Found in 5 comments
by dangoldin
2018-04-15
For those interested in the theory of lobbying and special interest groups one of my favorite books is Mancur Olson's Rise and Decline of Nations (https://www.amazon.com/Rise-Decline-Nations-Stagflation-Rigi...). It's an incredibly approachable read that does a wonderful job digging into the incentives and explains why lobbying exists and why it works.
Original thread
by crassus
2013-11-18
Tianming. If some other system governs better than democracy, then we should use it.

As Moldbug points out, the current US Govcorp is structured as an employee collective[1][2], which no competitive corporation chooses as a system of organization in the free market. As Mancur Olson points out, bureaucracies tend to get more inefficient over time[3].

I know we've all been raised to believe that democracy is love and rainbows, but maybe it's time to rethink that.

[1] http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/07/why-whe...

[2] http://foseti.wordpress.com/2011/02/02/on-government-employm...

[3] http://www.amazon.com/The-Rise-Decline-Nations-Stagflation/d...


Original thread
by mclin
2010-09-01
Read Rise and Decline of Nations by Mancur Olson. http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Decline-Nations-Stagflation-Rigid...

It explains this phenomenon. Basically, for a group of size n, members only get 1/n of the value they contribute towards any collective goal, so noone bothers, unless coerced, like with unions.


Original thread
by nazgulnarsil
2010-01-20
the government as bandit hypothesis makes a lot of sense to me. at the least it explains where money came from (did not arise naturally from barter, was originally a tally for taxes and looting).

the article was tl;dr. did they at least cite mancur olsen for the stationary bandit hypothesis? AFAIK it originated in his book the rise and decline of nations:

http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Decline-Nations-Stagflation-Rigid...


Original thread
by dangoldin
2009-10-03
Although a nice idea, it suffers from the fact that it would be very difficult to get that many people on the same page. Smaller groups are able to come to decisions much more quickly and will be able to move faster.

The lobbiest advantage is that they can afford to raise money quickly and be able to focus it on specific issues.

Although every citizen can together raise a ton of money, once that money is raised it will be very difficult allocating it.

Imagine if people had to come together in order to raise money for museums rather than relying on large individual contributions. It's likely that many fewer museums would exist.

For a deeper look at this I recommend reading the book by Mancur Olson - The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation, and Social Rigidities. It takes a look at special interest groups and their effects on economic growth.

http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Decline-Nations-Stagflation-Rigid...


Original thread

Looking for a good book? Subscribe to the weekly newsletter.