Great line: "While critics often belittle this achievement as mere “cream-skimming,” the sad truth is that much if not most of the world’s cream now curdles in backwards farms and dysfunctional slums."
I like the case of HK as an argument for charter cities. But that arrangement was as a result of the Opium War. I don’t know how plausible it is to recreate such a set of circumstances, esp at scale, in 2026.
As for open borders, the end state is physically clearing out all third world nations, and relocating all third world inhabitants to first world countries. Just as a tiny real world example, take a look at what’s happening in Europe. This infatuation of yours has no practical application that doesn’t ruin destination countries.
And, of course, voting the First World countries into Third World countries, so that there are no more First World countries and no more prosperity anywhere.
No idea. Depends on the metric you use, I think. GDP per capita, they’re not very high. Their first tier cities rival anybody anywhere, while their backwaters are as backwards as just about anywhere. Their overall economy ranks second in the world I believe. So I don’t know how you combine those realities.
Charter cities seems non-starter trusting an authoritarian govt that has already created the conditions ppl are trying to flee, to not nationalize as soon as you've built something worth taking.
Without an army or some tangible political stake in the overarching govt at least; and if you do, starts to look like neo-colonialism, not that I'd complain, but hard sell PR wise.
I am fascinated by the idea of charter cities and this is a persuasive argument! #Caplan4UNAmbassadorGen
Certainly worth grappling with the downsides though; sovereignty, 'neo-colonialism', and governance are the first that come to mind. Also I think redistribution could be more 'effective' taking from the developed rich /s(!)
A problem with charter cities is the amount of negotiation involved in setting them up. Given the amount of interventionist nonsense in which the US indulges, I would like to see the US government 'negotiate' a 99-year lease wherever they happen to be intervening. There could be a Hong Kong in Afghanistan, Iraq, and probably a few other places.
Great line: "While critics often belittle this achievement as mere “cream-skimming,” the sad truth is that much if not most of the world’s cream now curdles in backwards farms and dysfunctional slums."
I like the case of HK as an argument for charter cities. But that arrangement was as a result of the Opium War. I don’t know how plausible it is to recreate such a set of circumstances, esp at scale, in 2026.
As for open borders, the end state is physically clearing out all third world nations, and relocating all third world inhabitants to first world countries. Just as a tiny real world example, take a look at what’s happening in Europe. This infatuation of yours has no practical application that doesn’t ruin destination countries.
And, of course, voting the First World countries into Third World countries, so that there are no more First World countries and no more prosperity anywhere.
Say, Steve, is the People’s Republic of China now a First World country, a Second World country, or a Third World country?
No idea. Depends on the metric you use, I think. GDP per capita, they’re not very high. Their first tier cities rival anybody anywhere, while their backwaters are as backwards as just about anywhere. Their overall economy ranks second in the world I believe. So I don’t know how you combine those realities.
Footnote 2 has an incorrect link. It should be https://chartercitiesinstitute.org/faq/
chartercitiesINSTITUTE.org, not chartercities.org
Charter cities seems non-starter trusting an authoritarian govt that has already created the conditions ppl are trying to flee, to not nationalize as soon as you've built something worth taking.
Without an army or some tangible political stake in the overarching govt at least; and if you do, starts to look like neo-colonialism, not that I'd complain, but hard sell PR wise.
https://mdnadimahmed888222.substack.com/p/satyapur-the-delaware-of-bangladesh
https://mdnadimahmed888222.substack.com/p/satyapur-ii
I wrote two manifestoes about a much more limited charter city implementation for Bangladesh. I would love to get your opinion on the matter.
I am fascinated by the idea of charter cities and this is a persuasive argument! #Caplan4UNAmbassadorGen
Certainly worth grappling with the downsides though; sovereignty, 'neo-colonialism', and governance are the first that come to mind. Also I think redistribution could be more 'effective' taking from the developed rich /s(!)
A problem with charter cities is the amount of negotiation involved in setting them up. Given the amount of interventionist nonsense in which the US indulges, I would like to see the US government 'negotiate' a 99-year lease wherever they happen to be intervening. There could be a Hong Kong in Afghanistan, Iraq, and probably a few other places.
Brilliant memo. Did it cause the Gates Foundation to reconsider? Has any other foundation taken up the cause instead?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that if either of those had happened, you would have mentioned it in the preamble.
Market principles face social desirability bias, as you have often remarked, even among the market's great successes, like Mr. Gates.