Because it works so well in China ?
Also Ahmadinejad has a master in civil engineering, a PhD in transportation engineering, and has taught as a professor (apparently he has returned to that job).
Also Ahmadinejad has a master in civil engineering, a PhD in transportation engineering, and has taught as a professor (apparently he has returned to that job).
I think the problem is more who our politicians are listening to then what they actually believe themselves. Banning lobbying would probably do a lot more than just trying to elect a bunch of scientists and engineers.
(BTW Botvinnik, the first Soviet chess champion, was trying to push his (weaker than competition) chess-playing program as a basis for running the entire Soviet economy (he explained the weakness of his program for chess by it being more general than the competition; it apparently did not occur to him however that the fact that it lost to other machines and of course to people - this was 1990 - could perhaps mean it might run the economy somewhat worse than say a person. He was an engineer.))
As to electing engineers - let's put it this way: all else being equal, I'd rather be ruled by an EXPERIENCED ex-engineer (not just a guy with a degree) with a track record of achieving something, for which people who worked with them can vouch, than an ex-lawyer or an ex-journalist. But "engineer" by itself is not even a certificate of basic sanity, let alone the ability to lead someone somewhere other than the abyss, and for this HN's comment section provides ample evidence on a daily basis.
Also the USSR didn't just have problems optimizing supply chains. It had a problem deciding what to make. You couldn't buy woolen sweaters so you bought woolen socks and made sweaters from the woolen threads making up the sock (yes, I fucking participated in this fuckery). How is a giant neural network going to figure out how many socks and sweaters people want better than demand affecting prices affecting production, even if I grant you the assumption that the problem of managing the socks supply chain is nailed today?
[1] Nobody was called that as cybernetics was declared "a servant of Imperialism", I guess nominally because automating away jobs hurts workers or something, which is one reason the USSR never produced particularly good computing machinery. But I get whom you refer to.
I do think we need some fairer, structured, open reevaluation of certain laws like US commercial code, income tax and fixed monetary fines which harm the poor and benefit the rich, whereas income-/balance-sheet-based fines (ie Finland)
As trivia, the current UN secretary-general - one of our former PMs - is a Physics and Electrical Engineering graduate.
I suspect that non-Western countries have different preferences for what disciplines to study. For instance, they probably don't have much use for degrees in US law or European art history. STEM subjects happen to be more portable across borders, and can be turned into a job that can pay off more quickly -- a practical issue when you can't fall back on family money.
Huh? Have you looked at it recently? Beijing has made incredible strides in solving air pollution problems. They turned around the situation quickly to pretty decent results -- give them some more time and I'm sure they'll do even better.
China is not doing that bad. And I think one of the reasons why is in fact that high amount of STEM-educated folks in the politburo.
Separately, I want to say: judging per capita they're not doing bad.
Thanks to the CIA
>>China is Authoritarian.
Yes but I would argue they are making large strides in freedom, clearly they have a LONG way to go but you have to see the changes in both the government and the culture.
Is this improvement a result of STEM leaders? Is America's decline in this area also a result of a regression in our Leaders? America used to have Inventors, Businessmen, even scientists as leaders.
There are democratic procedures in China, even if it doesn't extend to every person. As an American you've most likely been indoctrinated to the American flavor of democracy, but even here our votes aren't all equal, as evidenced by the election of Trump despite having fewer popular votes (effectively disenfranchising some American voters).
American democracy is only as perfect or democratic as can be given the constraints in its ability to amend itself (American government was designed specifically to move slowly and prevent concentration of power). It would be fallacious to think that America has the perfect representative governing system. The end goal is to serve the people, and while the government of China may be different, given that the American model isn't perfect, it means there's room for alternative systems to potentially serve the interest of its people in a better way.
If you look at the efficacy of China's government, it's done pretty well objectively in lifting its population out of poverty. As much as US criticizes other governments, you have to realize the US openly admits its own citizens come first, which means you can't really take its criticisms seriously as in the best interest of its target.