Anyone read this book yet ? your thought ?
>inclusive institution
>extractive institution.
>>1343417
Kamasutra is better desu.
>>1343417
It's a fun read but like any book that tries to cover such a broad sphere it be nit picked here and there but over all it was enjoyable
Right about many things but kind of naive, no institution is inclusive, just limited by outside forces.
Interesting framework but pretty much crumbles when applied to India vs China.
>>1345793
Not really.
There's a chapter dedicated to explaining growth in extractive institutions.
>>1345795
Which didn't really explain the phenomenon. It just stated that there is a maximum amount of growth achievable through such a phenomenon. Well, time can only tell but on a GDP per capita basis, China has pretty much left India in the dust despite converging growth rates. How does a supposedly politically and economically "inclusive" nation fail to spread well-being (even by HDI) to its citizens better than a politically extractive but economically inclusive state?
The only explanation I can give is that India hasn't really achieved a truly centralized state and thus suffers partially from the Somalian phenomenon.
A China vs Russia comparison also brings the framework into question. China basically did a perestroika sans glasnost which gave much better results, both economically and politically.
>>1345845
>India
>inclusive
They're an oligarchy doing a very bad impression of rule of law.
>>1345850
Well, in comparison to the Chinese system, it's relatively more inclusive isn't it?
>>1345856
>chinese not inclusive
They literally give membership to everyone who has any artistic talent or business acumen.
>>1345856
Not really.
You can't have a functional economy without rule of law, and China has actually managed to do better than India in that regard.
Way more high level Chinese officials have been prosecuted for corruption than Indian.
>>1345845
Kerala is is reall amazing though coinsidering the model tha state took up.
It's HDI is 0.920!!.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala_model
>>1345869
To the CPC? If it's merely membership than registering for one of the parties Indian parties should be comparatively easier shouldn't it?
>>1345877
But why is there no rule of law if they supposedly have a centralized state that can enforce said rule of law? The explanation they give for the English elite's adoption of strict rule of law then can't be applied to the Chinese elite and is mysteriously lacking in India, which should not be occurring according to their model.
>>1345845
Indian's caste system is a big problem for their development.
>>1345901
India is fucked in a large number of ways.
For one, it wasn't unified, and so has hundreds of local political scenes with different histories and customs.
Some of these places, like Kerala and Gujarat, are actually quite good.
Generally speaking, India's problem is that they have little history of centralized administration the way China does, and that the model they followed in terms of economic development post independence was socialism.
China managed to break away from Maoism into state capitalism after Mao died in '75.
India has made significant progress in adapting their system to greater economic growth, but they haven't done as much, as soon as the Chinese did.
If your looking to learn about global economics and you have a simple basic understanding, this book helps gain a better understanding. I have learned a lot from it because its easy to read and isn't full of economic jargon.
>>1343417
>mfw you can't answer this with "because Niggers and Faggots"
>>1349206
Who would argue otherwise?
>>1350413
The book? They favor institutional analysis in lieu of other geographic, cultural and ignorance theories.
>>1345921
> China managed to break away from Maoism into state capitalism after Mao died in '75.
They never learn, do they?
>>1343417
War and peace and war is much better
>>1345845
You weren't kidding
>>1345878
Kerala is successful, but its model cannot be applied elsewhere.
It's also still third world despite what
>muh HDI
says
nations fail when they lose sense of a people united by purpose, creed, and moral standard
>>1351961
Yes, but much more than that is needed to succeed.
>>1351319
Been a while since I read the book, but I don't recall them saying that culture/environment/etc. don't matter. Obviously they matter insofar as they contribute to the formation and evolution of institutions.
>>1351985
They don't completely discard it, but basically say that institutional analysis debunks the alternative theories that rely on geographic, cultural and policy (ignorance) factors.
Try to recall the Nogales (USA) vs Nogales (Mexico) example.
