spark that started it all was innovation. That's debatable, however let's concede that the guy is a top-notch-one-in-a-million innovator. Ok, cool. Later on, the bulk of his money was made from monopolic practices. Still is. Carlos Slim has always been an I-make-money-owning-stuff bussinessman, just like Bill's pal, the guy who made it all possible: Steve Ballmer.
A controversial statement, Mugabe was a good president !
Why?
@@Andrii87 one reason being he stood for his people, in Zimbabwe Europeans were taking majority of the assets and natives were struggling to build their own wealth
👍🏿
Does not explain China
It will, let's see
For what I've seem in this video he has some patriotic irrational bias. Most big US technological advances was forced by the government. US also played a big role on undermining other nations growth with "big stick" policy.
couldn,t agree more
he,s wrong about mugabie oor any dictatatr ship deeply , history plays a huge role colonisation , imperalsim , please learn more then say what you think why some are poor
I moslty found poor countries are imperail exploaition , more then any thing and is always exploited by empire as middle east by non call USA empire
How does that contradict his conclusions? Private or state driven innovations, USA and Canada have been more successful than other countries in Americas, due to their political buildup.
However, as capital gets concentrated into the hands of smaller and smaller group of elites in US, and lack of easily accessible healthcare and education becomes an obstacle, also IS political system has been downgraded in ratings from "democracy" to "flawed democracy" even before Trump, so US might start to lag behind the rest of the West.
@@TotalRookie_LV this guy is dumb, he laughed at the idea that China would have an economy bigger than the one of the US, happened 2 years after this talk. He can't predict or understand shit, he is just talking stuff that make people happy and motivated but reality doesn't work that way, the truth will often left you nothing but frustations.
In his book he acknowledges that while US and western societies are relatively inclusive, leading to greater prosperity, they also set up or empowered extractive colonial institutions in other countries that formed the power structures that keep them poor, even to this day. And regarding the fact that many technologies were driven by war and the US Government: the incentives for innovation were still there. People who created the advances sponsored by the government were generally rewarded financially, so the incentives were still there. Additionally, in his book he points out that even in heavily centralized extractive societies, some innovation is possible as it can benefit those in power directly, but innovation that disrupts the extractive power structure is restricted. This means that extractive societies can generate growth, but it is limited by the political actions of the elites who don’t want to lose power.
Hello world! If you want to get a clear and detailed summary of "Why Nations Fail" by Daron Acemoğlu & James A. Robinson + the critics of the book, I just made this animated video that may be of help for you : ruclips.net/video/rNSna19Iwcg/видео.html
No
He ignored to raise an important point which is that some nations fail because of U.S. sanctions e.g. North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Iraq.
Also, some nations prosper because of U.S. support e.g. Israel and Ukraine.
Moreover, Western European countries, especially Great Britain, prospered because of their invasion of many Indian and African countries leaving those disadvantaged countries to famine and economic collapse.
i found him rather shallow in theory
but i like the book as he collect many historical fact
I feel like his approach is a bit shallow, but very flexible and powerful, and a great place to start when looking at societal issues in a given country or city. Often the best theories and approaches feel like they should be obvious, so may feel more shallow than they actually are.
It seems like he is afraid of saying capitalism. And the oposit of e tractive is not working inclusive. Seems strand a solar is struggling with oposit and wields. 😂😂😂 He is funny every comunist idiology is not working nut not because it is comunist but because it is not inclusive 😂😂but inclusulcivety is the faudation of cunism
Good work but really strange choice of words
the analysis of these economists in this book is purely scientific , it leaves out human vices like greed and will power . Africa is not rich because of climate ? or geography ? that's wrong because it has the best of these and all resources the world needs , Africa is poor because of European greed and neocolonialism !!!
And because locals were all too happy to serve Arab and European colonisers and sell off their own people, thus turning slave trade into their main industry for several centuries.
@@TotalRookie_LV it even has nothing to do with slavery , western institutions are keeping Africa poor on purpose
@@larrykemet6709 That's plain distilled bullshit. I come from what is *now* again part of the West - a poor European ex-Soviet country. What do we have to do with "keeping Africa poor"? Is that what made us much more wealthier than during Soviet era? No and no!
@@TotalRookie_LV clearly you from Soviet nation, you are not part of those European nation which loot africa dry and clearly I see you not even aware that European nations loot africa since its scramble . you are from a communist country suffering from the the ails of communism . which made the poverty you experience
P.S. A simple test. If keeping someone poor was the way to prosperity, we should see growing numbers of poor as there is a growing number of wealthy people. Is that the case? No! On contrary - poverty is at it's lowest in whole history, so much so, obesity on average has become a bigger problem than starvation.
South Africa is a bad example, post-1994 worse economy and more politically extractive.
The United States vs Global Inc?..
Ohhhh, gegen and the Google, the Nacíon failed to the fortunes.
Maybe because currency south Korea printed by amerika
"In sub-saharan african there is a lot of black... " hahaha
Genius!
40:28 ....he should mention IQ of the society
...and he did jumping running around to avoiding the IQ matter
Lol I'm sure intelligence is very important but there is No differences. It hasn't been proven that other races are any smarter or dumber
@@innercitadel3279 yes, there is proof that other races are smarter:
ruclips.net/video/6lsa_97KIlc/видео.html
@@JM-fo1te Unfortunatelly the video link isn't working
@@JM-fo1te Have you checked out other forms of intelligence other than iq?
??????
This guy has no idea what he's talking about..
I'd have asked this speaker 2 questions;
1. Who is the Finance Minister of North Korea?
2. What is the GDP per capita of North Korea?
I will bet my life's worth this guy would not have known the answer to these two questions.
Then, I'd have said how he could have doctored those pictures, or maybe taken those pictures when North Korea intentionally had a power outage for example. How is this even a premise of an academic study? These guys know nothing about North Korea, or Iran or any other country. Just make crap up to sell some books. Survivor bias all along.
I hope Google wouldn't invite hacks like this back.
If you are a foreigner, an acid test is to contrast their views, and based on what arguments regarding your own country, not only with your own perception but of those on whom there is a consensus. How can they hold Great Britain was not an extractive and deprading power?
he,s wrong about mugabie oor any dictatatr ship deeply , history plays a huge role colonisation , imperalsim , please learn more then say what you think why some are poor
I moslty found poor countries are imperail exploaition , more then any thing and is always exploited by empire as middle east by non call USA empire
He talks about this in his book. Colonial institutions were extractive and kept countries poor, and when the colonial powers left, often local politicians simply took over the extractive institutions rather than reform them and make them more inclusive. Corruption and extractive institutions are the main issue in Nigeria and Mexico for example, not so much colonialism. Now I do think you have a point: he does underemphasize modern neocolonial empires like the US which sometimes extract resources from other countries unfairly. However, these thing happen through local extractive institutions: local dictators and corrupt politicians benefit from the extractive set up and are a big factor into why their countries remain poor.