Hacker News Reader

> for consolidating elections to once every four years so that politicians have time to cool down from the constant campaign hype pressure.

You talk about "western" politicians, but this point feels like it only really applies to the US with its ridiculous two-year cycle.

A 4-years cycle is also nowhere near enough for any long term project. This is the cost of democracy where you have to give people short term wins in order to win an election.

Infrastructure projects can take decades. The country’s budget is a 0 sum game. Developing something expensive will lead to cuts or shortages somewhere else and those people suffering will make you pay in the next election because they won’t care about the greater good from 20 years from now.

Your opponents will exploit any perceived failure and use it against you. And they will equally take your victories and sell them as their own if your long term project happens to bear fruit on their term. So everyone focuses on what looks good inside a term of a few years to sell in the next election.

The most common long-term project worldwide is the raiding of the public chest. :-)

> You talk about "western" politicians, but this point feels like it only really applies to the US with its ridiculous two-year cycle.

I'm German, it's even worse here because we have 16 states plus the EU elections and that means you have about three to five distinct elections in any given year. And with the exception of the small states no one gives a fuck about (sorry Saarland), each and every single of the state elections is seen as a sign for federal politics.

And a general election process that lasts from January to November of every fourth year, and an executive hobbled until the January after that because, goodness knows why, you get to remain in power for weeks after someone else has taken the mandate to govern.

> and an executive hobbled until the January after that because, goodness knows why, you get to remain in power for weeks after someone else has taken the mandate to govern.

Heh in Germany we have taken our sweet time as well. 2017 for example? That stretched into 2018, half a year [1].

The key difference is, while the outgoing executive holds their position until the new government coalition is formed, there is a strong tradition in a) the outgoing government to not abuse their positions to force their successors' hands, b) for everyone (including the far-left, excluding the far-right) to cooperate with each other to keep the country running and c) for cooperation across the aisles in general, even when there is a stable government. And there is no problem when the government/parliament cannot pass a budget either. Governmental authorities and public services keep on running assuming the last year's budget.

[1] https://www.mehr-demokratie.de/nachrichten/einzelansicht/die...

> goodness knows why,

It takes time for the horses to bring the electors to Washington.

> In contrast, Western corporate execs have an event horizon between "next quarterly reports" and "vesting/bonus period",

The big tech companies ran without profit for a long time. People worried a lot about that but they did it anyway.

High interest rates in general are a strong deterrent from investing with that kind of time horizon. The risk free rate of return has skyrocketed, and investors no longer have to turn to risky gambles to make a return. The same thing happened in Canada when housing was propped up by the government in ‘08, leading to real estate sucking all of the money out of the economy. The US is in this position now because of how allergic all politicians have become to using taxes for the purpose of cooling down the economy. The only feasible campaigns are full inflationary spending, all the time, and the only difference is who the money goes to. The stupid electorate who vote for candy for dinner instead of eating vegetables are equally to blame.

> I'm rather calling for dissolution of the stock market for speculation

this would do so much untold good, i hope i live to see it