What you said about "next fiscal quarter" is exactly right, and goes along with us (in the US) only thinking politically in 4 year cycles... which means on average we are thinking only 2 years ahead.

China is the master of the long-game. It's shortest cycles are 5 year tactical plans. Their strategic plans go far beyond.

I don't know what the solution is in the US (and West in general) to be able to think 25+ years ahead, as no material incentive would do the job; only cultural/society/civilizational goals make someone think that far ahead (religion does too).

If the US can't think that far ahead for the same reasons as China, maybe we need to find things we care about long term and tie economic development to that (family, religion, and even our potential extreme longevity).

▲

tw04 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> I don't know what the solution is in the US (and West in general) to be able to think 25+ years ahead, as no material incentive would do the job

Eliminate share buybacks. Raise the top tax bracket to 95% on earnings over $10m. Executive shares cannot be exercised until retirement if you really want to get aggressive.

The nuclear option would be stocks cannot be used as collateral for loans, it would shore up 90% of the nonsense overnight and have 0 negative impact on 99.99% of the general public.

▲

andriy_koval 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think having wealth tax would make rich push money to innovations and production more aggressively.

▲

Eueudhsbsj32 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why would the elites ever agree to that?

It's already too easy for those in power to control popular opinion, and only getting easier, so you're not going to get mass protests or revolutions that upset the status quo.

▲

throw-the-towel 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

How would raising the taxes force people to think 25 years ahead?

	▲	tw04 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		If I can reinvest my profits to grow my business or pay most of it out in taxes I’m probably reinvesting it if there’s a long term gain to be had. Unlike trickle down economics, it’s not just a failed theory. It’s something we’ve seen in action and it works as expected.
	▲	arrosenberg 6 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Taxing profits incentivizes reinvestment over reaping.

▲

Qworg 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This was the role of those "unelected bureaucrats" in the US that some folks decry.

It is far shorter than a fiscal quarter - the next market open is all that matters.

	▲	verdverm 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		with the president trying to sell early access to his market moving "truths"

▲

metabagel 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> and goes along with us (in the US) only thinking politically in 4 year cycles

One of the two parties spends most of their intellectual capital on acquiring and maintaining power. The other party spends theirs on policies which they rarely have power to enact.

▲

bell-cot 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> ...only cultural/society/civilizational goals make someone think that far ahead ...

Not saying I was paying close attention to America from 1850 to 1950, but a variety of cultural and social factors - especially less hyper-individualism, and people's futures being far more closely tied to the success of their families, neighborhoods, towns, etc. - lead to very priorities.