Podcasts about charter cities

How do we fight back against the broligarchs? Journalist Gil Durán, of the must-read newsletters Nerd Reich and FrameLab, shows the way, in this week's Gaslit Nation.    Jean-Paul Sartre's famous line, “Hell is other people,” from his play No Exit, written in Nazi-occupied France, captured a grievance that mirrored the era's ideological clashes—fascism, communism, and isolationism, often overlapping and competing, fueling Stalin's genocides, the Holocaust, and World War II. The solution to sharing society with others, it seemed, was elimination: kill them.    This is why democracies rely on tolerance—you don't have to like my existence, but you must let me exist in peace. Yet today's tech oligarchs, having amassed unimaginable wealth, would rather invest billions in creating tech colonies and new religions to justify mass murder, enslavement, and C.E.O. king fiefdoms than address world hunger, provide free education, and strengthen social safety nets. Their vision isn't coexistence—they're building an anti-empathy billionaire bunker cult.    Gil Durán, a San Francisco journalist and former editorial page editor of The Sacramento Bee and The San Francisco Examiner, has a front-row view of the rise of the broligarchs, analyzing their fascist justifications for cruelty in his popular newsletter, Nerd Reich. Durán spent over a decade in California politics, serving as chief communications strategist for Governor Jerry Brown, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, and Attorney General Kamala Harris. His work has appeared in The New Republic, Esquire, and PBS. He co-founded Framelab, a newsletter on politics, language, and the brain, with Dr. George Lakoff. Most importantly we discuss: how do we defeat the Nerd Reich and the Vichy Democrats?    This week's bonus for our Patreon subscribers at the Truth-teller level and higher continues with Gil Durán of Nerd Reich, examining Democratic leaders as controlled opposition—public allies secretly serving the oligarchs. Want to enjoy Gaslit Nation ad-free? Join our community of listeners for bonus shows, ad-free episodes, exclusive Q&A sessions, our group chat, invites to live events like our Monday political salons at 4pm ET over Zoom, and more! Sign up at Patreon.com/Gaslit!   Show Notes:   The Nerd Reich by Gil Durán https://www.thenerdreich.com/   FrameLab https://www.theframelab.org/   Trump on Charter Cities: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/agenda47/agenda47-a-new-quantum-leap-to-revolutionize-the-american-standard-of-living   One of Peter Thiel's favorite book: The Sovereign Individual: How to Survive and Thrive During the Collapse of the Welfare State https://www.publishersweekly.com/9780684810072 Find a Tesla Takedown Protest near you: https://www.teslatakedown.com/   Download/print fliers made by Rise and Resist: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NsdVaglj2-qbaUxPL-aXlPSSMbnjAPV-/view?usp=sharing   https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rCUHIzHfJunm2fnZzdm2sMUWlRYeUtGg/view?usp=sharing   https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MfkQlear-zAGgpkth6j_r85sSoXihilr/view?usp=sharing   https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fXKCdNCrkPOL8nYI8I9WU7-DGIAGHSXb/view?usp=sharing   https://drive.google.com/file/d/14oYKLO_vzVzEU1sxXSaH1kd_lZ1ylaOG/view?usp=sharing   Clip: Elon Musk realizes he might lose his empire: https://bsky.app/profile/internetceleb.bsky.social/post/3lk2rd73f422n   Robert Reich on Twitter: “When Trump was sworn in, Elon Musk's corporations were under more than 32 investigations conducted by at least 11 federal agencies. Most of the cases are now closed or likely to be closed soon, and the federal agencies are being defanged by DOGE. Funny how that works, huh?” https://x.com/RBReich/status/1898780869092884808   Andrea on Bluesky: “Start building a case for Trump and Musk to be arrested by the International Criminal Court” https://bsky.app/profile/andreachalupa.bsky.social/post/3lk47dkixgs2k   EVENTS AT GASLIT NATION: March 17 4pm ET – Dr. Lisa Corrigan joins our Gaslit Nation Salon to discuss America's private prison crisis in an age of fascist scapegoating  March 31 4pm ET – Gaslit Nation Book Club: From Dictatorship to Democracy: A Conceptual Framework for Liberation, which informed revolts in Ukraine, the Arab Spring, Hong Kong, and beyond  NEW! April 7 4pm ET – Security Committee Presents at the Gaslit Nation Salon. Don't miss it!  Indiana-based listeners launched a Signal group for others in the state to join, available on Patreon. Florida-based listeners are going strong meeting in person. Be sure to join their Signal group, available on Patreon. Have you taken Gaslit Nation's HyperNormalization Survey Yet? Gaslit Nation Salons take place Mondays 4pm ET over Zoom and the first ~40 minutes are recorded and shared on Patreon.com/Gaslit for our community 

For the past three years, Isabelle Castro has reported extensively on fintech and crypto in Europe and the US, interviewing industry leaders to track the development of the financial system. At Digital Frontier, she is looking at the cutting edge of innovation, focused primarily on fintech and the web3 space but branching into topics like longevity and biotech, the future of cities and AGI.

Mark Lutter of the Charter Cities Institute and Braavos Cities discusses focusing on tangible, actionable research to help make better decisions for developing charter cities. Lutter explains the significant challenges in city development, including the necessity of political buy-in and complex stakeholder coordination amidst increasing global uncertainty. He notes that younger, growing populations often drive city growth. Alongside Jarrad Hope, they explore topics such as urbanization patterns, financing mechanisms for low-income housing, and economic development strategies essential for successful charter city projects.JOIN THE COMMUNITYLogos TwitterLogos Discord TIMESTAMPS:00:00:31 Who Is Mark Lutter and What Led Him to Charter Cities?00:04:31 What Is the Connection Between Urbanization and Economic Growth?00:07:55 How Do Charter Cities Address Urban Migration?00:09:04 What Are the Key Elements for Effective Urban Governance?00:12:03 What Infrastructure and Governance Are Needed for New Cities?00:15:45 How Did Mark's Journey Lead to Founding the Charter Cities Institute?00:17:51 How Has Increasing Global Uncertainty Affected Charter Cities?00:18:27 What Are the Stages and Challenges of Starting a Charter City?00:21:21 Why Do Charter Cities Have a Controversial Reputation?00:22:31 How Do Charter Cities Compare to Special Economic Zones and Other Models?00:25:15 What Are the Risks and Rewards of Entrepreneurial Communities?00:27:53 How Can a Charter City Develop Its Economy Intentionally?00:31:04 What Lessons Can Be Learned from Real-World Charter City Projects?00:36:21 What Role Do Productivity and Markets Play in Poverty Alleviation?00:37:42 What Criteria Determine the Location of a Charter City?00:39:24 How Do CCI and Bravo Cities Differ in Their Approach?00:40:46 What Is Happening with Charter City Projects in Zanzibar?00:43:59 What Types of Research Facilitate the Development of Charter Cities?00:45:02 Why Is Regional Influence Increasingly Important for Charter Cities?00:45:29 How Can One Get Involved or Learn More About Charter Cities? Logos Press Engine includes Logos Podcast and Hashing It Out. Hashing it Out dives into the mechanisms and hardware of the technology that aid in making sovereign communities.

Art Finch is a South African-American Entrepreneur. Art has experience across South Asia and is interested in setting up Free Private Cities or Charter Cities. In this episode he shares his experiences in Bhutan and shares his theories on how Bitcoin and Free Private Cities can work together.  Timestamps: (00:00) - Intro (01:28) - Art's background & his interest in building a Free Private City (FPC) (10:50) - The need for a Free Private City (13:11) - A look at Shenzhen as an SEZ (16:20) - Education in an FPC context (20:08) - Sponsors (22:22) - Education in an FPC context (contd.) (26:11) - Setting up an FPC in Bhutan (33:56) - Bhutan's leadership views on the FPC  (41:41) - Sponsors (44:00) - Art's insights on Bhutan & Bitcoin mining (46:08) - Potential FPCs in the future X clips: 07:18 - biggest risk to FPC 08:47 - 10:01 - Bhutan FPC in a nutshell 10:57 - 12:40 - need for FPC 18:08 - 20:08 -  learning/self education, role of schools, start with one node and grow from there - similar to bitcoin 44:08 - 45:59 - Bitcoin progress in Bhutan - mining ops,   Links: Article mentioned: https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahemerson/2023/12/15/bhutan-futuristic-city-dragon-king/ Site: https://yungdrung.city/ Free Citadels profile: https://freecitadels.com/profile/art-finch/  Sponsors: Swan.com (code LIVERA) CoinKite.com (code LIVERA) Mempool.space Nomadcapitalist.com/apply Stephan Livera links: Follow me on X: @stephanlivera Subscribe to the podcast Subscribe to Substack

Send us a Text Message.Hyper-partisanship is tearing America apart, and we need bold solutions. In this episode of Politically High Tech, we welcome special guest Evan Jaqua, who presents his radical vision for an anti-political party movement. We push the boundaries of conventional political thought by discussing the addictiveness of political power and proposing revolutionary changes like one-term limits for politicians and the elimination of political party dominance. Jaqua passionately argues that our democracy is at risk when those in power prioritize their own interests over the principles they are supposed to uphold. Together, we dissect bipartisan strategies for resolving critical issues like immigration, criticizing both major parties for their self-serving agendas.Turning our attention to Central and South America, we expose the grave dangers posed by entrenched drug cartels and corrupt regimes. By drawing parallels to the fall of the Soviet Union, we highlight the transformative potential of creating economic disparities that can undermine tyranny. The conversation underscores the urgency of addressing root causes, such as political corruption, and advocates for term limits to ensure politicians serve their constituents. We propose comprehensive solutions to improve the quality of life and tackle the refugee crisis, underscoring the need for a holistic approach to combat lawlessness and corruption.Finally, we explore the economic and social benefits of encouraging immigration to revitalize struggling communities and industries. From affordable senior care to labor-intensive sectors like agriculture, an influx of immigrant labor could inject much-needed vitality into the American economy. We introduce innovative concepts like Charter Cities and self-sustaining manufacturing hubs in third-world countries as long-term solutions to global immigration challenges. As we critique the outsized influence of swing counties in presidential elections, we emphasize the importance of honest political discourse and the positive impact of travel on personal growth, setting the stage for future thought-provoking discussions.Follow Evan Jaqua at ...https://www.solutionsparty.org/If you want to be a guest on my podcast, please click at the link here.https://www.joinpodmatch.com/politically-high-techSupport the Show.Follow your host atYouTube and Rumble for video contenthttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUxk1oJBVw-IAZTqChH70aghttps://rumble.com/c/c-4236474Facebook to receive updateshttps://www.facebook.com/EliasEllusion/Twitter (yes, I refuse to call it X)https://x.com/politicallyht

Greetings Glocal Citizens! This week's conversation comes to you in two parts and is courtesy of a connection made by my guest from Episode 34, Stacey Enyame (https://glocalcitizens.fireside.fm/guests/stacey-enyame). Recognizing the intersection between tech and community/economic development and my background, Stacey suggested I join the Keta MakerSpace community on WhatsApp--a brainchild of #GlobalGhanaian, Paul Kwesi Damalie. We go into detail about the community and the vision for the platform and new city in the making in Part 2 of the conversation, both parts are not to be missed! Paul is founder of Damalie Innovation Holdings Group which invests in and builds companies in health tech, sports value chain, gaming and family entertainment, urban infrastructure & development and trade & embedded finance, climate resileince. Previously he was the co-founder of Inclusive Innovations Inc. which developed the Appruve API, product making it easy for financial services to verify individuals and businesses all over Africa. In 2023 Appruve was acquired by Smile ID. As a Fintech industry influencer, he is among Untapt's Top 23 fintech influencers to follow on X; he is a Chapter Lead of Next Money, the global thought leader community for stakeholders within the financial services and technology ecosystem. He organizes events (meetups & conferences) that create opportunities for stakeholders to discuss current trends, explore opportunities through networking and influence policy in the financial services ecosystem. He also has experience consulting for fintech startups and new market entrants into West Africa, working closely with fintech innovation programmes, accelerators and investors as well as financial inclusion research institutions. Where to find Paul? On LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/pauldamalie/) On X (https://twitter.com/PaulDamalie) On Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/imaginedbysenam/) On Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/paul.damalie/) What's Paul reading? The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers (https://a.co/d/evhUwt1) by Ben Horowitz Every.to (https://every.to) What's Paul listening to? Funaná (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funan%C3%A1) Kizomba (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kizomba) Other topics of interest: Keta Coastal Analysis (https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/11/6/1144) Albert (https://booknook.store/product/albert-comfort-ocran-executive-collection-paperback/) and Comfort (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comfort_Ocran) Ocran DSF Lab (https://www.dfslab.net) Caribou Digital (https://www.cariboudigital.net) Afropolitan Network State (https://www.afropolitan.io) Ethereum's Vitalik Buterin talks Charter Cities (https://chartercitiesinstitute.org/podcast/charter-cities-podcast-international-hubs-and-the-future-of-living-with-vitalik-buterin/) an the Charter Cities Institute (https://chartercitiesinstitute.org/author/marklutter/) New City Concepts - Zuzalu (https://www.vitadao.com/event/zuzalu), Próspera (https://www.prospera.co), Fumba Town (https://fumba.town), Itana (https://www.itana.africa) On Digital Nomads (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_nomad) Playground.ai (linkhttps://playground.ai) Google for Startups (https://startup.google.com) Y Combinator (https://www.ycombinator.com) Sand Hill Road (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_Hill_Road) Tokeh Beach, Sierra Leone (https://tourismsierraleone.com/attractions/tokeh-beach/) Special Guest: Paul Damalie.

Greetings Glocal Citizens! This week's conversation comes to you in two parts and is courtesy of a connection made by my guest from Episode 34, Stacey Enyame (https://glocalcitizens.fireside.fm/guests/stacey-enyame). Recognizing the intersection between tech and community/economic development and my background, Stacey suggested I join the Keta MakerSpace community on WhatsApp--a brainchild of #GlobalGhanaian, Paul Kwesi Damalie. We go into detail about the community and the vision for the platform and new city in the making in Part 2 of the conversation, both parts are not to be missed! Paul is founder of Damalie Innovation Holdings Group which invests in and builds companies in health tech, sports value chain, gaming and family entertainment, urban infrastructure & development and trade & embedded finance, climate resileince. Previously he was the co-founder of Inclusive Innovations Inc. which developed the Appruve API, product making it easy for financial services to verify individuals and businesses all over Africa. In 2023 Appruve was acquired by Smile ID. As a Fintech industry influencer, he is among Untapt's Top 23 fintech influencers to follow on X; he is a Chapter Lead of Next Money, the global thought leader community for stakeholders within the financial services and technology ecosystem. He organizes events (meetups & conferences) that create opportunities for stakeholders to discuss current trends, explore opportunities through networking and influence policy in the financial services ecosystem. He also has experience consulting for fintech startups and new market entrants into West Africa, working closely with fintech innovation programmes, accelerators and investors as well as financial inclusion research institutions. Where to find Paul? On LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/pauldamalie/) On X (https://twitter.com/PaulDamalie) On Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/imaginedbysenam/) On Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/paul.damalie/) What's Paul reading? The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers (https://a.co/d/evhUwt1) by Ben Horowitz Every.to (https://every.to) What's Paul listening to? Funaná (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funan%C3%A1) Kizomba (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kizomba) Other topics of interest: Keta Coastal Analysis (https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/11/6/1144) Albert (https://booknook.store/product/albert-comfort-ocran-executive-collection-paperback/) and Comfort (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comfort_Ocran) Ocran DSF Lab (https://www.dfslab.net) Caribou Digital (https://www.cariboudigital.net) Afropolitan Network State (https://www.afropolitan.io) Ethereum's Vitalik Buterin talks Charter Cities (https://chartercitiesinstitute.org/podcast/charter-cities-podcast-international-hubs-and-the-future-of-living-with-vitalik-buterin/) an the Charter Cities Institute (https://chartercitiesinstitute.org/author/marklutter/) New City Concepts - Zuzalu (https://www.vitadao.com/event/zuzalu), Próspera (https://www.prospera.co), Fumba Town (https://fumba.town), Itana (https://www.itana.africa) On Digital Nomads (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_nomad) Playground.ai (linkhttps://playground.ai) Google for Startups (https://startup.google.com) Y Combinator (https://www.ycombinator.com) Sand Hill Road (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_Hill_Road) Tokeh Beach, Sierra Leone (https://tourismsierraleone.com/attractions/tokeh-beach/) Special Guest: Paul Damalie.

The Catawba Economic Zone is the new best place to incorporate your LLC. In this episode we discuss how the Catawba Zone came to be, how it fits into the Special Economic Zone (SEZ) movement, and why it might be the best place to incorporate your business.

In this episode, we delve into the controversy surrounding the Prospera charter city in Honduras, which has embraced libertarian principles and adopted Bitcoin as legal tender and a unit of account. The city is currently embroiled in a legal battle with the Honduran government. Gene asks Jeffrey Mason, from Charter Cities Institute, what it all means for the future of charter cities. Jeffrey provides some good examples of how charter cities still have a lot of potential, and he talks about projects CCI is involved in in Africa, particularly in Zanzibar. Tune in to gain insights into the intersection of governance, economics, and innovation in the context of charter cities.Please get in touch with any questions, comments and suggestions by emailing us at contact@economicsexplored.com or sending a voice message via https://www.speakpipe.com/economicsexplored. About this episode's guest: Jeffrey Mason, Head of Research, Charter Cities Institute Jeffrey joined CCI as a Researcher in 2019. His research interests include urban economics, structural transformation, special economic zones, and technology ecosystems. He has worked on policy advisory projects in Nigeria, Tanzania, Zambia, and Honduras, among other countries. Prior to joining the Charter Cities Institute, Jeffrey worked as an MA Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. He holds a BA in economics from the University of Maryland and an MA in economics from George Mason University. His writing has been featured in publications including City Journal, Works in Progress, Investment Monitor, Quartz Africa, and The American Mind.What's covered in EP234Introduction. (0:00)Honduran ZEDEs: zones for employment and economic development. (4:12)Honduran ZEDEs and impacts on local communities. (9:41)Investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms. (15:15)Charter cities and their potential to improve governance and economic growth. (20:37)Charter cities and urban development in Zanzibar. (26:15)Affordable housing development in Zanzibar, Tanzania. (30:56)Urban development and new city projects. (39:27)TakeawaysThe controversy surrounding Prospera in Honduras highlights the risks and uncertainties involved in charter city projects.The concept of charter cities is evolving, with a growing emphasis on affordability, local engagement, and sustainable development to ensure their long-term success.Legal and political stability, along with government partnerships, are crucial for the success of charter cities, as demonstrated by the contrasting experiences of Prospera and the Zanzibar project, Fumba Town, that Charter Cities Institute is involved in.Links relevant to the conversationJeffrey's bio: https://chartercitiesinstitute.org/people/jeffrey-mason/Ryan Grim's report at the Intercept “Honduras Ratchets Up Battle With Crypto-Libertarian Investors, Rejects World Bank Court”: https://theintercept.com/2024/03/19/honduras-crypto-investors-world-bank-prospera/Counter Points report “Honduras GOES TO WAR With Crypto Bros”, CCI's involvement with Fumba Town: https://chartercitiesinstitute.org/fumba-town/Fumba Town: https://chartercitiesinstitute.org/fumba-town/EP147 with Kurtis Lockhart on charter cities: https://economicsexplored.com/2022/07/11/charter-cities-a-public-private-partnership-ppp-model-w-kurtis-lockhart-ep147/Lumo Coffee promotionLumo Coffee Discount: Visit Lumo Coffee (lumocoffee.com) and use code EXPLORED20 for a 20% discount until April 30, 2024.Thanks to Obsidian Productions for mixing the episode and to the show's sponsor, Gene's consultancy business www.adepteconomics.com.au. Full transcripts are available a few days after the episode is first published at www.economicsexplored.com.

Can a city hold the key to unlocking economic prosperity on a grand scale? In this episode, we sit down with Brooke Bowman and Mark Lutter to discuss charter cities and their role in addressing economic development challenges. Mark is a visionary thinker invested in progress, governance, social dynamics, and the concept of new cities. He is the Founder and Executive Chairman of the Charter Cities Institute and CEO of Braavos Cities, a pioneering charter city development company. Brooke is the founder of Vibecamp, a community that aims to foster connections and personal growth. Join us as we delve into the intricacies of community-building, economic development, and cultural influence. We unpack the concept of charter cities as a way to address economic development challenges and the importance of facilitating genuine connections with people through city developments and fostering community and co-living without excessive overhead. Tuning in, you'll discover the value of creating spaces where like-minded individuals can gather and interact and how the intersection of co-creation and play drives culture and innovation. To learn how to unlock the potential of charter cities and create vibrant, sustainable communities with a focus on culture, innovation, and positive societal impact, don't miss this conversation!Key Points From This Episode:Introducing Mark, his background, and his interest in charter cities.The concept of Charter Cities and how they can alleviate poverty.Mark and Brooke's experience of a pop-up community experiment called Zuzalu.How community gatherings help drive innovation in a society.Explore creating a sustainable community with a vibrant culture.The Neighborhood project and how it helping to build communities.What role the internet plays in facilitating the formation of real-life communities.Details about the governance structure of the Próspera development.Incorporating families and children into Vibecamp communities.Insights into how long communities will take to grow to scale.Why mimicking successful models from history is essential.The important sense of community and shared values that festivals provide.Why there is a need for economic development alongside community building.An overview of the legal mechanisms to ensure long-term success.Links Mentioned in Today's Episode:Brooke BowmanBrooke Bowman on XMark LutterMark Lutter on XBraavos CitiesVibecampThe Network State ConferenceJason BennThe NeighborhoodCabin CityCharter Cities InstituteCharter Cities Institute on FacebookCharter Cities Institute on...

00:00 Introductions[1][2]02:40 Values in governance systems17:33 Seasteading[3]23:35 Zone for Employment and Economic Development (ZEDE)[4]27:55 Physical territory requirement 34:45 Open source law40:14 Charter Cities & Pronomos[5]54:31 Reading list[6]58:04 Criticism01:02:53 GoodbyePatri Friedman: https://twitter.com/patrissimo https://patrifriedman.com/Jarrad Hope: https://twitter.com/jarradhope_https://www.seasteading.org/https://www.lawg.org/the-zedes-law-in-honduras-sanctuary-for-exploitation-corruption-and-organized-crime/https://www.pronomos.vc/https://chartercitiesinstitute.org/reading/ Logos Press Engine includes Logos Podcast and Hashing It Out. Hashing it Out dives into the mechanisms and hardware of the technology that aid in making sovereign communities.

Today's episode is a throwback to when Erik interviewed Byrne Hobart for the first time on the Venture Stories by Village Global podcast. Byrne and Erik go deep on technological change, debate centralization versus decentralization, discuss mental models for financial bubbles, and examine human nature from the lens of different thinkers. The Riff is sponsored by Shopify: https://shopify.com/momentofzen for a $1/month trial period. --- The Riff is a part of the Turpentine podcast network. Learn more: https://turpentine.co --- We're hiring across the board at Turpentine and for Erik's personal team on other projects he's incubating. He's hiring a Chief of Staff, EA, Head of Special Projects, Investment Associate, and more. For a list of JDs, check out: eriktorenberg.com. --- Thanks to our sponsor: SHOPIFY Shopify is the global commerce platform that helps you sell at every stage of your business. Shopify powers 10% of all e-commerce in the US. And Shopify's the global force behind Allbirds, Rothy's, and Brooklinen, and 1,000,000s of other entrepreneurs across 175 countries. From their all-in-one e-commerce platform, to their in-person POS system – wherever and whatever you're selling, Shopify's got you covered. With free Shopify Magic, sell more with less effort by whipping up captivating content that converts – from blog posts to product descriptions using AI. Sign up for $1/month trial period: https://shopify.com/momentofzen --- LINKS: Byrne's writing: https://thediff.co --- X / TWITTER: @eriktorenberg (Erik) @byrnehobart (Byrne) @turpentinemedia (Turpentine) --- TIMESTAMPS: (00:00) Intro (01:11) Byrne's Approach to Understanding (02:56) Productivity Growth (06:38) Debate on Globalization (16:30) Sponsor: Shopify (18:12) Understanding the Impact of Geography, Demographics, and Energy (27:25) State Capacity Libertarianism (33:21) Predicting the Future of US-China Relationship (34:37) Lessons from the East Asian Economic Miracles (35:42) The Role of Corruption in Economic Growth (36:32) Strategies for Subsidizing Exports (38:05) The Impact of Anti-Globalization Movements (38:30) The Trade Deficit Debate (46:21) Charter Cities (52:38) The Techlash (01:07:38) The Future of Wall Street and Its Impact on Society (01:17:53) The Power of the Dollar System (01:18:55) Understanding Negative Interest Rates (01:20:43) The Impact of Low Interest Rates on Infrastructure Development (01:25:05) The Impact of Demographics on Long Term Bonds (01:27:48) The Problem of Underfunded Pensions (01:28:52) Understanding Financial Bubbles (01:33:37) The Dynamics of Centralization and Decentralization (01:50:43) The Future of Silicon Valley and California (01:56:31) Disagreements with Notable Thinkers

In today's episode of Charter Cities, we're honored to welcome Lant Pritchett, a distinguished economist and a thought leader in development economics. Our deep-dive conversation will focus on the critical topic of growth diagnostics, exploring the complex challenges policymakers face in developing nations. Lant will illuminate the importance of identifying impactful actions for growth, emphasizing the need for rigorous debate and evidence-based decision-making. We'll also scrutinize the limitations of traditional development metrics like the "dollar a day" measure and consider alternative, more effective approaches. We'll also investigate innovative solutions like charter cities as a mechanism for fostering sustainable growth by addressing institutional challenges.Key Points From This Episode:Why overemphasis on low-bar goals lead to ineffective randomized control trials in developmentHow bright minds in development economics are missing the markPolicymakers in developing countries lack effective prioritization, not ideas, for fostering economic growthTony Blair's approach focuses on achievable priorities but could benefit from rigorous initial diagnostics for high-impact actionsDeveloping countries grow fast but collapse easily due to fragile "deals-based" governance, unlike OECD's robust rule-based systemsPrioritizing the prevention of growth decelerations; reforms can help but need better diagnosticsShifting focus from economic growth blamed on the end of the Cold War and structural adjustment failuresWeighing charter cities: positives include a focus on urbanization and productivity; challenges involve credibility and feasibility of implementing changeEmphasizing the need for experimentation and policy diversityHow migration from low to high TFP countries can yield 40x greater income gains than anti-poverty programsLabor mobility increasingly viable due to demographic shifts and political changeUrbanization requires new approaches to ensure inclusive, opportunity-driven growth in citiesLinks Mentioned in Today's Episode:RISEHarvard Kennedy SchoolCharter Cities InstituteCharter Cities Institute on FacebookCharter Cities Institute on Twitter

On today's Charter Cities episode, host Jeffrey Mason is joined by colleagues Heba Elhanafy and Matthew McCartney to unpack the New Africa's Bad Urban Laws project. This initiative dissects laws in African cities hindering growth and community well-being. Additionally, Jeffrey reminds listeners of the upcoming Africa's New City Summit in Kigali, Rwanda. The team dives deep, discussing the reasons for and effects of detrimental urban laws, using instances like Zambia's land ownership as an example. Tune in for an insightful discussion on urban policies in Africa.Key Points From This Episode:How urban laws negatively affect African urban environments across fiscal, administrative, and spatial planningThe project exposes bad urban laws and questions their persistent existence in African citiesBad urban laws persist due to misunderstandings, political interests, and distributional benefitsHow Zambia's outdated land ownership laws, rooted in colonial times, benefit a few and hinder economic developmentEgypt's attempt to modernize land laws led to unique urban challenges affecting millionsUrban physician reforms laws with expertise; urban politician navigates political realities for urban changesInteractive map showcases bad urban laws, allows user contributions for more awarenessCCI's research aims for awareness through interactive maps and practical urban reformLinks Mentioned in Today's Episode:Africas New Cities SummitCharter Cities InstituteCharter Cities Institute on FacebookCharter Cities Institute on Twitter

Coming up on today's episode of Charter Cities, we have a very special guest joining host Mark Lutter: Vitalik Buterin, the co-founder of Ethereum. In this episode, we delve into the fascinating world of community building and the importance of creating meaningful connections within cities and online communities. We explore the challenges and successes of building communities in different contexts, from crypto communities to health tribes. With insights from Vitalik's own experiences and observations, we discuss the value of diversity, the impact of infrastructure on small towns, and the need for community filters. Stay tuned for an enriching conversation on the power of communities in shaping our lives and the future of cities.Key Points From This Episode:Factors driving relocation due to cost of livingEmotional disconnect from home countriesGlobal impact of the crypto industryNavigating immigration complexitiesGrowing trend of purposeful location choices for hubsZuzalu community's remarkable success storySignificance of local insights in community buildingDiverse dynamics within health-focused communitiesCautions against hasty expansion and misuse of Zozalu's nameStructured growth imperative as project scalesRegional influencers and quest for secure refugesUrban and rural benefits of clusteringInfrastructure's role in enhancing small town appealSpecial network effects in close-knit communitiesDigital communities united by shared valuesSovereignty quest challenges and complexitiesCommunity's pivotal role in city developmentNavigating delegation challenges and preventing tyrannyLinks Mentioned in Today's Episode:ZuzaluVitalik on TwitterVitalik on MediumCharter Cities InstituteCharter Cities Institute on FacebookCharter Cities Institute on Twitter

This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/paul_romer_why_the_world_needs_charter_cities ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/187-academic-words-reference-from-paul-romer-why-the-world-needs-charter-cities-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/7xxj_4CxUhA (All Words) https://youtu.be/xsxvoFrHOSw (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/ewg4P9Oxh-0 (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)

In this spiritual followup to our previous episode on Charter Cities, we get a glimpse at Galt's Gulch Chile. We investigate how a farming community built on Ayn Rand's principles fell into a freaky web of lawsuits, arrests, freaks, pencil mustaches, and a shooting at a Chilean protest by an American YouTube economist in a yellow vest.

To hear the full episode, subscribe at patreon.com/TrueAnonPod --------- SBF's arrest, mixed with his brother's desire to buy an island in order to do unregulated medical experimentation, leads us towards the weird world of ultra-libertarian Charter Cities.

Host Jeffrey Mason welcomes esteemed guests Martin Rama and Yue Li to another enthralling episode of Charter Cities. Together, they embark on a deep exploration of the intriguing world of private cities, delving into their impact on urban agglomerations and the delicate interplay with local governments. Tune in today to hear their insights on the successes and challenges that private cities face, as well as the potentials that lie ahead. Through engaging discussions and vivid examples, our hosts and guests will illustrate the multifaceted landscape of private urban development. Martin and Yue share their perspectives on how private actors are reshaping urban environments and the intricate dynamics that govern these relationships. As our episode unfolds, the conversation navigates the complexities of urban development, revealing the key facts and insights surrounding this captivating subject. Thanks for listening!Key Points From This Episode:The significance of private cities as major urban agglomerations with political constituenciesThe push for a voice and a shift towards traditional cities as the population growsResistance against converting successful private cities into traditional onesStrategic underinvestment by private actors in services, relying on government provisionEvolution of institutions between private actors and local governmentsDesigning private cities to offer improved services and environmentsWillingness of residents and firms to pay a premium for landBenefits for developers or companies through increased land valueExploration of different private city models and demographic focusesA historical look at private cities and their reemergence in modern timesExamples of private cities in both advanced and developing countriesAn overview of private cities and their types in various countriesFocus on initial research in South Asia, including India and PakistanIndonesia's status as the country with the highest number of private citiesCategorization into company towns, strategic cities, and mixed citiesPrevalence of strategic cities in Indonesia, with some in IndiaAn analysis of economic activities and government support in private citiesVarious economic activities spearheaded by the private sectorEfforts to seek favorable treatment from the governmentThe role of special economic zones and infrastructure supportStrategies to attract specific industries and investorsThe urgent need for empirical research on economic dynamics and inequalityTentative conclusions and a call for further researchDefinitions and challenges associated with private citiesContradictions with typical city governance run by local governmentThe leading role played by private actors in planning, financing, and service operationChallenging but not new conventional notions of city governancePublic-private partnerships (PPPs) in private city governanceTopological studies, inventories, and governance evolution within private citiesVariations in roles and functions between the private sector and local governmentLand value capture and equity issues in private city developmentThe viability and underinvestment associated with value capture limitationsCreative equity solutions, such as preserving original residents or project sharesExploration of alternative value recovery and fairness mechanismsThe challenges faced by local governments in designing effective value capture strategiesLinks Mentioned in Today's Episode:The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank

In der heutigen Episode freue ich mich Dr. Titus Gebel begrüßen zu dürfen. Wir sprechen über sein Konzept der »Freien Privatstädte«. Titus Gebel ist Unternehmer und promovierter Jurist. Er war Mitgründer der Deutsche Rohstoff Gruppe  sowie des Startups Dual Fluid, deren CFO Björn Peters, in Episode 73 zu Gast war. Dr. Gebel spielt auch eine wesentliche Rolle in der Etablierung einer ambitionierten Sonderentwicklungszone mit dem Namen Prospera in Honduras und berät andere Sonderwirtschaftszonen weltweit. Aber das Thema des Gesprächs ist breiter: wir beginnen mit der Frage, was modernes Staatswesen ausmacht, was Freiheit bedeutet, was die Rolle von Bürger und Staat sind, wo die Ursprünge und philosophischen Ideen liegen und was bis zum heutigen Zeitpunkt in verschiedenen Nationen daraus geworden ist. Wir beginnen mit einem Blick in die Geschichte, was ist die Rolle des Staates nach Thomas Hobbes und John Stuart Mill? Was ist der Begriff der Freiheit?  »Struggle between Liberty and Authority« »By liberty, was meant protection against the tyranny of the political rulers.«, John Stuart Mill Wie hat sich die Rolle des Staates verändert?  »Der moderne Staat hat sich etabliert, um seinen Bürgern vor allem zwei Grundpfeiler des Lebens zu garantieren: Freiheit und Sicherheit.«, K. P. Liessmann Wie kommt es zu einem Mehr an Freiheit? Aus philosophischen Überlegungen und Ideen, oder aus pragmatischeren Aspekten? Führt der Weg von der göttlichen Bestimmung zur Freiheit? Wie wird der Wille des Volkes überhaupt bestimmt und was bedeutet dies für Minderheiten? Wir beide stimmen darin überein, dass wir eine beginnende, schwere Krise in den westlichen Demokratien, beziehungsweise Verwaltung erkennen. Die Frage ist: wie ist diese zu erklären und wie könnten Wege heraus aussehen?  »Heute haben wir es mit einer Überdehnung des modernen Staates zu tun, und zwar sowohl wohlfahrtsstaatlich wie ökologisch. Mit dem Wohlfahrtsstaat, der eigentlich schon in der traditionellen Gemeinwohlformel angelegt ist, kehrt das summum bonum zurück: das größte Glück der größten Zahl; der gehobene Lebensstandard wird als politisches Recht definiert.«, Norbert Bolz Bismarck gilt als Erfinder des Sozialstaats, was war die damalige Motivation? Wie hat sich der Sozialstaat seit damals entwickelt? Führen falsche Anreizsysteme für Politiker in die Krise, denn Gratisleistungen des Staates erscheinen nur gratis, sind es aber natürlich nicht? »Es gibt in westlichen Demokratien keine klassisch liberalen Parteien mehr, das sind alles Umverteilungsparteien geworden«  »Die Gruppe der Menschen, die tatsächlich produktiv und wertschöpfend tätig ist, wird immer kleiner.« Dazu passt auch der Gedanke des mittlerweile 93 jährigen Thomas Sowell: »You have people making [political] decisions, for which they pay no price when they are wrong. No matter how high a price other people pay.« Dr. Gebel hat ein Konzept entwickelt, das er Freie Privatstädte nennt und wir diskutieren über das Konzept, welche Rolle Verwaltung und Regierung einnehmen sollen, wie Anreizsysteme verbessert werden können und vergleichbare andere Ansätze, die in eine ähnliche Richtung gehen. Kann es so etwas wie Verwaltung als Dienstleistung geben? » Der Staat sollte aus meiner Sicht theoretisch kein Monopol auf das Staatsgebiet haben. In Liechtenstein haben wir das verwirklicht. So zwingt man den Staat, ein guter Dienstleister zu sein.«, Hans Adam II von Liechtenstein Wir sprechen dann über die zwiespältige Entwicklungen des 19. Jahrhundert, Engels und den Manchester-Kapitalismus. Welche Rolle spielt Solidarität, Menschwenwürde? Wer soll diese Gewährleisten, und in welcher Form? Welche Rolle spielt Selbstorganisation (bottom up) im Gegensatz zu staatlichen Top Down Mechanismen?  Ab wann gleitet ein Sozialstaat in einen »Nanny-State« ab, ganz nach dem alten sozialistischen Motto »Von der Wiege bis zur Bahre« in der Hand des Staates? Gibt es in Deutschland nur mehr vier Grüne und eine rechte Partei, und sind letztlich alle auf dem Pfad des »Rent Seeking«? »Aus dem Recht der Bürger, nach ihrem Glück zu streben, wurde längst die Pflicht des Staates, für dieses Glück zu sorgen. Dass in einer Demokratie die Bürger diesen Staat ausmachen und deshalb solche Forderungen an sich selbst adressieren müssten, wird gerne vergessen«, Konrad Paul Liessmann Machen wir den Fehler einen vermeintlichen Idealzustand mit dem Ist-Zustand zu vergleichen? Warum gelingt es auch nicht mehr — nach Cicero — dass die Begabtesten in die Politik gehen, sondern wir heute eher eine negative Auslese erleben? »Wenn man merkt, dass man ein totes Pferd reitet, sollte man absteigen.« Titus Gebel erklärt dann sein Konzept der freien Privatstädte genauer, auch die Abgrenzungen zu Charter Cities und Sonderwirtschaftszonen im Allgemeinen. Warum sind seiner Ansicht nach die Anreizsysteme in diesen Konzepten besser? Welche Rolle spielt der Markt — als Entdeckungsverfahren — und wie können wir evolutionäre Prinzipien auch in Verwaltung und Staatswesen etablieren mit Mutation, Nachahmung, Reproduktion, beziehungsweise dem »Seed, Select, Amplify« (Meyer, Davis) Prinzip? Probieren und Scheitern sollte wieder möglich werden, sonst gibt es auch weiterhin keinen Fortschritt. »Es wäre besser, wir würden in einer Welt von 2.000 Liechtensteins leben, die alle ein veschiedenes System haben als in 200 Staaten.« Aber ist es realistisch, dass sich Koordination von viele kleine Einheiten global bei wesentlichen Fragen umsetzen lässt? Wie könnte ein solches System überhaupt umgesetzt werden, wo doch alle Landflächen von existierenden Nationen kontrolliert werden? Gibt es eine reale Chance der Umsetzung? Oder gibt es schon exisitierende Beispiele? Dr. Gebel spricht über Beispiele in China, dem Nahen Osten, Saudi Arabien und Südamerika? Sind diese Ansätze nicht nur Gated Communities für die Elite? Was macht ein Gemeinwesen? Ich fühle ja auch keine Gemeinschaft zu anderen Gästen in einem Hotel? »Es gibt zwei Arten von Menschen: die einen, die ihre Meinungen anderen aufzwingen wollen, und die anderen, die das nicht wollen und die sagen, Leben und Leben lassen. Die erste Gruppe strebt natürlich in die Politik.« Findet der wirkliche politische Konflikt heute nicht, wie so oft behauptet, zwischen links und rechts, sondern vielmehr zwischen autoritär und (klassisch) liberal statt? »Leben und Leben lassen in unterschiedlichsten Formen des Zusammenlebens.« Referenzen Andere Episoden Episode 73: Ökorealismus, ein Gespräch mit Björn Peters Episode 58: Verwaltung und staatliche Strukturen — ein Gespräch mit Veronika Lévesque Episode 57: Konservativ und Progressiv Episode 29: Fakten oder Geschichten? Wie gestalten wir die Zukunft? Episode 26: Was kann Politik (noch) leisten? Ein Gespräch mit Christoph Chorherr Episode 17: Kooperation Titus Gebel Webseite von Dr. Titus Gebel Deutsche Rohstoff AG Dual Fluid Titus Gebel, Freie Privatstädte: Mehr Wettbewerb im wichtigsten Markt der Welt (2023) Free Cities Foundation Liberty in Our Lifetime Konferenz 2023 Fachliche Referenzen Honduran ZEDEs: Their Past and Future Reason TV: A private libertarian city in Honduras (2023) Franz Oppenheimer,  Der Staat (1907) Austrian Institute, „Der Staat soll nicht nur einer privilegierten Schicht dienen, sondern allen Menschen“ – Interview mit Fürst Hans-Adam II. von Liechtenstein (2017) John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (1859)  Thomas Sowell im Gespräch mit Peter Robinson, Uncommon Knowledge(7.9.2023) Konrad Paul Liessmann, Lauter Lügen, Paul Zsolnay Verlag (2023)  Norbert Bolz, Keine Macht der Moral, Politik jenseits von Gut und Böse, Matthes & Seitz Berlin (2021) Christopher Meyer, Stan Davis, It's Alive, Texere Publishing (2004) Karl Popper, Die Offene Gesellschaft  Karl Popper - Ein Gespräch (1974) Roger Scruton, How to be a Conservative, Bloomsbury Continuum (2014)    

Malcolm Collins is a parent, polymath serial entrepreneur, education nerd, pronatalist and a 5x bestselling author, including the Pragmatists' Guide series.He has a podcast and YouTube channel called Based Camp.In this episode, we talk about a wide range of topics including:Demographic Collapse: At current fertility rates in developed countries, there will be 5 grandchildren per 100 people. This demographic trend is not economically sustainable and will lead to fundamental transformations of society.Pronatalism: Pronatalism is a movement that Malcolm and his wife Susan are well, known for as the founders of Pronatalists.org. The analogy is with climate change: it's not about freezing the planet, it's about countering an unsustainable trend - population decline - by having more children.Charter Cities: Malcolm views charter cities as key for the pronatalist movements as incubators for a different culture that is not influenced by "urban monoculture".Some of Malcolm's surprising theses are:The collapse is coming when markets price in lack of population growth and divest from assets that losing money to places that grow. These shifts in market sentiments typically happen gradually, and then suddenly.The winning cultures need more than high birth rates. The Amish people have high birth rates, but little clout. The winning cultures need to have high birth rates and be technophilic and be at the forefront of technologyThe key for charter cities or special jurisdictions to attract Malcolm are: a) a guaranteed right to use reproductive technologies, and b) a harsh environment, like a space colony, that nurture a culture of hard work to surviveThis is a kaleidoscopic episode with insights into the frontiers of humanity.

The traditional concept of sovereign states and physical borders has been stretched to its limits in the age of the internet and technological innovation. The slow pace of governmental bureaucracy and regulatory bottlenecks are hindering innovation and progress. Governments are struggling to understand and provide timely answers to global challenges. In this conversation with Niklas Anzinger, we explore how new cities and societies can be built in the age of the internet by introducing the concepts of Charter Cities and Network States.Niklas is the founder and GP of Infinita, the first Prospera-based VC fund. Niklas aims to end the Great Stagnation by supporting founders to overcome regulatory bottlenecks by utilizing startup cities, network states, and defi rails. Before Infinita, Niklas was an early-stage startup operator.00:00 Intro01:49 Definition of Network States and their properties12:05 Why the need to form new Nations16:57 The 3 types of emerging cities21:30 Niclas's story and how he got involved with Prospera31:31 What is Prospera and why it is unique35:57 Why you should consider Prospera44:49 How Niklas evaluates his startups investments

Hello everyone, and you are listening to Ideas Untrapped podcast. This episode is a continuation of my two-part conversation with Lant Pritchett. It concludes the discussion on education with the five things Lant would recommend to a policymaker on education policy, how to balance the globalized demand for good governance with the design of state functionalities within a localized context - along with RCTs in development and charter cities. I also got an exclusive one of his infamous ‘‘Lant Rants''. I hope you find this as enjoyable as I did - and once again, many thanks to Lant Pritchett.TranscriptTobi;Yeah, I mean, that's a fine distinction. I love that, because you completely preempted where I was really going with that. Now, on a lighter note, there's this trope when I was in high school, so I sort of want us to put both side by side and try to learn more about them. There's this trope when I was in high school amongst my mates, that examination is not a true test of knowledge. Although it didn't help the people who were saying it, because they usually don't test well, so it sort of sounded like a self serving argument. But examination now, or should I say the examination industry, clearly, I mean, if I want to take Nigeria as an example, is not working. But it seemed to be the gold standard, if I want to use that phrase. It's as bad as so many firms now set up graduate training programs. Even after people have completed tertiary education, they still have to train them for industry and even sometimes on basic things. So what are the shortcomings of examination, the way you have distinguished both? And then, how can a system that truly assesses learning be designed?Lant;  Let me revert to an Indian discussion because I know more about India than Africa by far. There are prominent people, including the people around JPAL and Karthik Muralidharan, who say, look, India never really had an education system. It had a selection system. And the ethos was, look, we're just throwing kids into school with the hopes of identifying the few kids who were bright enough, capable enough, smart enough, however we say it, measured by their performance on this kind of high stakes examination who are going to then become the elite. So it was just a filter into the elite, and it really meant the whole system was never really in its heart of heart geared around a commitment to educating every kid. I've heard teachers literally say out loud when they give an exam and the kids don't master the material, they'll say, oh, those weren't the kind of kids who this material was meant for. And they leave them behind, right? There's a phrase “they teach to the front of the class.” You order the class by the kid's academic performance, and then the teachers are just teaching to the front of the class with the kind of like, nah, even by early grades. So the evils of the examination system are only if it's not combined with an education system. So essentially, an education system would be a system that was actually committed to expanding the learning and capabilities of all kids at all levels and getting everybody up to a threshold and then worried about the filter problem much later in the education process.So if they're part of an education system like they have been in East Asia, they're not terribly, terribly damaging. But if they're part of a selection system in which people perceive that the point is that there's only a tiny little fraction that are going to pass through these examinations anyway and what we're trying to do is maximize the pass rates of that, it distorts the whole system start to finish. My friend, Rukmini Banerjee, in India started this citizen based assessment where it was just a super simple assessment. You need assessment in order to have an effective education system, because without assessment, I don't know what you know or don't know, right? And if I don't know as a teacher or as a school what my kids actually know and don't know, how is anybody imagining that you're giving them an effective education? So I think the role of early assessment and the drive to integrate teaching with real time assessment, I think is hugely, hugely important. This is why I had the preemptive strike on the question of testing [which] is that I want radically more assessment earlier, integrated with teaching. And there are still some educationists that will push back against that. But if we put in a bundle, formative classroom assessment integrated with effective pedagogy and high-stakes examinations, then everybody's going to hate them both. So we have to really unbundle those two things.And the hallmark of an education system is that it really has targets that every kid can learn and believes every kid can learn, and builds a system around the premise and promise that every kid can learn. There's this example out there, Vietnam does it. And Vietnam did it and continues to do it at levels of income and social conditions that are very much like many African countries. So if I were a country, I'd kind of hate Vietnam as this goody goody, that, you know. You know how you always hated the kid in school who would really do well, and then the teacher would go, well, how come you're not like that kid? On education, Vietnam is that country. It's, like, out there producing OECD levels of learning with very little resources and starting at least in the 1980s, at very low levels of income. So they're proving that it's possible. They're the kid who, like, when everybody goes, oh, that exam was too hard, and like, Bob passed it, like, how hard can it be? Anyway? So I think radically different bases for assessment versus examinations. And to some extent, the only integrity that got preserved in the system wasn't the integrity of the classroom and teaching, it was the integrity of the examination as a filter.Tobi;I want to ask you a bit about the political economy of this a little bit. So if, say, you are talking to a policymaker who is actually serious about education, not in the superficial sense, but really about learning and says, okay, Lant, how do I go about this? How do I design an educational system that really does these things? I've written quite a number of reports here and there that rely so much on your accountability triangle. I would have sent you royalty checks, but it wasn't paid work. Sorry. So how exactly would you explain the political economy of designing a working educational system? I know people talk a lot about centralization versus decentralization, who gets empowered in that accountability triangle? Where should the levers to really push, where are they? So how exactly would you have that conversation?Lant;  So let me start with the accountability triangle and design issues. I think people mistake what the accountability triangle and design issues are about in the following sense. If I'm going to design a toaster, and the toaster is going to turn my untoasted bread into toasted bread, and it's going to be an electric toaster, there are certain fundamental things that have to happen, right? I have to have a current. I need to get that current running through something that heats up. I need that heat to be applied to the bread. I need it to stop when I've applied enough heat. Now, those fundamental principles of toaster design can lead to thousands of different actual designs of toasters. So I want people to get out of the notion that there's a single best toaster and that the accountability triangle or any other mode of analysis is to give you the best toaster and then everybody copies the best toaster. The principles are, design your own damn toaster, right? Because there's a gazillion ways to toast bread. Now, [for] all of them to work, [they] have to be compatible with the fundamental principles of electricity and current flow. You know, so I'm trying to get to one size doesn't fit all, but any old size doesn't necessarily fit everything either.You raise the question of decentralization, right? The thing is, if you look across countries that have roughly similar learning outcomes from PISA and other assessments, they're radically different designs. France is an entirely centralized system. Germany is a completely federalized system. The US is almost completely localized system. The Low Countries, Netherlands and Belgium have money follows the student system into the private sector. They have the highest private sector enrollment of any country in the world because they allow different pillars of education between the secular, the Catholic and the Protestant to coexist. So then if you ask is decentralization the best way to design your education system? It's like, no, no, no, you're missing the point. The point is, if you choose a centralized system, there are principles in how you design the flows of accountability that are going to produce success and those that are going to produce failure. If you choose a decentralized system, there are systems of the alignment of accountability that are going to produce success and failure. So the analytical framework doesn't determine the grand design, it determines the mechanics of the design. And I just want to get that straight up front.Second, as a result of the eight year research project of RISE, we have a policy brochure that has, kind of, here are the five kind of principles and here's the 15 minutes if I have five minutes with a minister or leader of a country, here are the five things I want to tell. And the first of those things is, commit. A lot of times we want to skip the most fundamental stage. And what I mean by commit is you actually need to create a broad social and political consensus that you're really going to do this and that you're committed to it. This big research project, RISE, which is based out of Oxford and I've been head of for eight years, we included Vietnam as one of our focused countries because it was a success case. Hence, we wanted our research team to partly do research about Vietnam and issues that were relevant in Vietnam. But we really wanted to answer the question, how did Vietnam do this? Why did they succeed? Right? And five years into the research effort, I was with the Vietnamese team and they had produced a bunch of empirical research of the econometric type. Is Vietnam success associated with this or that measurable input? Nothing really explains Vietnam at the approximate determinant input level. And finally, one of the researchers said to me, Lant, we're trying to get around the fundamental fact that Vietnam succeeded because they wanted to. And on one level it's like, my first response was, I can't go back and tell the British taxpayers that they spend a million dollars for a research project on Vietnam, and the conclusion to why Vietnam succeeded was because they wanted to.[Laughs]Tobi;  That's kind of on the nose, right? Lant; Yeah. On another level, it's a deep and ignored truth. The policymakers ignore it, the donors ignore it. Everybody wants to ignore it. Everybody wants to assume it's a technocratic issue, it's a design issue. I think the fundamental problem of these failing and dysfunctional education systems, it's a purpose problem. The purpose of education isn't clear, understood, widely accepted among all of the people from top to bottom responsible for achieving results. And once that leads to what I call norm erosion. Within the teachers, there's this norm erosion of what does it really mean to be a teacher? So again, the first and maybe only thing I would say if I had five minutes with a leader is, how are you going to produce a broad social, political and organizational commitment that you are really going to achieve specific, agreed-upon learning results? The technical design issues have to flow from that commitment rather than vice versa. And you could copy France's system, you could copy the Vietnamese system. I think you've heard the term from me and others, isomorphic mimicry. You can copy other people's systems and not have the same effect if it isn't driven by per purpose. Like, if you don't have the fundamental commitment and you don't have the fundamental agreed-upon purpose, the rest of the technical design is irrelevant.Tobi;It sort of leads me to my next theme. And that is the capability question in development.Lant; Yeah.Tobi;  First of all, I also want to make a quick distinction, because lately, well, when I say lately that's a little vague. State capacity is all the rage now in development.Lant;  Really? Is that true?Tobi; Yeah,Lant; I'm so happy to hear that. 3s I'm glad that you think so. And I hope that that's true, because it wasn't. It really wasn't on the agenda in a serious way. So, anyway …Tobi; But I also think there's also a bit of misunderstanding still, and usually, again, maybe I'm just moving with the wrong crowd. Who knows? People focus a lot more on the coercive instruments of the state and how much of it can be wielded to achieve certain programmatic results for state capacity. Revenue to GDP in Nigeria is low, how can the states collect more taxes? How much can the state squeeze out of people's bank accounts, out of companies, or the reverse. That, the reason why the state collects very little taxes is because state capacity is low. But, I mean, nobody really unpacks what they mean by that. They just rely on these measures like X to GDP ratio.Another recent example was, I think it was in 2020, when the pandemic sort of blew over and China built a hospital with 10,000 bed capacity in, I don't know, I forgot, maybe 20 days or…Lant;  Yeah. It was amazing.Tobi; A lot of people were like, oh, yeah, that's an example of state capacity. It's very much the same people now [who] are turning around and seeing China as an example of failure on how to respond to a pandemic. So I guess what I would ask you is, when you talk about the capability of the state, what exactly do we mean?Lant; In the work that were done and the book that we wrote, we adopt a very specific definition of capability, which is an organizational measure. Because there are all these aggregate country level measures and we use them in the book. But in the end, I think it's easier to define capability at the organizational level. And at the organizational level, I define [that] the capability of an organization is the ability to consistently induce its agents to take the policy actions in response to circumstances that advance the normative objective of the organization. And that's a long, complicated definition, but it basically means can the organization, from the frontline worker to the top of the organization, can it get people to do what they need to do to accomplish the purpose?And that's what I mean by the capability of an organization. And fortunately, unfortunately, like, militaries, I think, make for a good example. It's amazing that highfunctioning militaries have soldiers who will sacrifice their lives and die if needs be, to advance the purpose of the organization. Whereas you can have a million man army that's a paper tiger. No one is actually willing to do what it takes to carry out the purpose that the organization has been put to of fighting a particular conflict. And I think starting from that level makes it clear that, A, this is about purpose, B, it's about inducing the agents to take the actions that will lead to outcomes. And the reason why I'm super happy to hear that capability is being talked about is (you're doing a very good job as an interviewer drawing out connection between these various topics) the design of the curriculum is almost completely irrelevant to what's happening in schools. And so there's been way too much focus in my mind in development discourse on technocratic design and way too little on what's actually going to happen in practice. And so my definition of capability is, you measure an organization's capability of what actually happens in practice, what are the teachers actually going to do day to day? Right? And having been in development a long time, I often sit in these rooms where people are just, you know, I go out to the field and teachers aren't there at the school. Teachers are sitting in the office drinking their tea while the kids are running around on the playground, even during scheduled instructional time. And then I go back and hear discussions in the capital about higher order 21st century skills. You know, I wrote this article about India called Is India a Flailing State?Tobi;Yeah.Lant;And what I meant by flailing is there was no connection between what was happening in the cerebrum and what was being designed at the center. And what was actually happening when the actual fingers were touching the material and the nerves and sinews and muscles that connected the design to the practice were completely deteriorated. And therefore, capability was the issue, not design. So that's what I mean by capability. I mean, you use the example of tax. I think it's a great example. It's like, can you design a tax authority that actually collects taxes? And it's a hard, difficult question. And I think by starting from capability, I was really struck by your description of capability being linked to the coercive power of the state because that's exactly not how I would start it. I would start it with what are the key purposes for which the state is being deployed and for which one can really generate a sufficient integrated consensus that we need capability for this purpose.Tobi; Now, one of my favourite blogs of yours was how you described… I think it was how the US escaped the tyranny of experts, something like that. So I want to talk about that a bit versus what I'll call the cult of best practice…Lant; Hmm.Tobi;  Like, these institutions that are usually transplanted all over the world and things like independent central bank and this and that. And you described how a lot of decentralized institutions that exists in the United States, they were keenly contested, you know… Lant Yes.Tobi; Before the consensus sort of formed. So I'm sort of wondering, developing countries, how are they going about this wrong vis a vis the technical advice they are getting from development agencies? And the issue with that, if I would say, is, we now live in a world where the demand for good governance is globalized. Millions of Nigerians live on the internet every day and they see how life is in the industrial rich world and they want the same things. They want the same rights. They want governments that treat them the same way. Someone like me would even argue for an independent central bank because we've also experienced what life is otherwise.Lant; Right. Tobi; So how exactly to navigate this difficult terrain because the other way isn't also working. Because you can't say you have an independent central bank on paper that is not really independent and it's not working.Lant;  Your questions are such a brilliant articulation of the challenges that are being faced and the complex world we live in because we live now in an integrated world where people can see what's happening in other places. And that integrated world creates in and of itself positive pressures for performance, but also creates a lot of pressures for isomorphism, for deflecting the actual realities and what it will take to fix and make improvements with deflective copies of stuff that has no organic roots. I've written lots of things and even though you love all of your children, you might have favorites. One of my favorite blogs is a blog I wrote that is, I think, the most under cited blog of mine relative to what I think of it, which is about the M16 versus the AK-47.Tobi;Oh, yeah, I read that.Lant;It's an awkward analogy because no one wants to talk about guns.Tobi;Hmm.Lant;But I think it's a really great analogy because the M16 in terms of its proving ground performance is an unambiguously superior, more accurate rifle. The developing world adopts the AK-47. And that's because the Russian approach to weapon design was - design the weapon to the soldier. And the American approach is - train the soldier to the weapon. And what happens again and again across all kinds of phenomena in development is the people who are coming as part of the donour and development community to give advice to the world, all want them to adopt the M16 because it's the best gun, and they don't have the soldiers that can maintain the M16. And the M 16 has gotten better, but when it was first introduced, it was a notoriously unreliable weapon. And the one thing as a soldier, you don't want to happen is as you pull the trigger and the bullet doesn't come out at the end. That's what happens when you don't maintain an M16. So I think this isomorphism pressure confuses what best practice is with assuming there's this global best practice that can be adopted independently of the underlying capacity of the individuals and capabilities of the organizations. So I think huge problem.Second, I think there is a super important element of the history that the modes of doing things that now exist in the Western world and which we think of as being “modern,” I'm using scare quotes which doesn't help in a podcast, but we think of as being modern and best practice had to struggle their way into existence without the benefit of isomorphism. In the sense that when the United States in the early 20th century underwent a huge and quite conflicted and contested process of the consolidation of one room, kind of, locally operated schools into more professionalized school systems, that was politically contested and socially contested. And the only way the newer schools could justify themselves was by actually being better. There was no, oh, but this is how it has to be done, because this is how it has been done in these other places, and they have succeeded. And so there was no recourse to isomorphism, right. So in some sense, I think the world would be a radically better place for doing development if we just stopped allowing best practice to have any traction at all. If Nigerians just said, Screw it, we don't want to hear about it. Like, we want to do in Nigeria, what's going to work better in Nigeria? And telling me what Norway does and does not do, just no. Just no, we don't want to hear about it. Like, that doesn't help because it creates this vector of pressures that really deteriorate the necessary local contestation. My colleague Michael Wilcock, who is a sociologist, has characterized the development process as a series of good struggles. And in our work on state capability, we say you can't juggle without the struggle. Like, you can't transplant the ability to juggle. I can give you juggling lessons, I can show you juggling videos. But if you don't pick up the balls and do it and if you don't pick up the balls and do it with the understanding that unless you juggle, you haven't juggled, you can never learn to juggle. So I think if development were radically more about enabling goods, local struggles in which new policies, procedures, practices had to struggle their way into existence, justifying themselves on performance against purpose, we would be light years ahead of where we are. And that's what the debate about capability has to be.And I think to the extent the capability discourse gets deflected into another set of standards and more isomorphism, just this time about capability, I think we're going to lose something. Whereas if we start the state capability from discussion of what is it that we really want and need our government to get better at doing in terms of solving concrete, locally dominated problems, and then how are we going to come about creating the capability to do that in the Nigerian context, (I'm just using Nigeria, I could use Nepal, I could use any other country). That's the discussion that needs to happen. And the more the, kind of, global discourse and the global blessed practice gets frozen out completely, the sooner that happens, the better off we'll be.Tobi;  So I guess where I was going with that is…Lant; 78:25Yeah.Tobi; One of those also fantastic descriptions you guys used in the book is” crawling the design space” on capability. So now for me, as a Nigerian, I might say I do not necessarily want Nigeria to look like the United States. Because, It wouldn't work anyways. But at the same time, you don't want to experiment and end up like Venezuela or Zimbabwe. It may not work to design your central bank like the US Federal Reserve, but at the same time, you don't want 80% inflation like Turkey. So we're ate the midway, so to speak?Lant; I get this pushback when I rail on best practice. I often get the push back, well, why would we reinvent the wheel? And I've developed a PowerPoint slide that responds to that by showing the tiniest little gear that goes into a Swiss watch and a huge 20 foot large tire that goes on a piece of construction machinery. And then say they're both wheels. Nobody's talking about reinventing the wheel. There are fundamental principles of electricity that a toaster design has to be compatible with. So, again, there is a trade off. There are fundamental principles, but there's a gazillion instantiations of those principles. We don't want to start assuming that there's a single wheel, right? When people say, don't reinvent the wheel, it's like, nobody's reinventing the idea of a wheel. But every wheel that works is an adaptation of the idea of a wheel to the instantiation and purpose for which is being put. And if you said to me, oh, because we're not going to reinvent the wheel, we're going to take this tiny gear from a Swiss watch and put it on a construction machine and expect it to roll, it's like, no, that's just goofy, right? And what I've really tried to do in the course of my career is equip people with tools to think through their own circumstances.Tobi;Hmm.Lant;Coming back, the accountability triangle or the crawling the design space. What I'm not trying to do is tell somebody, here is what you should do in your circumstance, because my experience is what's actually doable and is going to lead to long-run progress is an unbelievably complicated and granular thing that involves the realities of the context. But what I do want to do is help people understand there are certain common principles here and some things are going to lead to, like, Venezuela like circumstances, and we've seen it happen again and again, but there are a variety of pathways that don't lead to that. And you need to choose a pathway that works for you. And the PDAA isn't a set of recommendations, it's a set of tools to help people think through their own circumstances, their own organization, their own nominated problems and make progress on them. The accountability triangle isn't a recommendation for the design of your system. It's a set of tools that equip people to have conversations about their own system. And I have to say, at one time was in some place in Indonesia and it was a discussion of PDAA being mediated by some organization that had adopted it and was teaching people how to do it in Indonesia. And I had the wonderful experience of having this Indonesian woman who was a district official working on health, describe in some detail how they were using PDAA to address the problem of maternal mortality with no idea who I was. And I was like, oh, just for me to hear her say, here is how I use the tool to address a problem I've never thought about in a context, in an organization I've never worked with. So I think equipping people with tools to enable them in their own local struggles is my real objective rather than the imagination that I somehow can come up with recommendations that are going to work in a specific context.So the don't reinvent the wheel is just complete total nonsense. It's like every wheel is adapted to its purpose and we're just giving you tools to adapt the idea of the wheel to your purpose. Adapting a square to the purpose just isn't going to work. So I agree. We want to start from the idea of things that work. And there are principles of wheel design that you can't violate. You can't come in and say, I have a participatory design of a water system that depends on water running uphill. No. Water runs downhill. That's a fundamental principle of water. But I think the principles are much broader and the potentiality for locally designed and organic, organically produced instantiations of common principles are much broader than the current discourse gives the possibility for.Tobi; 83:47 I can't let you go without getting your thoughts on just a few more questions. So indulge me. I've stayed largely away from RCTs because there's a bunch of podcasts where your thoughts can be fairly assessed on that issue, but it's not going away. Right? So for me, there's the ethical question, there's the methodological question, and there's the sort of philosophical question to it. I'm not qualified to have the methodological question, not at all. Maybe on the ethics, well, there's a lot of also biases that get, so I'm not going to go there. For me, when I think about RCTs, and I'm fairly close here in Nigeria with the effective altruism community, my wife is very active, and I have this debate with them a lot. Surprisingly, a lot of them are also debating Lant Pritchett, which is which is good, right now. The way I see it is. The whole thing seems too easy in the sense that, no disrespect to anybody working in this space at all… in the sense that it seems optimizing for what can be measured versus what works.So for me, the way I look at it is, it's very difficult to know the welfare effects for maybe a cohort of households. If you put a power station in my community, which has not had power for a while. So, but it's pretty easy if you have a fund and you distribute cash to households and you sort of divide them into a control group, and you know… which then makes it totally strange if you conclude from that that that is the best way to sort of intervene in the welfare and the well being of even that community or a people generally. I mean, where am I going wrong? How am I not getting it? Lant;  No, the people listening to the podcast can't see me on the camera trying to reach out and give you a big hug. I think you have it exactly right. I think we should go back and rerecord this podcast where I ask you questions and your questions are the answer. So I think you've got the answer exactly right. So first of all, by the way, the original rhetoric and practice of RCTs is going away, and roughly has gone away. Because the original rhetoric was Independent Impact Evaluation. All of the rhetoric out of JPAL and IPA and the other practitioners is now partnerships, which is not independent, but essentially everybody's adopted the Crawl the Design Space use of evidence for feedback loops in making organizations better. So they've all created their own words for it because they don't want to admit that they're just, again, borrowing other ideas. So to a large extent the whole community is moving in a very positive direction towards integrating, seeking out relevant evidence for partner organizations in how can they Crawl the Design Space and be effective. And they're just not admitting it because it's embarrassing how wrong they were first, but they've come to the right space. So I want to give them credit.When I gave a presentation at NYU called The Debate About RCTs Is Over And I won. It's not a very helpful approach, it's true, but it's not very helpful because I have to let them do what they're now doing, which is exactly what I said they should have been doing, and they are now doing. So, to some extent, asking people to say, yeah, we changed what we're doing is a big ask. And I'd rather they actually change what they're doing then they admit they did that. So to some extent it is going away. I think it's going away as it was originally designed, as this independent white coat guys, descend on some people and force them to carry out an impact evaluation to justify their existence. They're much more integrated, let's Crawl the Design Space in partnership with organizations, let's use randomization and more AB testing ways. And so I feel it's moving in a very positive direction with this weird rhetoric on top of it.Second, I think you're exactly right and I think it's slightly worse than you said. Because it's not just about what can be measured, but it's about attributability. It's not just what can be measured, but what can be attributed directly, causally to individual actions. And my big debate with the Effective Altruism community is I'm hugely, you know, big, big, big wins from the Effective Altruism movement attacking kind of virtue signaling, useless kind of philanthropic endeavors. I think every person should be happy for them. But if I were African, I would be sick of this philanthropic b******t that you guys are going to come and give us a cow or Bill Gates talking about…Tobi;Or chickens.Lant;Chickens. My wife doesn't do development at all. She's a music teacher. But when she heard Bill Gates talking about chickens, she think, does Bill Gates think chickens haven't been in Africa for hundreds of years? Like, what does he think he knows about chickens that Africans don't know about chickens? That's just such chicken s**t, right? But again, I'll promote a blog. I have a blog called let's All Play for Team Development. And I think what you're raising in your thing is that it's not just what we can measure, it's what we can measure and attribute to the actions of a specific actor. Because, you know, your example of not having power in a village, that we can measure. But all of the system things that we've talked about so far - migration, education, state capability - these aren't going to be solved by individualized interventions. They're going to be solved by systemic things. And with my team on education, we've had this big research project on education standards but I keep telling my team, look, if you're not part of a wave, you're a drop in the ocean. The only way for your efforts to not be a drop in the ocean is for you to be part of a wave [of] other people around you working on the same issue, pushing in the same direction, to build that. And that kind of thing gets undermined by attributability. So with my RISE project, I sometimes tell my funders, you can have success or you can have attributability, but you can't have both, right? Because if we're going to be successful at changing the global discourse in education, we're not going to do it by ourselves. We're going to be part of a team and a network. So, anyways…By the way, like early, early, early in the Effective Altruism movement, I had an interview with Cari Tuna and I think Holden Karnofsky, when they were thinking about what to do, and I made exactly this point. It's like, look, being effective at the individualized interventions that are happening is one thing, but don't ignore these huge systemic issues because you can't measure the direct causal effect between the philanthropic donation and the outcome. And that's your point, I think, which is, Nigeria is not going to get fixed by cash transfers.Tobi;No way.Lant; I mean, for heaven's sakes if Nigeria had the cash to transfer to everybody and fix it, well, then the national development struggle wouldn't be what it is. It's a systemic struggle across a number of fronts.Tobi;Why not just get Bill Gates to donate the money.Lant; But again, even Bill Gates, his fortune relative to the…you know, impact you could have through these programs, relative to what happens with national development, is just night and day. So to the extent that the adoption of a specific methodology precludes serious, evidence-based, hard struggle work on the big systemic issues, it's a net negative.Tobi;Again, to use your term, “kinky ideas in development.” Lant; Yeah.Tobi;I was reading a profile in the FT, a couple of days ago, all about charter cities, right?Lant;  About what?Tobi; Charter cities. It was an idea I was kind of into for a while, I mean, from Paul Roma's original presentation at TED. But you strongly argued against it at your CATO debate. So what is wrong with that idea? Because there are advocates, there are investors, who think charter cities are this new thing that is going to provide the space for the kind of organizational and policy experimentation. And China's SEZs are usually the go to examples, Shenzhen particularly. So, what do you have to say about that?Lant;I like discussing charter cities.Tobi;Okay.Lant;And the reason I like discussing charter cities is because they're not kinky. Right. My complaint about Kinky is that you've drawn this line in human welfare and you act as if development is only getting people over these very low-bar thresholds. So conditional cash transfers are an example of Kinky, and conditional cash transfers are just stupid, right? Charter cities are wrong.I mean, conditional cash transfers are just stupid in a trivial way.Charter cities are wrong in a very deep and sophisticated way. So I love talking about charter cities. The reason I love talking about charter cities is A, they have have the fundamental problem posed, right? The fundamental problem is countries and systems are trapped in a low level equilibrium and that low level equilibrium is actually a stable equilibrium and so you need to shock your way out of it. And the contest between me and Charter cities is I think there's good struggle paths out of low level equilibrium. So I'm a strategic incrementalist. I want to have a strategic vision, but I want incremental action. So I'm against the kinky, which is often incremental incremental, it doesn't really add up to a development agenda. So I like, yes, we need to have a way out of this low level equilibrium and state capability in the way education systems work, in the way economic policies keep countries from achieving high productivity, et cetera. But I'm a good struggle guy. And charter cities want Magic Bullet. Right.Now, the rationale for Magic Bullet is that good struggle is hard and hasn't necessarily proved successful. And these institutional features that lead to these low level traps just are resistant to good struggle methods out. And I think that's a really important debate to be having. But I think the right way to interpret China's experience and Yuen Yeun Ang's book on how China did it is, I think, a good illustration of this is China was Good Struggle. Using regional variations as a way of enabling good struggles. It's instructive that difficulty with Charter Cities always goes back. You keep going deeper and deeper of who's going to enforce this, who's going to enforce this, who's going to enforce this, you know. They're caught in their own catch 22 in my mind. So the first proposed, what appeared to be feasible Charter City in Honduras eventually got undermined by governance issues in which the major investor didn't want to actually be subject to rules based decision making. So, I love talking about charter cities. I think they're on the right set of issues of how do we get to the institutional conditions that can create a positive environment for high productivity firms and engagement and improved governance. And they have a coherent argument, which is good, that, it's a low level trap and there's no path out of the low level trap and so we need big shock to get out of it.But I don't think they're ultimately correct about the way in which you can establish the fundamentals. You can't just big jump your way to having reliable enforcement mechanisms and until you get to reliable enforcement mechanisms, the whole Charter City idea is still kind of up in the air. The next podcast I have scheduled to do is with the Charter Cities podcast, so that hopefully…Tobi;Oh. Interesting. Last question. We sort of have a tradition on the show where I ask the guest to discuss one new idea they would like to see spread everywhere. But I think more in line with your own brand, like you said earlier, I think I would like to ask for our own exclusive, Ideas Untrapped Exclusive Lant Rant, something you haven't talked about before or rarely. So you can go on for however long you wish. And that's the last question.Lant; I think if I had to pick something that if we could just get rid of it, it would be this fantasy that technology is going to solve problems. My basic point I make again and again and again is Moore's Law, which is the doubling of computer capacity every two years, has been chugging along, and it might have slowed down, but has been chugging along since 1965. So computing power has improved by a factor of ten to the 11th. And just as an illustration of just how big ten to the 11th is, the speed you drive on a freeway of 60 miles an hour is only ten to the 7th smaller than the speed of light. So ten to the 11th is an astronomically huge number in the sense that only astronomers have any use for numbers as big as ten to the 11th. Okay. My claim is anything that hasn't been fixed by a ten to the 11th change in computing power isn't going to get fixed by computing power. And I ask people sometimes in audiences, okay, particularly with older people, you look a little young for this question, but I ask them, okay, you older people that have been married for a long time, computing power has gone up ten to the 11th over the course of your marriage, has it made your marriage any better. And they're like, well, a little bit, sometimes when we're abroad, we can communicate over Skype easier, but on the other hand, it's made it worse because there's more distractions and more temptations to not pay attention to your spouse.So on net, ten to the 11th of computing power hasn't improved average marriage quality. And then I ask them, has it improved your access to pornography? And it's like, of course, night and day, like, more instantaneous access to pornography. And my concluding thing is a huge amount of what is being promoted in the name of tech is the pornography of X rather than the real deal. So people promoting tech in education are promoting the pornography of education rather than real education. People that are promoting tech in government are promoting the pornography of governance rather than true governance. And it's just like, no, these are deeper human issues, and there's all kinds of human issues that they're fundamentally technologically resilient. And expecting technology to solve human problems is just a myth. It enables salespeople to pound down people's doors, to sell government officials some new software that's going to do this or that. But without the purpose, without the commitment, without the fundamental human norms of behaviour, technology isn't going to solve anything and the pretence that it is is distracting a lot of people from getting to the serious work. So if we could just replace the technology of X with the pornography of X, I think we'd be better off in discussions of what its real potentialities are. How's that for [an] original?Tobi;Yeah, yeah.Lant;You asked for it.Tobi; Yeah, that's a lot to think about, yeah. Thank you so much for doing this.Lant;  Thanks for a great interview, Tobi. That was super fun. We could go back and record this with my asking questions and your questions being the answers. Because you're really sophisticated on all these issues. You're in exactly the right space.Tobi;Thank you very much.Lant;Great. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ideasuntrapped.com/subscribe

Episode 222 (2 May 2013): In this chat from the archives, Michael and I discuss real teaching and the problems with institutional reform when the "powers that be" don't want to let go. Michael also appeared in Episode 94 (Sep 2020) of Jive Talking https://soundcloud.com/jivetalking/94-michael-strong-is-radically-improving-education

Special Economic Zones (SEZs) exist across the world, where national laws and rights are suspended and companies operating in them are more or less free to do as they please. SEZs – sometimes referred to as ‘open zones' – take different forms; freeports and charter cities are both forms of SEZ. All this means bigger profits for the companies operating in these zones and worse conditions for workers.

Niklas speaks with Mark Lutter. Mark is the Founder and Chairman of the Charter Cities Institute, a non-profit which is building the ecosystem for charter cities. Mark has a PhD in economics from George Mason University.Mark also has a podcast called the Charter Cities Podcast, a fantastic listen to learn about this fascinating movement.Mark and Niklas start by talking about how they both became more motivated to pursue experimentation to fix or build alternatives to government institutions as a result of the covid-19 pandemic, and how they hope charter cities can propel new technology development such as biotech and longevity or drone delivery.Mark talks about charter cities, how to finance them and the many other challenges involved in building them. First and foremost, charter cities are a political challenge and require local partnerships and buy-in from national governments.Mark believes an optimistic scenario could lead to charter cities having 3 million residents in ten years with growth rates 1-2 percentage points higher than the surrounding region. Charter cities have a very long time horizon and are up against the inherent stability of existing institutions: people typically don't move unless there is a really strong motivation such as political or religious persecution, or instability.This stickiness of existing institutions is something Mark believes is often underestimated by proponents of "network states" such as Balaji Srinivasan. While charter cities have overlaps with network states, Mark believes there is not enough migration flow out of developed countries with bad institutions - the much stronger force pressure to migrate is from developed to developing countries.Mark cautions against claiming the sacred concept of political sovereignty and instead opts for partnerships with governments. He sees the biggest potential for charter cities in Africa, because of the strong urbanization ratesMark is a key thought leader in the charter cities space, and achieved tremendous success in increasing awareness and developing the right templates through the Charter Cities Institute - it was fascinating to have Mark on to share his learnings!Infinita Discord: https://discord.gg/dwbNh7NKNiklas on Twitter: https://twitter.com/NiklasAnzingerInfinita Website: https://infinitavc.com/

I'm with Patri Friedman who is a General Partner @ Pronomos Capital, the world's first charter city VC fund. Before this, he founded The Seasteading Institute, a non-profit that explores the creation of sovereign ocean colonies. What is a charter city? What does a sovereign ocean colony mean? We will explore all these ideas in detail with Patri pretty soon. For now, you should know that Patri is a champion for innovation in governance. Our economy thrives because there's continuous innovation happening when new products and services are brought in the market. That innovation is mostly driven by startup companies who challenge the status quo of established companies. But this dynamic doesn't exist in governance – we're stuck with the legal systems and constitutions we're born into. What if we could kick-start a new city with an entirely fresh take on society? That's the topic of today's discussion. == What we talk about == 00:00 - Introduction to the podcast 01:13 - What led Patri to start the Seasteading Institute (a non-profit that explores the creation of sovereign ocean colonies) 05:44 - The current status of the project 07:29 - What is the legal status of putting a house, in the middle of nowhere? 16:30 - Definition of a Charter City 19:13 - What type of governments would allow Charter Cities? 21:30 - Are some governments fearful of giving up control? 24:50 - Have you made any investments in Charter Cities? What are the exciting things that are happening in this space? 29:20 - How do you motivate these incredibly smart, talented, and motivated people to move to a new city? 32:45 - What does a seed investment/early stage investment mean for a charter city or a community? 35:30 - Are there any focus areas or geographical regions you're interested in that entrepreneurs can reach out to you with their pitches? 39:30 - How did your father David D. Friedman's and grandfather Milton Friedman's thinking shape your thinking? 45:10 - What is the basic principle of Anarcho-capitalism? 51:20 - Are ideas like DAO in crypto inspired by Anarcho-capitalism? 52:44 - Have you thought about what governance systems will make sense when we become interplanetary species? 55:45 - Any laws on who claims a part of Moon or Mars? 56:20 - What is Jhana Meditation, and how does it differ from other styles of meditation? 1:04:00 - Is there anything else that you want to add, that you wanted me to ask, but I didn't ask? 1:05:12 - Concluding Thoughts

Interview with Matthew McCartney, professor of development economics and researcher at the Charter Cities Institute. We will talk about his vision for the future of cities, the pace of urbanisation, economic concepts in urban areas, intratrade in Africa, and many more. Professor Matthew McCartney spent twenty years as an academic at the School of African and Oriental Studies, University of London (2000-2011), and at the University of Oxford (2011-21). He has been a visiting Professor at Universities in China, Pakistan, India, Japan, South Korea, Poland, and Belgium. He is a development economist by background with a teaching and research specialization in the economic development of India and Pakistan after 1947. He has published, supervised, and taught on economic issues relating to industrialization, technology, trade, the role of the state, investment and economic growth, and human development issues relating to nutrition, employment, education, poverty, and inequality. He has also worked for the World Bank, USAID, EU, and UNDP in Botswana, Georgia, Bangladesh, Azerbaijan, Egypt, Jordan, Bosnia, and Zambia. He holds a BA in Economics from the University of Cambridge, an MPhil in Economics from the University of Oxford, and a Ph.D. in Economics from SOAS, University of London. His latest book is the outcome of two years of research-based in China and Pakistan ‘The Dragon from the Mountains: The CPEC from Kashgar to Gwadar' and was published by Cambridge University Press in 2021. You can find out more about Matthew through these links: Matthew McCartney at the Charter Cities Institute; Interview with Matthew McCartney and Junaid Qureshi, the director of European Foundation for South Asian Studies (EFSAS) about Pakistan, China and CPEC Matthew McCartney speaking at EFSAS Seminar on CPEC in EU Parliament; The Dragon from the Mountains book by Matthew McCartney, published by Cambridge University Press; The Dragon from the Mountains book by Matthew McCartney on Amazon; Connecting episodes you might be interested in: No.060I - Interview with Gala Camacho about responsible technologies; No.072I - Interview with Tamás Mezős about urban characteristics; No.087I - Interview with Paul Brookbanks about the rate and pace of urbanisation; What wast the most interesting part for you? What questions did arise for you? Let me know on Twitter @WTF4Cities or on the wtf4cities.com website where the shownotes are also available. I hope this was an interesting episode for you and thanks for tuning in. Music by Lesfm from Pixabay

Sam and Emma host Raymond Craib, Professor of History of Cornell University, to discuss his recent book Adventure Capitalism: A History of Libertarian Exit, from the Era of Decolonization to the Digital Age. First, Sam and Emma dive into updates on early voting and the GOP's abandonment of New Hampshire, before diving into Biden finally centering GOP cuts to Social Security and Medicare in his talking points. Professor Raymond Craib then joins as he jumps right into his “big tent” definition of libertarianism, ranging from the neoliberal politics of Hayek and Friedman to Murray Rothbard's complete reliance on private contracts in his theory, with the Ayn Rands and Ludwig von Miseses falling somewhere in between. After walking through the distinct roles the state can play along this spectrum – particularly in protecting individuals from direct violence and in their private property rights – Sam, Emma, and Professor Craib tackle the disregard for the inherent violence and expropriation of primitive accumulation that sets the stage for the rights libertarians supposedly respect. This brings Professor Craib to the progression of attempts at libertarian Utopia and the constant need for colonial measures of expropriation to begin these attempts, first taking on Michael Oliver's experiments attempting to lay claim to foreign lands for his new utopia via domestic law and insurrectionist attempts at secession, before diving into the more contemporary version of this libertarian colonial utopia, Sam, Emma, and Raymond parse through Paul Romer's “Charter Cities,” and how he essentially created a system of finance-backed feudalism that inevitably created an incredibly precarious system. They wrap up the interview by assessing the future of these mass-scale speculative real estate grifts, and what role the Big Tech monopolists will play when these grifts are right in their wheelhouse. And in the Fun Half: Sam and Emma dive into Bob Woodward's continuing leaks from the Trump years, as Trump claims to be the only one to look into Kim Jong un's eyes and truly understand him, and Nicholas from Silicon Valley explores the disappointing conclusion to the January 6th hearings. Olivia from Las Vegas discusses the recent bout of mail-in-ballot-related crime in the city, and launches a greater conversation on voter intimidation, Kowalski celebrates MR as the Holidays approach, and Dr. Oz continues to dig his own grave. Dylan from New Mexico talks about Santa Fe's housing crisis, and Tucker Carlson cackles as Kari Lake #owns a CNN reporter, plus, your calls and IMs! Check out Raymond's book here: https://pmpress.org/index.php?l=product_detail&p=1242 Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Subscribe to the ESVN YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/esvnshow Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! http://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: http://majority.fm/app Check out today's sponsors: ZipRecruiter: Some things in life we like to pick out for ourselves - so we know we've got the one that's best for us - like cuts of steak or mattresses. What if you could do the same for hiring - choose your ideal candidate before they even apply? That's where ZipRecruiter's ‘Invite to Apply' comes in - it gives YOU, as the hiring manager, the power to pick your favorites from top candidates. According to ZipRecruiter Internal Data, jobs where employers use ZipRecruiter's ‘Invite to Apply' get on average two and a half times more candidates — which helps make for a faster hiring process. See for yourself! Just go to this exclusive web address, https://www.ziprecruiter.com/majority to try ZipRecruiter for free! Cozy Earth: One out of three Americans report being sleep deprived, and their sheets could be the problem. Luckily Cozy Earth provides the SOFTEST, MOST LUXURIOUS and BEST-TEMPERATURE REGULATING sheets. Cozy Earth has been featured on Oprah's Most Favorite Things List Four Years in a Row! Made from super soft viscose from bamboo, Cozy Earth Sheets breathe so you sleep at the perfect temperature all year round.  And for a limited time, SAVE 35% on Cozy Earth Bedding. Go to https://cozyearth.com/and enter my special promo code MAJORITY at checkout to SAVE 35% now. Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattBinder @MattLech @BF1nn @BradKAlsop Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on Youtube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Subscribe to Discourse Blog, a newsletter and website for progressive essays and related fun partly run by AM Quickie writer Jack Crosbie. https://discourseblog.com/ Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com/ The Majority Report with Sam Seder - https://majorityreportradio.com/

The idea of leaving society to start up a new one isn't exactly new... history is full of people leaving to go start new countries. But the idea became especially fashionable in 20th century America and was jump-started as a reaction to the counterculture in the 1960's, and given new life by Silicon Valley entrepreneurs in the 2000's. Dave talks with Raymond Craib, professor of history at Cornell University, about his new book "Adventure Capitalism: A History of Libertarian Exit from the Era of Decolonization to the Digital Age" which covers the upsurge in these ideas in the 60's to today, and their connection to everything from Brexit to Seasteading. Learn more about Ray Craib's work on Twitter (@raycraib) and at his Cornell faculty page: https://history.cornell.edu/raymond-b-craib Adventure Capitalism (Book): https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/57700808 Keywords: Libertarian exit, libertarianism, Murray Rothbard, Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Milton Friedman, Michael Oliver, Werner Stiefel, New Atlantis, Tonga, Minerva Reefs, Abaco, Bahamas, Mitchell WerBell, Andrew St. George, Phoenix Foundation, Azores, New Hebrides, Vanuatu, Stefan Mandel, Mondragon, David Duke, Bayou of Pigs, Peter Thiel, Seasteading, Joe Quirk, Patri Friedman, Balaji Srinivasan, Nick Land, Curtis Yarvin, Mencius Moldbug, Urbit, Hans-Herman Hoppe, James Dale Davidson, William Rees Mogg, Jacob Rees Mogg, Brexit, Sovereign Individual, Longtermism, Effective Altruism, Honduras, ZEDEs, Charter Cities, Liz Truss, Shankar Singham, Barbara Kolm, Mises Institute.

Peter Young is the managing director of the Free Cities Foundation. In this interview, we discuss the development of autonomous administrative areas around the world called ‘free cities', where new types of governance can be offered to citizens outside the control of existing states. - - - - Paul Romer, former chief economist at the World Bank and a Nobel prize winner, proposed in 2009 the concept of Charter Cities. Romer was trying to tackle the problem of stagnant investment in the Global South arising from bad governance. The solution was to evolve the idea behind special economic zones and create autonomous city-states within existing countries. The autonomy would extend to alternate legal and political systems from the host nation, and to the provision of services by private organisations. An advanced guarantor country would protect the legal rights of residents. The idea was that such cities would become trusted centres predicated on good rules, attracting investment, firms and people, the benefits of which then filter beyond the cities' boundaries into the host country. The Free City Foundation have taken Romer's idea and sought to implement it in different parts of the world. The aim is to provide citizens with alternatives to the status quo: establishing new legal, financial and municipal relationships with residents. The ideology is to reduce the size of the modern state, which is considered to act in its own self-interest at the expense of society. There are a number of different scales of initiatives for the Free City Foundation: from intentional communities to prosperity zones, all the way to Free Private Cities. Prospera in Honduras is a working example of a Free City: a new settlement on the island of Roatán is being developed within its own civil law, regulatory agencies and taxation; although it must still adhere to the Honduran constitution, international treaties and criminal law. But this is only the start: many more examples are being developed across the world. Perhaps the most innovative idea is Seasteading, where independent communities are developed in international waters, outside of the jurisdiction of existing governments. Are these initiatives viable and preferable alternatives to the nation-state? That may be too early to tell, but there is a growing number of investors who think they are the future of civilisation.

“A world where there's a plethora of different kinds of society where people consent to the rules, and people have the ability to choose what kind of system they live under, is a better society for everyone.”— Peter YoungPeter Young is the managing director of the Free Cities Foundation. In this interview, we discuss the development of autonomous administrative areas around the world called ‘free cities', where new types of governance can be offered to citizens outside the control of existing states.- - - - Paul Romer, former chief economist at the World Bank and a Nobel prize winner, proposed in 2009 the concept of Charter Cities. Romer was trying to tackle the problem of stagnant investment in the Global South arising from bad governance. The solution was to evolve the idea behind special economic zones and create autonomous city-states within existing countries.The autonomy would extend to alternate legal and political systems from the host nation, and to the provision of services by private organisations. An advanced guarantor country would protect the legal rights of residents. The idea was that such cities would become trusted centres predicated on good rules, attracting investment, firms and people, the benefits of which then filter beyond the cities' boundaries into the host country. The Free City Foundation have taken Romer's idea and sought to implement it in different parts of the world. The aim is to provide citizens with alternatives to the status quo: establishing new legal, financial and municipal relationships with residents. The ideology is to reduce the size of the modern state, which is considered to act in its own self-interest at the expense of society. There are a number of different scales of initiatives for the Free City Foundation: from intentional communities to prosperity zones, all the way to Free Private Cities. Prospera in Honduras is a working example of a Free City: a new settlement on the island of Roatán is being developed within its own civil law, regulatory agencies and taxation; although it must still adhere to the Honduran constitution, international treaties and criminal law.But this is only the start: many more examples are being developed across the world. Perhaps the most innovative idea is Seasteading, where independent communities are developed in international waters, outside of the jurisdiction of existing governments. Are these initiatives viable and preferable alternatives to the nation-state? That may be too early to tell, but there is a growing number of investors who think they are the future of civilisation.- - - - This episode's sponsors:Gemini - Buy Bitcoin instantlyLedn - Financial services for Bitcoin hodlersBitcasino - The Future of Gaming is herePacific Bitcoin - Bitcoin‑only event, Nov 10 & 11, 2022Ledger - State of the art Bitcoin hardware walletWasabi Wallet - Privacy by defaultTexas Blockchain Summit - Nov 17-18, 2022 | Austin, TexasBCB Group - Global digital financial Services-----WBD553 - Show Notes-----If you enjoy The What Bitcoin Did Podcast you can help support the show by doing the following:Become a Patron and get access to shows early or help contributeMake a tip:Bitcoin: 3FiC6w7eb3dkcaNHMAnj39ANTAkv8Ufi2SQR Codes: BitcoinIf you do send a tip then please email me so that I can say thank youSubscribe on iTunes | Spotify | Stitcher | SoundCloud | YouTube | Deezer | TuneIn | RSS FeedLeave a review on iTunesShare the show and episodes with your friends and familySubscribe to the newsletter on my websiteFollow me on Twitter Personal | Twitter Podcast | Instagram | Medium | YouTubeIf you are interested in sponsoring the show, you can read more about that here or please feel free to drop me an email to discuss options.

Today's guest on the Expat Money Show is Francisco Litvay, Co-founder of Settee, an internationalization company. At age 17, he moved from Brazil and, at 21, became a digital nomad, having been in more than 20 countries on 4 continents since then. He specializes in Special Economic Zones and Charter Cities and is an ambassador for the Free Private Cities Foundation and Head of Internationalization at the Adrianople Group, a business intelligence firm focused on special jurisdictions.   TODAY'S CONVERSATION WITH FRANCISCO Today I chat with Francisco Litvay about the power of free cities and private cities and how they just work better. If you're new to this idea, listen to the entire podcast, there's so much we unpack. We discuss the possibility of creating a voluntary system of government and how that can help your business, how you can pay less taxes, and how free zones can help you move to different countries. And if you've ever wondered how each of my podcast episodes is connected, week after week, I'll let you in on the secret during this show.   A fascinating conversation on the practicality of libertarianism, what are the big projects in this space really have legs, things that are up and coming and what Francisco is working on right now. Francisco and I talk about ZEDEs, the concept, and the value they bring to the world. We talk a lot about Honduras and what it will mean to the country, but there are many around the world.  We delve into other jurisdictions like Uruguay and the UAE, how their governments have handled special economic zones, and what the incentives are for businesses set up in these zones. You've decided that you love the idea of a free zone, and you want to participate; Francisco discusses the company formation side, the banking side, the living side, and anything you can actually do to increase your own freedom using this vehicle and this varies from country to country, so listen carefully. Special Economic Zones in Africa? Countries like São Tomé and Príncipe or Nigeria. Maybe these are great alternative countries and islands that we should look at? If you want to see where all of the special economic zones are across the world, basically every zone on earth, go to Open Zone Map. If it's a charter city, a free zone, a free port, private or public, or if you really want to learn about zones and see where there are opportunities close to you, check out the open zone map; I'll give you the link below.   HOW TO REACH FRANCISCO LITVAY Adrianople Group - https://www.adrianoplegroup.com/ (https://www.adrianoplegroup.com) Open Zone Map - https://www.openzonemap.com/ (https://www.openzonemap.com) Internationalization website (for Portuguese Speakers): https://settee.io/ (https://settee.io) Francisco's contact: @franlitvay on every social media RELATED EPISODES  https://expatmoneyshow.com/episodes/kolja-spori (196: How To Make Friends With Warlords And Other Dangerous Individuals – Kolja Spori) https://expatmoneyshow.com/episodes/peter-young (192: Building Free Private Cities Around The World – Peter Young )   CONCLUSION This is such a super exciting topic for my clients and for me. I love learning about ZEDEs and free private cities, and special economic zones around the world. I'm also grateful to be connected with people that really understand what's going on in the world today. Don't miss this episode!  

Francisco Litvay é Diretor de Internacionalização da Adrianople Group e embaixador da Free Cities Foundation. Neste episódio, ele fala sobre os conceitos de Cidades privadas, quais abordagens elas utilizam e suas características. Litvay explica ainda sobre a proximidade desse modelo com os bairros planejados, zonas econômicas e quais projetos empreendedores os brasileiros podem investir. Estrutura do episódio:. • 4:05 - O que faz Francisco Litvay • 4:51 - O que é a charter city, conhecida como cidades privadas ou cidades livres? • 7:20 - Abordagens das cidades privadas • 8:54 - Como é a vida de um diretor de expansão internacional focado em cidades privadas? • 10:30 - Perfil das cidades privadas: modelo, localização, características • 14:14 - A cidade de Próspera, em Honduras • 17:45 - Quem decide as coisas em Próspera? • 26:19 - Por que Honduras? • 28:00 - Há algum movimento para Charter Cities no Brasil? • 31:52 - É possível incluir residências nas Charter Cities? • 32:30 - Oportunidades que podem ser exploradas pelo empreendedor imobiliário • 33:50 - Zonas existentes no Brasil • 35:00 - Qual é a distância, diferença e similaridades entre um bairro planejado e uma charter city? • 38:51 - Comunidades privadas nos Estados Unidos • 41:18 - Comunidades para interesses diferentes de vida • 43:00 - Zonas econômicas na China • 48:30 - Investidores brasileiros em Próspera. Qual o papel do Brasil no desenvolvimento de cidades privadas? • 51:40 - O que você não concorda com o conceito de cidades privadas e da sua implementação? • 55:24 - Onde buscar mais informações sobre o assunto • 56:43 - Projetos que o investidor brasileiro possa participar • 57:40 - Considerações finais

Can we do cities better? Researcher Heba Elhanafy, and the American headquartered think tank the Charter Cities Institute, think so. Heba joined Jason and the Smarter Cities Podcast from her office in Zambia, where she is working with African governments on creating new and better cities that work for people as well as deliver economic development. Learn more about Heba and the Charter Cities Institute at: https://chartercitiesinstitute.org/ Smarter Cities Podcast: Listen and subscribe at Spotify here: https://lnkd.in/fJq96sk Listen and subscribe at Apple Podcasts here: https://lnkd.in/fRBYnZf You Tube: https://lnkd.in/g8rFxGf E-mail us at smartercitiespod@gmail.com This episode is presented with thanks to Podium, the end-to-end digital platform that provides the property and construction industry with insights and clarity never experienced before. Find out more at: https://lnkd.in/dFwaDufp  

In this podcast, we consider the Tory Government proposal to institute eight 'Charter Cities' in the UK. Charter Cities are planned to be areas which are given over to governance by a corporation which is likely to remove workers protections, ban minimum wage laws, dismantle welfare, quash restrictions on working hours and more. All this is thought to be facilitated by Brexit and the subsequent revocation of EU regulations. For its neoliberal proponents, who are universally drawn from the big oil funded right international, this is a utopia which will end world poverty. We argue the contrary, that it will be a monstrously dystopian  anti-democratic nightmare in which workers will be treated like disposable things and which must be stopped. For background, a good shortish read is here - https://medium.com/@cormack.lawson/charter-cities-the-real-reason-for-brexit-and-the-bigger-picture-4de80dbb69fbhttps://medium.com/@cormack.lawson/charter-cities-the-real-reason-for-brexit-and-the-bigger-picture-4de80dbb69fb [Free. 58 minutes.]

Here with us today on our CityDAO Podcast is Carl Youngblood, who is currently spending his vacation in Madrid, Spain. Carl is a Software Engineer for over twenty years, specializing in highly scalable web services and applications. He is especially interested in blockchain technology and smart contracts. For today's episode, we will have a more in-depth discussion about Charter Cities, Carl's transition to the blockchain space, his work in AWS (Amazon Web Services), proof-of-work versus proof-of-stake, designing the city of the future, and so much more. Carl used to be a part of the Amazon Web Services as a Senior Solutions Architect and Blockchain specialist. He is also the Co-Founder of Blockscale LLC, which provides highly-available, reliable, and scalable blockchain services for crypto projects. Blockscale has led the deployment of the Tezos Foundation's baker infrastructure during their mainnet launch, and continues to maintain it today. They have also released open-source projects and tools for Ethereum and Tezos. Blockscale was recently acquired by Coinbase. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/city-dao-podcast/message

Kurtis Lockhart, Executive Director of the Charter Cities Institute, tells us about the benefits of charter cities - cities with their own rules or charter, independent of national or subnational governments. Kurtis argues the best way to implement charter cities is via public-private partnerships (PPPs). Learn about the fascinating work the Charter Cities Institute is involved in around the world with a view to stimulating economic development and lifting millions out of poverty.  About this episode's guest - Kurtis LockhartKurtis Lockhart is Executive Director & Head of Research at the Charter Cities Institute. Kurtis is also a PhD candidate in political science at the University of Oxford. His research examines the effect of institutional reforms on public goods provision with a regional focus on sub-Saharan Africa. At Oxford he has taught both quantitative methods and African politics. In the field, Kurtis has previously worked as a Research Manager for the International Growth Centre (IGC), for Warc Africa (both in Sierra Leone), and for the ELIMU Impact Evaluation Center in Kenya where he managed the implementation of several randomized control trials across many different sectors (health insurance, rural electrification, tax administration, and legal aid). Kurtis has also completed consulting projects with both Oxford Development Consultancy and with Warc Africa. He holds an MSc in Development Management from the London School of Economics where he graduated top of his class, as well as a BA in Economics and Development Studies (First Class Honors) from McGill University. Find him on Twitter @kurtislockhart.Links relevant to the conversationThe Charter Cities InstitutePodcast Archives - The Future of Development (Charter Cities Institute podcast)Paul Romer: Why the world needs charter citiesThe Charter Cities Institute on Twitter: @CCIdotCityCreditsThanks to the show's audio engineer Josh Crotts for his assistance in producing the episode and to the show's sponsor, Gene's consultancy business www.adepteconomics.com.au. Please consider signing up to receive our email updates and to access our e-book Top Ten Insights from Economics at www.economicsexplored.com. Also, please get in touch with any questions, comments and suggestions by emailing us at contact@economicsexplored.com or sending a voice message via https://www.speakpipe.com/economicsexplored. Economics Explored is available via Apple Podcasts, Google Podcast, and other podcasting platforms.

I flew to the Bahamas to interview Sam Bankman-Fried, the CEO of FTX! He talks about FTX’s plan to infiltrate traditional finance, giving $100m this year to AI + pandemic risk, scaling slowly + hiring A-players, and much more.Watch on YouTube, or listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here. Follow me on Twitter for updates on future episodes.Timestamps(00:18) - How inefficient is the world?(01:11) - Choosing a career(04:15) - The difficulty of being a founder(06:21) - Is effective altruism too narrowminded?(09:57) - Political giving(12:55) - FTX Future Fund(16:41) - Adverse selection in philanthropy(18:06) - Correlation between different causes(22:15) - Great founders do difficult things(25:51) - Pitcher fatigue and the importance of focus(28:30) - How SBF identifies talent(31:09) - Why scaling too fast kills companies(33:51) - The future of crypto(35:46) - Risk, efficiency, and human discretion in derivatives(41:00) - Jane Street vs FTX(41:56) - Conflict of interest between broker and exchange(42:59) - Bahamas and Charter Cities(43:47) - SBF’s RAM-skewed mindUnfortunately, audio quality abruptly drops from 17:50-19:15TranscriptDwarkesh Patel 0:09Today on The Lunar Science Society Podcast, I have the pleasure of interviewing Sam Bankman-Fried, CEO of FTX. Thanks for coming on The Lunar Society.Sam Bankman-Fried 0:17Thanks for having me.How inefficient is the world?Dwarkesh Patel 0:18Alright, first question. Does the consecutive success of FTX and Alameda suggest to you that the world has all kinds of low-hanging opportunities? Or was that a property of the inefficiencies of crypto markets at one particular point in history?Sam Bankman-Fried 0:31I think it's more of the former, there are just a lot of inefficiencies.Dwarkesh Patel 0:35So then another part of the question is: if you had to restart earning to give again, what are the odds you become a billionaire, but you can't do it in crypto?Sam Bankman-Fried 0:42I think they're pretty decent. A lot of it depends on what I ended up choosing and how aggressive I end up deciding to be. There were a lot of safe and secure career paths before me that definitely would not have ended there. But if I dedicated myself to starting up some businesses, there would have been a pretty decent chance of it.Choosing a careerDwarkesh Patel 1:11So that leads to the next question—which is that you've cited Will MacAskill's lunch with you while you were at MIT as being very important in deciding your career. He suggested you earn-to-give by going to a quant firm like Jane Street. In retrospect, given the success you've had as a founder, was that maybe bad advice? And maybe you should’ve been advised to start a startup or nonprofit?Sam Bankman-Fried 1:31I don't think it was literally the best possible advice because this was in 2012. Starting a crypto exchange then would have been…. I think it was definitely helpful advice. Relative to not having gotten advice at all, I think it helps quite a bit.Dwarkesh Patel 1:50Right. But then there's a broader question: are people like you who could become founders advised to take lower variance, lower risk careers that in, expected value, are less valuable?Sam Bankman-Fried 2:02Yeah, I think that's probably true. I think people are advised too strongly to go down safe career paths. But I think it's worth noting that there's a big difference between what makes sense altruistically and personally for this. To the extent you're just thinking of personal criteria, that's going to argue heavily in favor of a safer career path because you have much more quickly declining marginal utility of money than the world does. So, this kind of path is specifically for altruistically-minded people.The other thing is that when you think about advising people, I think people will often try and reference career advice that others got. “What were some of these outward-facing factors of success that you can see?” But often the answer has something to do with them and their family, friends, or something much more personal. When we talk with people about their careers, personal considerations and the advice of people close to them weigh very heavily on the decisions they end up making.Dwarkesh Patel 3:17I didn't realize that the personal considerations were as important in your case as the advice you got.Sam Bankman-Fried 3:24Oh, I don’t think in my case. But, it is true with many people that I talked to.Dwarkesh Patel 3:29Speaking of declining marginal consumption, I'm wondering if you think the implication of this is that over the long term, all the richest people in the world will be utilitarian philanthropists because they don't have diminishing returns of consumption. They’re risk-neutral.Sam Bankman-Fried 3:40I wouldn't say all will, but I think there probably is something in that direction. People who are looking at how they can help the world are going to end up being disproportionately represented amongst the most and maybe least successful.The difficulty of being a founderDwarkesh Patel 3:54Alright, let’s talk about Effective Altruism. So in your interview with Tyler Cowen, you were asked, “What constrains the number of altruistically minded projects?” And you answered, “Probably someone who can start something.”Now, is this a property of the world in general? Or is this a property of EAs? And if it's about EAs, then is there something about the movement that drives away people who took could take leadership roles?Sam Bankman-Fried 4:15Oh, I think it's just the world in general. Even if you ignore altruistic projects and just look at profit-minded ones, we have lots of ideas for businesses that we think would probably do well, if they were run well, that we'd be excited to fund. And the missing ingredient quite frequently for them is the right person or team to take the lead on it. In general, starting something is brutal. It's brutal being a founder, and it requires a somewhat specific but extensive list of skills. Those things end up making it high in demand.Dwarkesh Patel 4:56What would it take to get more of those kinds of people to go into EA?Sam Bankman-Fried 4:59Part of it is probably just talking with them about, “Have you thought about what you can do for the world? Have you thought about how you can have an impact on the world? Have you thought about how you can maximize your impact on the world?” Many people would be excited about thinking critically and ambitiously about how they can help the world. So I think honestly, just engagement is one piece of this. And then even within people who are altruistically minded and thinking about what it would take for them to be founders, there are still things that you can do.Some of this is about empowering people and some of this is about normalizing the fact that when you start something, it might fail—and that's okay. Most startups and especially very early-stage startups should not be trying to maximize the chances of having at least a little bit of success. But that means you have to be okay with the personal fallout of failing and that we have to build a community that is okay with that. I don't think we have that right now, I think very few communities do.Is effective altruism too narrowminded?Dwarkesh Patel 6:21Now, there are many good objections to utilitarianism, as you know. You said yourself that we don't have a good account of infinite ethics—should we attribute substantial weight to the probability that utilitarianism is wrong? And how do you hedge for this moral uncertainty in your giving?Sam Bankman-Fried 6:35So I don't think it has a super large impact on my giving. Partially, because you'd need to have a concrete proposal for what else you would do that would be different actions-wise—and I don't know that that I've been compelled by many of those. I do think that there are a lot of things we don't understand right now. And one thing that you pointed to is infinite ethics. Another thing is that (I'm not sure this is moral uncertainty, this might be physical uncertainty) there are a lot of sort of chains of reasoning people will go down that are somewhat contingent on our current understanding of the universe—which might not be right. And if you look at expected-value outcomes, might not be right.Say what you will about the size of the universe and what that implies, but some of the same people make arguments based on how big the universe is and also think the simulation hypothesis has decent probability. Very few people chain through, “What would that imply?” I don't think it's clear what any of this implies. If I had to say, “How have these considerations changed my thoughts on what to do?”The honest answer is that they have changed it a little bit. And the direction that they pointed me in is things with moderately more robust impact. And what I mean by that is, I'm sure one way that you can calculate the expected value of an action is, “Here's what's going to happen. Here are the two outcomes, and here are the probabilities of them.” Another thing you can do is say - it's a little bit more hand-wavy - but, “How much better is this going to make the world? How much does it matter if the world is better in generic diffuse ways?” Typically, EA has been pretty skeptical of that second line of reasoning—and I think correctly. When you see that deployed, it's nonsense. Usually, when people are pretty hard to nail down on the specific reasoning of why they think that something might be good, it’s because they haven't thought that hard about it or don't want to think that hard about it. The much better analyzed and vetted pathways are the ones we should be paying attention to.That being said, I do think that sometimes EA gets too narrow-minded and specific about plotting out courses of impact. And this is one of the reasons why that people end up fixating on one particular understanding of the universe, of ethics, of how things are going to progress. But, all of these things have some amount of uncertainty in them. And when you jostle them, some theories of impact behave somewhat robustly and some of them completely fall apart. I’ve become a bit more sympathetic to ones that are a little robust under thoughts about what the world ends up looking like.Political givingDwarkesh Patel 9:57In the May 2022 Oregon Congressional Election, you gave 12 million dollars to Carrick Flynn, whose campaign was ultimately unsuccessful. How have you updated your beliefs about the efficacy of political giving in the aftermath?Sam Bankman-Fried 10:12It was the first time that I gave on that scale in a race. And I did it because he was, of all the candidates in the cycle, the most outspoken on the need for more pandemic preparedness and prevention. He lost—such is life. In the end, there are some updates on the efficacy of various things. But, I never thought that the odds were extremely high that he was going to win. It was always going to be an uncertain close race. There's a limit to how much you can update from a one-time occurrence. If you thought the odds were 50-50, and it turns out to be close in one direction or another, there's a maximum of a factor-of-two update that you have on that. There were a bunch of sort of micro-updates on specific factors of the race, but on a high level, it didn’t change my perspective on policy that much.Dwarkesh Patel 11:23But does it make you think there are diminishing or possibly negative marginal returns from one donor giving to a candidate? Because of the negative PR?Sam Bankman-Fried 11:30At some point, I think that's probably true.Dwarkesh Patel 11:33Continuing on the theme of politics, when is it more effective to give the marginal million dollars to a political campaign or institution to make some change at the government level (like putting in early detection)? Or when is it more effective to fund it yourself?Sam Bankman-Fried 11:47It's a good question. It's not necessarily mutually exclusive. One thing worth looking at is the scale of the things that need to happen. How much are things like international cooperation important for it? When you look at pandemic prevention, we're talking tens of billions of dollars of scale necessary to start putting this infrastructure in place. So it's a pretty big scale thing—which is hard to fund to that level individually. It’s also something where we’re going to need to have cooperation between different countries on, for example, what their surveillance for new pathogens looks like. And vaccine distribution If some countries have a great distribution of vaccines and others don't, that's not good. It's both not fair and not equitable for the countries that get hit hardest. But also, in a global pandemic, it's going to spread. You need global coverage. That's another reason that government has to be involved, at least to some extent, in the efforts.FTX Future FundDwarkesh Patel 12:55Let's talk about Future Fund. As you know, there are already many existing Effective Altruist organizations that do donations. What is the reason you thought there was more value in creating a new one? What's your edge?Sam Bankman-Fried 13:06 There's value in having multiple organizations. Every organization has its blind spots, and you can help cover those up if you have a few. If OpenPhil didn't exist, maybe we would have created an organization that looks more like OpenPhil. They are covering a lot of what we’re looking at—we're looking at overlapping, but not identical things. I think having that diversity can be valuable, but pointing to the ways in which we intentionally designed to be a little bit different from existing donors:One thing that I've been really happy about is the re-granting program. We have a number of people who are experts in various areas to who we've basically donated pots that they can re-grant. What are the reasons that we think this is valuable? One thing is giving more stakeholders a chance to voice their opinions because we can't possibly be listening to everyone in the world directly and integrating all those opinions to come up with a perfect set of answers. Distributing it and letting them act semi-autonomously can help with that. The other thing is that it helps with a large number of smaller grants. When you think about what an organization giving away $100 million in a year is thinking about, “if we divided that up into $25,000 grants, how many grants would that mean?” 4,000 grants to analyze, right? If we want to give real thought to each one of those, we can't do that.But on the flip side, sometimes the smaller grants are the most impactful per dollar and there are a lot of cases where someone really impressive has an exciting idea for a new foundation or a new organization that could do a lot of good for the world and needs $25,000 to get started. To rent out a small office, to be able to cover salaries for two employees for the first six months. Those are the kind of cases where a pretty small grant can make a huge change in the development of what might ultimately become a really impactful organization. But they're the kind of things that are really hard for our team to evaluate all of, just given the number of them—but the re-grantor program gives us a way to do that. Instead, we have 10, 50, or 100 re-grantors, who are going out and finding a lot of those opportunities close to them, they can then identify those and direct those grants—and it gives us a much wider reach. It also biases it less towards people who we happen to know, which is good.We don't want to just like overfund everyone we know and underfund everyone that we don’t. That's one initiative that I've been pretty excited about that we're going to keep doing. Another thing we've really tried to have a lot of emphasis on making the (application) process smooth and clean. There are pros and cons to this. But it drops the activation energy necessary for someone to decide to apply for a grant and fill out all of the forms. We’ve really tried to bring more people into the fold.Adverse selection in philanthropyDwarkesh Patel 16:41If you make it easy for people to fill out your application and generally fund things that other organizations wouldn't, how do you deal with the possibility of adverse selection in your philanthropic deal flow?Sam Bankman-Fried 16:52It's a really good question. It’s a worry that Bob down the street might see a great book case study that he wants and wonder if he can get funding for this bookcase as it’s going to house a lot of knowledge. Knowledge is good, right? Obviously, we would detect that pretty quickly. The basic answer is that we still vet all of these. We do have oversight of them. But, we also do a deep dive into both all of the large ones, but also into samplings of all the small ones. We do deep dives into randomly sampled subsets of them—which allows us to get a good statistical sense of whether we are facing significant adverse selection in them. So far, we haven't seen obvious signs of it, but we're going to keep doing these analyses and see if anything worrying comes out of those. But that's a way to be able to have more trusted analyses for more scaled-up numbers of grants.Correlation between different causesDwarkesh Patel 18:06A long time ago, you wrote a blog post about how EA causes are multiplicative, instead of additive. Do you still find that's the case with most of the causes you care about? Or are there cases where some of the causes you care about are negatively multiplicative? An example might be economic growth and the speed at which AI takes off.Sam Bankman-Fried 18:24Yeah, I think it’s getting more complicated. Specifically around AI, you have a lot of really complex factors that can point in the same direction or in opposite directions. Especially if what you think matters is something like the relative progress of AI safety research versus AI capabilities research, a lot of things are going to have the same impact on both of those, and thus confusing impact on safety as a whole.I do think it's more complicated now. It's not cleanly things just multiplying with each other. There are lots of cases where you see multiplicative behavior, but there are cases where you don't have that. The conclusion of this is: if you have multiplicative cases, you want to be funding each piece of it. But if you don't, then you want to be trained to identify the most impactful pieces and move those along. Our behavior should be different in those two scenarios.Dwarkesh Patel 19:23If you think of your philanthropy from a portfolio perspective, is correlation good or bad?Sam Bankman-Fried 19:29Expected value is expected value, right? Let's pretend that there is one person in Bangladesh and another one in Mexico. We have two interventions, both 50-50 on saving each of their lives. Suppose there’s some new drug that we could release to combat a neglected disease. This question is asking, “are they correlated?” “Are these two drugs correlated in their efficacy?” And my basic argument is, “it doesn't matter, right?” If you think about it from each of their perspectives, the person in Mexico isn't saying, “I only want to be saved in the cases where the person in Bangladesh is or isn't saved.” That’s not relevant. They want to live.The person in Bangladesh similarly wishes to live. You want to help both of them as much as you can. It's not super relevant whether there’s alignment or anti-alignment between the cases where you get lucky and the ones where you don't.Dwarkesh Patel 20:46What’s the most likely reason that Future Fund fails to live up to your expectations?Sam Bankman-Fried 20:51We get a little lame. We give to a lot of decent things. But all the cooler or more innovative things that we do, don't seem to work very well. We end up giving the same that everyone else is giving. We don’t turn out to be effective at starting new things, we don't turn out to be effective at thinking of new causes or executing them. Hopefully, we'll avoid that. But, it's always a risk.Dwarkesh Patel 21:21Should I think of your charitable giving, as a yearly contribution of a billion dollars? Or should I think of it as a $30 billion hedge against the possibility that there's going to be some existential risk that requires a large pool of liquid wealth?Sam Bankman-Fried 21:36It's a really good question, I'm not sure. We've given away about 100 million so far this year. We're going to start doing that because we think there are really important things to fund and to start scaling up those systems. We notice opportunities as they come and we have systems ready in place to give to them. But it's something we're really actively discussing internally—how concentrated versus diffuse we want that giving to be, and storing up for one very large opportunity versus a mixture of many.Great founders do difficult thingsDwarkesh Patel 22:15When you look at a proposal and think this project could be promising, but this is not the right person to lead it, what is the trait that's most often missing?Sam Bankman-Fried 22:22Super interesting. I am going to ignore the obvious answer which is that the guy is not very good and look at cases where it's someone pretty impressive, but not the right fit for this. There are a few things. One of them is how much are they going to want to deal with really messy s**t. This is a huge thing! When I was working at Jane Street, I had a great time there. One thing I didn’t realize was valuable until I saw the alternative—if I decided that is a good trade to buy one share of Apple stock on NASDAQ, there's a button to do that.If you as a random citizen want to buy one share of Apple stock directly on an exchange, it'll cost you tens of millions of dollars a year to get set up. You have to get a physical colo(cation) in Secaucus, New Jersey, have market data agreements with these companies, think about the sip and about the NBBO and whether you’re even allowed to list on NASDAQ, and then build the technological infrastructure to do it. But all of that comes after you get a bank account.Getting a bank account that's going to work in finance is really hard. I spent hundreds, if not thousands of hours of my life, trying to open bank accounts. One of the things at early Alameda that was really crucial to our ability to make money was having someone very senior spend hours per day in a physical bank branch, manually instructing wire transfers. If we didn't do that, we wouldn't have been able to do the trade.When you start a company, there are enormous amounts of s**t that looks like that. Things that are dumb or annoying or broken or unfair, or not how the world should work. But that’s how the world does work. The only way to be successful is to fight through that. If you're going to be like, “I'm the CEO, I don't do that stuff,” then no one's going to do that at your company. It's not going to get done. You won't have a bank account and you won't be able to operate. One of the biggest traits that are incredibly important for a founder and for an early team at a company (but not important for everything in life) is willing to do a ton of grunt work if it’s important for the company right then.Viewing it not as “low prestige” or “too easy” for you, but as, “This is the important thing. This is a valuable thing to do. So it's what I'm going to do.” That's one of the core traits. The other thing is asking if they’re excited about this idea? Will they actually put their heart and soul into it? Or are they going to be not really into it and half-ass? Those are two things that I really look for.Pitcher fatigue and the importance of focusDwarkesh Patel 25:51How have you used your insights about pitcher fatigue to allocate talent in your companies?Sam Bankman-Fried 25:58Haha. When it comes to pitchers, in baseball, there's a lot of evidence that they get worse over the course of the game. Partially, because it's hard on the arm. But, it's worth noting that the evidence seems to support the claim that it depends on the pitchers. But in general, you're better off breaking up your outings. It's not just a function of how many innings they pitch that season, but also extremely recently. If you could choose between someone throwing six innings every six days, or throwing three innings every three days, you should use the latter. That's going to get the better pitching on average, and just as many innings out of them—and baseball has since then moved very far in that direction. The average number of pitches thrown by starting pitchers has gone down a lot over the last 5-10 years.How do I use that in my company? There’s a metaphor here except this is with computer work instead of physical arm work. You don't have the same effect where your arm is getting sore, your muscles snap, and you need surgery if you pitch too hard for too long. That doesn't directly translate—but there's an equivalent of this with people getting tired and exhausted. But on the other hand, context is a huge, huge piece of being effective. Having all the context in your mind of what's going on, what you're working on, and what the company is doing makes it easier to operate effectively. For instance, if you could have either two half-time employees or one full-time employee, you're way better off with one full-time employee because they're going to have more context than either of the part-time employees would have—thus be able to work way more efficiently.In general, concentrated work is pretty valuable. If you keep breaking up your work, you're never going to do as great of work as if you truly dove into something.How SBF identifies talentDwarkesh Patel 28:30You've talked about how you weigh experience relatively little when you're deciding who to hire. But in a recent Twitter thread, you mentioned that being able to provide mentorship to all the people who you hire is one of the bottlenecks to you being able to scale. Is there a trade-off here where if you don't hire people for experience, you have to give them more mentorship and thus can't scale as fast?Sam Bankman-Fried 28:51It's a good question. To a surprising extent, we found that the experience of the people that we hire has not had much correlation with how much mentorship they need. Much more important is how they think, how good they are at understanding new and different situations, and how hard they try to integrate into their understanding of coding how FTX works. We actually have by and large found that other things are much better predictors of how much oversight and mentorship they’re going to need then.Dwarkesh Patel 29:35How do you assess that short of hiring them for a month and then seeing how they did?Sam Bankman-Fried 29:39It's tough, I don't think we're perfect at it. But things that we look at are, “Do they understand quickly what the goal of a product is? How does that inform how they build it?” When you're looking at developers, I think we want people who can understand what FTX is, how it works, and thus what the right way to architect things would be for that rather than treating it as an abstract engineering problem divorced from the ultimate product.You can ask people like, “Hey, here's a high-level customer experience or customer goal. How would you architect a system to create that?” That’s one thing that we look for. An eagerness to learn and adapt. It's not trivial to ask for that. But you can do some amount of that by giving people novel scenarios and seeing how much they break versus how much they bend. That can be super valuable. Specifically searching for developers who are willing to deal with messy scenarios rather than wanting a pristine world to work in. Our company is customer-facing and has to face some third-party tooling. All those things mean that we have to interface with things that are messy and the way the world is.Why scaling too fast kills companiesDwarkesh Patel 31:09Before you launched FTX, you gave detailed instructions to the existing exchanges about how to improve their system, how to remove clawbacks, and so on. Looking back, they left billions of dollars of value on the table. Why didn't they just fix what you told them to fix?Sam Bankman-Fried 31:22My sense is that it’s part of a larger phenomenon. One piece of this is that they didn't have a lot of market structure experts. They did not have the talent in-house to think really deeply about risk engines. Also, there are cultural barriers between myself and some of them, which meant that they were less inclined than they otherwise would have been to take it very seriously. Ignoring those factors, there's something much bigger at play there. Many of these exchanges had hired a lot of people and they got in very large. You might think they were more capable of doing things with more horsepower. But in practice, most of the time that we see a company grow really fast, really quickly, and get really big in terms of people, it becomes an absolute mess.Internally, there's huge diffusion of responsibility issues. No one's really taking charge. You can't figure out who's supposed to do what. In the end, nothing gets done. You actually start hitting the negative marginal utility of employees pretty quickly. The more people you have, the less total you get done. That happened to a number of them to the point where I sent them these proposals. Where did they go internally? Who knows. The Vice President of Exchange Risk Operations (but not the real one—the fake one operating under some department with an unclear goal and mission) had no idea what to do with it. Eventually, she passes it off to a random friend of hers that was the developer for the mobile app and was like, “You're a computer person, is this right?” They likely said, “I don’t know, I'm not a risk person,” and that's how it died. I’m not saying that’s literally what happened but sounds kinda like that’s probably happened. It's not like they had people who took responsibility and thought, “Wow, this is scary. I should make sure that the best person in the company gets this,” and pass it to the person who thinks about their risk modeling. I don't think that's what happened.The future of cryptoDwarkesh Patel 33:51There're two ways of thinking about the impact of crypto on financial innovation. One is the crypto maximalist view that crypto subsumes tradfi. The other is that you're basically stress-testing some ideas in a volatile, fairly unregulated market that you're actually going to bring to tradfi, but this is not going to lead to some sort of decentralized utopia. Which of these models is more correct? Or is there a third model that you think is the correct one?Sam Bankman-Fried 34:18Who knows exactly what's going to happen? It's going to be path-dependent. If I had to guess I would say that a lot of properties of what is happening crypto today will make their way into Trad Fi to some extent. I think blockchain settlement has a lot of value and can clean up a lot of areas of traditional market structure. Composable applications are super valuable and are going to get more important over time. In some areas of this, it's not clear what's going to happen. When you think about how decentralized ecosystems and regulation intersect, it's a little TBD exactly where that ends up.I don't want to state with extreme confidence exactly what will or won't happen. Stablecoins becoming an important settlement mechanism is pretty likely. Blockchains in general becoming a settlement mechanism, collateral clearing mechanism, and more assets getting tokenized seem likely. There being programs written on blockchains that people can add to that can compose with each other seems pretty likely to me. A lot of other areas of it could go either way.Risk, efficiency, and human discretion in derivativesDwarkesh Patel 35:46Let's talk about your proposal to the CFTC to replace Futures Commission Merchants with algorithmic real-time risk management. There's a worry that without human discretion, you have algorithms that will cause liquidation cascades when they were not necessary. Is there some role for human discretion in these kinds of situations?Sam Bankman-Fried 36:06There is! The way that traditional future market structure works is you have a clearinghouse with a decent amount of manual discretion in it connected to FCMs. Some of which use human discretion, and some of which use automated risk management algorithms with their clients. The smaller the client, the more automated it is. We are inverting that where at the center, you have an automated clearing house. Then, you connect it to FCM, which could use discretionary systems when managing their clients.The key difference here is that one way or another, the initial margin has to end up at the clearinghouse. A programmatic amount of it and the clearinghouse acts in a clear way. The goal of this is to prevent contagion between different intermediaries. Whatever credit decisions one intermediary makes, with respect to their customers, doesn't pose risk to other intermediaries. This is because someone has to post the collateral to the clearinghouse in the end—whether it's the FCM, their customer, or someone else. It gives clear rules of the road and lack of systemic risk spreading throughout the system and contains risk to the parties that choose to take that risk on - to the FCMs that choose to make credit decisions there.There is a potential role for manual judgment. Manual judgment can be valuable and add a lot of economic value. But it can also be very risky when done poorly. In the current system, each FCM is exposed to all of the manual bespoke decisions that each other FCM is making. That's a really scary place to be in, we've seen it blow up. We saw it blow up with LME nickel contracts and with a few very large traders who had positions at a number of different banks that ended up blowing out. So, this provides a level of clarity, oversight, and transparency to this system, so people know what risk they are, or are not taking on.Dwarkesh Patel 38:29Are you replacing that risk with another risk? If there's one exchange that has the most liquidity om futures and there’s one exchange where you're posting all your collateral (across all your positions), then the risk is that that single algorithm the exchange is using will determine when and if liquidation cascades happen?Sam Bankman-Fried 38:47It’s already the case that if you put all of your collateral with a prime broker, whatever that prime broker decides (whether it's an algorithm or a human or something in between) is what happens with all of your collateral. If you're not comfortable with that, you could choose to spread it out between different venues. You could choose to use one venue for some products and another venue for other products. If you don't want to cross-collateralized cross-margin your positions, you get capital efficiency for cross-margining them—for putting them in the same place. But, the downside of that is the risk of one can affect the other. There's a balance there, and I don't think it's a binary thing.Dwarkesh Patel 39:28Given the benefits of cross-margining and the fact that less capital has to be locked up as collateral, is the long-run equilibrium that the single exchange will win? And if that's the case, then, in the long run, there won't be that much competition in derivatives?Sam Bankman-Fried 39:40I don't think we're going to have a single exchange winning. Among other things, there are going to be different decisions made by different exchanges—which will be better or worse for particular situations. One thing that people have brought up is, “How about physical commodities?” Like corn or soy? What would our risk model say about that? It's not super helpful for those commodities right now because it doesn't know how to understand a warehouse. So, you might want to use a different exchange, which had a more bespoke risk model that tried to understand how the human would understand what physical positions someone had on. That would totally make sense. That can cause a split between different exchanges.In addition, we've been talking about the clearing house here, but many exchanges can connect to the same clearinghouse. We're already, as a clearing house, connected to a number of different DCMs and excited for that to grow. In general, there are going to be a lot of people who have different preferences over different details of the system and choose different products based on that. That's how it should work. People should be allowed to choose the option that makes the most sense for them.Jane Street vs FTXDwarkesh Patel 41:00What are the biggest differences in culture between Jane Street and FTX?Sam Bankman-Fried 41:05FTX has much more of a culture of like morphing and taking out a lot of random new s**t. I don’t want to say Jane Street is an ossified place or anything, it’s somewhat nimble. But it is more of a culture of, “We're going to be very good at this particular thing on a timescale of a decade.” There are some cases where that's true of FTX because some things are clearly part of our core business for a decade. But there are other things that we knew nothing about a year ago, and now have to get good at. There's been more adaptation and it's also a much more public-facing and customer-facing business than Jane Street is—which means that there are lots of things like PR that are much more central to what we're doing.Conflict of interest between broker and exchangeDwarkesh Patel 41:56Now in crypto, you're combining the exchange and the broker—they seem to have different incentives. The exchange wants to increase volume, and the broker wants to better manage risk, maybe with less leverage. Do you feel that in the long run, these two can stay in the same entity given the potential conflict of interest?Sam Bankman-Fried 42:13I think so. There's some extent to which they differ, but more that they actually want the same thing—and harmonizing them can be really valuable. One is to provide a great customer experience. When you have two different entities with two completely different businesses but have to go from one to the other, you're going to end up getting the least common denominator of the two as a customer. Everything is going to be supported as poorly as whichever of the two entities support what you're doing most poorly - and that makes it harder. Whereas synchronizing them gives us more ability to provide a great experience.Bahamas and Charter CitiesDwarkesh Patel 42:59How has living in the Bahamas impacted your opinion about the possibility of successful charter cities?Sam Bankman-Fried 43:06It's a good question. It's the first time and it’s updated positively. We've built out a lot of things here that have been impactful. It's made me feel like it is more doable than I previously would have thought. But it's a lot of work. It's a large-scale project if you want to build out a full city—and we haven’t built out a full city yet. We built out some specific pieces of infrastructure that we needed and we've gotten a ton of support from the country. They've been very welcoming, and there are a lot of great things here. This is way less of a project than taking a giant, empty plot of land, and creating a city in it. That's way harder.SBF’s RAM-skewed mindDwarkesh Patel 43:47How has having a RAM-skewed mind influence the culture of FTX and its growth?Sam Bankman-Fried 43:52On the upside, we've been pretty good at adapting and understanding what the important things are at any time. Training ourselves quickly to be good at those even if it looks very different than what we were doing. That's allowed us to focus a lot on the product, regulation, licensing, customer experience, branding, and a bunch of other things. Hopefully, it means that we're able to take whatever situations come up and provide reasonable feedback about them and reasonable thoughts on what to do rather than thinking more rigidly in terms of how previous situations were. On the flip side, I need to have a lot of people around me who will try and remember long-term important things that might get lost day-to-day. As we focus on things that pop up, it's important for me to take time periodically to step back and clear my mind and remember the big picture. What are the most important things for us to be focusing on? This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.dwarkeshpatel.com

In this conversation, host Tamara Winter and Juan Du ,Dean of the Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design at the University of Toronto, discuss Du's book, The Shenzhen Experiment: The Story of China's Instant City—and the many myths that surround the city's origin and development.For a transcript of this episode, visit press.stripe.com/juan-du-transcriptFor more on Beneath the Surface, visit press.stripe.com/beneath-the-surfaceFollow Stripe Press on Twitter @stripepress

Each year, tens of millions of people migrate from rural areas to cities—mostly in emerging economies, where populations are growing faster than governments can create basic infrastructure. To address the challenges of urbanization without industrialization, development experts, economists, and policymakers have proposed solutions spanning from increased immigration to better family planning.In this episode, we ask: could charter cities—a model inspired by the successes of places like Singapore and Shenzhen—be a path to accelerating growth in emerging economies?Special thanks to Patri Friedman, Mark Lutter, Mwiya Musokotwane, Isabelle Simpson, and Juan Du.For a transcript of this episode, visit press.stripe.com/charter-cities-transcriptFor more on Beneath the Surface, visit press.stripe.com/beneath-the-surfaceFollow Stripe Press on Twitter @stripepress

O que são Charter Cities e quais suas diferenças em relação às cidades privadas? Quais são os projetos em andamento? Como essas novas formas de desenvolvimento propõem resolver os desafios atuais dos ambientes urbanos? Para responder a essas e outras perguntas, recebemos Francisco Litvay, especialista no assunto, e Rodrigo Quercia, membro do conselho de dois projetos de Charter Cities, Prospera e Tipolis. Apoie o Caos Planejado. Confira os links do episódio no site. Episódio produzido com o apoio de Loft.

Today's episode is a bonus episode, where we take a deep dive into the Italian Renaissance (with a focus on Venice) with world-renowned expert, Professor Corey Tazzara. From the fall of the Roman Empire to the formation of independent city-states, to the financial and political ramifications of the crusades, to the rise and fall of Venice as an economic powerhouse, this conversation has it all! We start at the beginning, with a comment on the role of the Middle Ages in the formation of society as it is today, and how the literature of the times contributed to the maintenance of the Roman Empire as a power. Despite this, there was decentralization across Europe in the 800s, and independent city-states arose. Rome regained its power from tourism and through regaining the seat of the papacy, while Florence formed the birthplace of the Renaissance through its art, culture, and adoption of investment banking. Milan became an authoritarian state, and we hear how the condottieri contributed to this. Unexpectedly, Genoa gained wealth in the loss of the War of Chioggia, while Venice was created from the marshes by refugees. The focus of the conversation shifts to the role of Venice in the Renaissance, and how it influenced society as we see it today. We learn how venture capital was created to profit from the Crusades, and how links to other cultures and societies benefitted the trade between Venice and the rest of Europe and the Middle East. Tune in to find out how the Venice of today differs from the Renaissance era Venice, and so much more, in this incredible discussion!   Key Points From This Episode:   •   Welcome to Corey Tazzara, professor of history at Scripps College and the world's leading expert on medieval and early modern freeports. •   Background into the decentralization of the Roman Empire, and why we owe today's society to the Middle Ages. •   How the literature of the Middle ages maintains the Roman Empire's power. •   The formation of independent city-states across Europe, and how they worked. •   The role of the papacy in reviving Roman law. •   What the 12th Century Renaissance is, and how it impacted the European economy. •   How the crusades altered the trade done at the port city-states: sea vs land travel. •   Why the Fourth Crusade was the first example of venture capital. •   The radical democracies that started in the Byzantine era across Italy. •   A quick tour of the major houses at play across the city-states in the 1300s. •   The revival of Rome: from the center of an empire to a tourism hotspot. •   How Florence became a republic, and why Corey feels it is the birthplace of the Renaissance. •   Why the adoption of investment banking fueled Florence's prosperity and the rise of the Medici family. •   Turning to Genoa: how the loss of the War of Chioggia lead to the gain of Western wealth in the centuries to come. •   The role of the condottieri in Milan's authoritarian government and war-based economy. •   Who Francesco Sforza was, and how he served as an example of the dangers of the condottieri to political powers. •   A few honorable mentions of other city-states that had tumultuous histories throughout the Renaissance. •   The formation of Venice: how it was formed, and why its history is so different from other city-states. •   The story of St. Mark's remains, why Mussolini hated the church of San Marco, and what these anecdotes say about Venice. •   Why Venice is the birthplace of investment banking and its role in the Fourth Crusade. •   How making Venice the gateway to the Levant drove up profit and Venetians who changed the world....

The Ukraine-Russia conflict has dominated headlines over the past few months, with countless theories and hypotheses being touted to explain Russia's aggression. Join us as we talk to one of the world's leading experts on violence and politics, Professor Chris Blattman. We start the episode with an explanation of why Chris chose to write his latest book Why We Fight: The Roots of War and the Paths to Peace, and how he can apply the logic within to explain Putin's motivations and behavior. We learn why peace is a better driver for innovation and competition than war, and what Chris feels about the controversial observations made by John Mearsheimer about the Ukraine-Russia conflict. Tune in to learn what the George Washington example is, and the role of the COVID-19 pandemic in the rising levels of violence within the USA. We next move on to the role of CBT in reducing violence across the globe, with some insightful examples of Mr. Rogers-like personas across Africa who Chris has worked with. This episode is jam-packed with tons of fascinating insights into current affairs, how to best tackle poverty, theoretical debate and so much more. Join us today as we talk to a true role model and thought leader on another episode of the Charter Cities podcast.   Key Points From This Episode:   •   An introduction to Chris Blattman, author, economist, political scientist, expert on violence, and seasoned peacebuilder. •   The inspiration behind why Chris wrote Why We Fight: The Roots of War and the Paths to Peace. •   Chris's response to John Mearsheimer's observations on the Ukraine-Russia conflict. •   Why Chris is content that his book was published before Russia invaded Ukraine. •   The five logics of war applied to the Ukraine-Russia conflict: unchecked interests, intangible incentives, uncertainty, commitment problems, and misperceptions. •   Why Chris feels that peace drives competition and innovation better than war. •   The George Washington example: what it means and how it can be applied to other situations. •   Why Chris is interested in applying Machiavellian logic to his research and blogging. •   How the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted levels of violence within the USA, and why. •   Why the Mr. Rogers principle is so effective, and examples Chris has come across in other countries. •   CBT and how it can be applied to reduce poverty. •   The monetary values associated with CBT across different cultures. •   Why oversimplifying complex problems is bad for the solution, and why including locals in the solution is key to success. •   An example of one of Chris' RCTs that failed! •   Why Chris feels that he might have had a larger impact on society if he had moved into consulting in Africa. •   The factors that helped to make the Harris School the success it is today. •   Why Chris thinks giving cash is more effective at reducing poverty than other interventions. •   How decentralizing power will be the ultimate solution to poverty. •   Chris's thoughts on the Charter Cities Institute and goals. •   Where Chris is now, and the issues he will be researching in the next five years.     Links Mentioned in Today's Episode:   https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrisblattman/ (Chris Blattman on LinkedIn) https://chrisblattman.com/ (Chris Blattman) https://chrisblattman.com/why-we-fight/ (Why We Fight: The Roots of War and the Paths to Peace) https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010 (The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined) https://www.linkedin.com/in/charles-tilley-obe-a242501b8/?originalSubdomain=uk (Charles Tilley on LinkedIn)...

Grabación en DIRECTO del PODCAST El gris importa con Miguel Ors Villarejo y Javier Díaz-Giménez. Cansados de la actualidad hoy hablamos de Charter Cities. Video Paul Romer: https://youtu.be/mSHBma0Ithk ---video https://youtu.be/Pv3lFY0YFVM

Like what you hear? Like, share, and subscribe to stay updated on new videos and help promote the Yaron Brook Show: https://bit.ly/3ztPxTxBecome a sponsor to get exclusive access and help create more videos like this: https://bit.ly/2TCEqHcOr make a one-time donation: https://bit.ly/2RZOyJJContinue the discussion by following Yaron on Twitter (https://bit.ly/3iMGl6z) and Facebook (https://bit.ly/3vvWDDC )Want to learn more about Ayn Rand and Objectivism? Visit the Ayn Rand Institute: https://bit.ly/35qoEC3#CharterCities #Prospera #HigherEducation #AynRand #Objectivism #Politics

Rechtslibertäre Utopien beziehungsweise Dystopien werden Wirklichkeit: In vielen Entwicklungsländern werden derzeit private Städte aus dem Boden gestampft. So will etwa der US-Rapper #Akon im Senegal eine Smart-City bauen lassen und diese auch mit einer eigenen Währung, dem Akon-Coin, ausstatten. In Honduras ist man schon einen Schritt weiter, denn bereits vor knapp zehn Jahren ließ sich die Regierung von Wirtschaftsnobelpreisträger Paul Romer beraten, der das Konzept der #CharterCities entwickelt hat. Dabei sollen Entwicklungsländer Teile ihrer Fläche an einen Industriestaat verkaufen, damit dieser dort nach dem Vorbild von Sonderwirtschaftszonen eine boomende Stadt kreieren kann – ohne dazu demokratisch legitimiert zu sein. Sowohl bei Charter Cities als auch bei den Privatstädten glaubt man uneingeschränkt an die Kraft der freien Marktwirtschaft und an den Wettbewerb. Um diese Visionen in die Tat umzusetzen, sind die Einheimischen die Leidtragenden, denn es handelt sich stets um imperialistische Projekte, die die Ideologie des Neoliberalismus konsequent weiterdenken. In der neuen Folge von „Wohlstand für Alle“ stellen Ole Nymoen und Wolfgang M. Schmitt die libertären Stadtkonzepte vor. Literatur: Titus Gebel: Freie Privatstädte. Mehr Wettbewerb im wichtigsten Markt der Welt, Aquila Urbis Verlag. Carsten Lenz, Nicole Ruchlak: „Honduras als Experimentierfeld neoliberaler Utopien“, online verfügbar unter: https://amerika21.de/analyse/145288/charter-cities-honduras Konzept zu den Charter-Städten: http://web.archive.org/web/20100113160410/http://www.chartercities.org/concept Armin Rothemann: „Privatstädte für Investoren in Honduras“, online verfügbar unter: https://amerika21.de/blog/2021/01/246797/privatstaedte-fuer-investoren-honduras Ihr könnt uns unterstützen - herzlichen Dank! Paypal: https://www.paypal.me/oleundwolfgang Wolfgang M. Schmitt, Ole Nymoen Betreff: Wohlstand fuer Alle IBAN: DE67 5745 0120 0130 7996 12 BIC: MALADE51NWD Twitter: Ole: twitter.com/nymoen_ole Wolfgang: twitter.com/SchmittJunior Die gesamte WfA-Literaturliste: https://wohlstand-fuer-alle.netlify.app

Honduras ZEDEs are a radical attempt at creating private cities to alleviate poverty and stimulate the economy. The program has been met with significant controversy. Prominent Honduran ZEDE lawyer Jorge Colindres discusses the most common anti-ZEDE arguments with Thibault Serlet. Join us on November 4-5 at TransLogistica in Warsaw, Poland:https://translogistica.pl/en/Jorge's Twitter:https://twitter.com/georgecolindres?lang=enSPI Inertia:https://spi-inertia.com/ZEDE Prospera:https://prospera.hn/ZEDE Morazan:https://www.morazan.city/ZEDE Orquidea:https://zedeorquidea.com/ This podcast was produced by the Adrianople Group. The Adrianople Group is a business intelligence firm that focuses on special economic zones, venture capital, private equity, and geoeconomics. For more information, please visit:https://www.adrianoplegroup.com/https://twitter.com/geoeconomicspod #HondurasZEDE #ZoneforEmploymentandEconomicDevelopment #CharterCities #CharterCity #ZEDE #Honduras #Prospera #Morazan #Orquidea #Jorge #Colindres #JorgeColindres #Thibault #Serlet #ThibautSERLET #Inertia #SPIInertia #NewayCapital #ErickBrimen #HondurasElection2021 #Geopolitics #Internationalrelations #Podcast #Adrianople #AdrianopleGroup #Geoeconomics #Economics #Infrastructure #Interview #Expert #Trade #Zone #Economy #Markets #Development #Regulations #Law #Legal #Governance 

Mark Lutter is the Founder and Executive Director of the Charter Cities Institute. CCI's aim is to build an ecosystem for charter cities We talk about - The basic concepts of charter cities - What is the biggest misconception about charter cities? - What personality type does it take to run a non profit? --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/pradyumna-sp/message

In this Geoeconomics Podcast episode, Aleksa Burmazovic talks with Tom W. Bell, lecturer at the Chapman University Fowler School of Law, founder of Archimediate LLC, and leading legal thinker and scholar of the SEZ space. Tom W. Bell:  http://www.tomwbell.com/ "Your Next Government?" Audiobook:https://www.audible.com/pd/Your-Next-Government-Audiobook/B08J28YHSL Prospera:https://prospera.hn/ Ulex and the Institute for Competitive Governance:https://instituteforcompgov.org/ulex Free Society Project:https://www.freesociety.com/ Dubai International Financial Center:https://www.difc.ae/ Balaji Srinivasan's 1729:https://1729.com/ Scott Alexander's Piece on ZEDEs:https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/prospectus-on-prospera Tom's Paper on Common Law Zones:http://ojs.instituteforcompgov.org/index.php/jsj/article/view/30/12 CERN:https://home.cern/ This podcast was produced by the Adrianople Group. The Adrianople Group is a business intelligence firm that focuses on special economic zones, venture capital, private equity, and geoeconomics. For more information, please visit: https://www.adrianoplegroup.com/     https://twitter.com/geoeconomicspod This podcast is licensed under Creative Commons with Attribution #Podcast #Adrianople #AdrianopleGroup #Geoeconomics #Economics #Infrastructure #Geopolitcs #Interview #Expert #Trade #Zone #Economy #Markets #FreeTradeZone #FreeTrade #Business #Development #Sustainable #Regulations #Law #Legal #Governance #SEZ #Future #Cities #CharterCity #CharterCities #NewCity #SmartCity #SmartCities #Government #2030 #Market #Institute #Study #SpecialJurisdiction #TomWBell #Prospera #Honduras #ChapmanUniversity #ArchimediateLLC #Legalthinker #Code #Bitcoin #CommonLaw

In this Geoeconomics Podcast episode, Aleksa Burmazovic talks with Kurtis Lockhart from the Charter Cities Institute about how cities work, what governance must do to adapt, and how the next 15 years will look like in the governance and human cohabitation spaces. Don't miss the Charter Cities Handbook:https://www.chartercitiesinstitute.org/ Charter Cities Institute Twitter:@CCIdotCity Kurtis' Website:https://kurtislockhart.com/contact/ This podcast was produced by the Adrianople Group. The Adrianople Group is a business intelligence firm that focuses on special economic zones, venture capital, private equity, and geoeconomics. For more information, please visit: https://www.adrianoplegroup.com/     https://twitter.com/geoeconomicspod?l... This podcast is licensed under Creative Commons with Attribution #Podcast #Adrianople #AdrianopleGroup #Geoeconomics #Economics #Infrastructure #Geopolitcs #Interview #Expert #Trade #Zone #Economy #Markets #Industrial #FreeTradeZone #FreeTrade #Business #Development #Sustainable #Knowledge #Money #Regulations #Law #Legal #Governance #SEZ #Investment #Routes #China #CharterCitiesInstitute #Future #Cities #City #CitiesofTomorrow #Book #Books #CharterCity #CharterCities #NewCity #SmartCity #SmartCities #Government #2030 #Market #Institute #Study #MarkLutter 

Finishing my reading of "Intervention Report: Charter Cities by DavidBernard, Jason Schukraft" from Rethink Priorities, as posted on the EA Forum. Whew, this was long! I even read the comments. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/david-reinstein/message

By popular request (N=1), I read "Intervention Report: Charter Cities by DavidBernard, Jason Schukraft" from Rethink Priorities, as posted on the EA Forum. - Minimal commentary and explainers (trying to cut back) - I got through about half the report, tbc soon --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/david-reinstein/message

Kurtis Lockhart is a PhD candidate at Oxford, and Head of Research at the Charter Cities Institute. His research interests focus on the political economy of development. He joins us to talk about charter cities and the role they can play in reforming institutions. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hello there and welcome to the Fifth Comedy episode of Doc Strange and the Dude, "The Strange Mole Show" - Text, Text, Nudge Nudge - The Strange Mole Show Episode 5 - 26th April 2021   What a couple of weeks we have had since Episode 4 Snidey Cuts and Bruises   Boris Johnson 'said he'd rather see bodies pile high in thousands' than do 3rd lockdown!   Ironically, that thanks to him, extra thousands of deaths AND a third lockdown because he didn't listen to the science, again.   Anti Mask, Covid Denying, Thick as Mince, Tory Voting, Brexit Loving Flag Shaggers have been out in force. Beating up the Police!   Boris Johnson Texts from James Dyson asking for Tax breaks for Ventilators, which were never made or supplied.   Boris Johnson claims he paid for the hidious make over at number 10 and not from donations. Coming from the man who said he didn't get paid enough to live on.   Wasted £2.1m on breifing room that now won't be used and built by Russia.   Cummings is ratting out Boris Johnson because the powers that be want Gove to be PM. Which will lead to Freeports becoming Charter Cities and your rights will mean diddly squat.   Basically, it's all about Johnson, the Liar, the Fraud, The Adulterer, Tax Avoider, Murderer and floppy headed, squinty eyed Devil that he is.      There's Nothing Funny about any of it, but we've tried, Enjoy the show!   www.StrangeMole.co.uk        @StrangeMoleShow Written by Holy Mole, Performed by Holy Mole, Chris Doc Strange and Chrissie Grech Please Share if You Enjoy our idea of a Satirical Comedy Sketch Show. Thanks for listening. WARNING: The Police are "Just Following Orders" from Priti Patel (Histroy will remember that name. Not in a good way.) Listen to the Podcast and give us your feedback. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I have #3Point5Percent Vinyl stickers available. Free & Fast, Signed for UK Post - 14 Day No Quibble Returns. LOVE THEM or Return Them. No Questions Asked. https://ko-fi.com/s/243b81c2b5 #ThreePointFivePercent #Resist #Revolt #Remove #ToriesOut #ToryLiars #Brexit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Writers and Performers VERY Welcome, Please Get in touch. There's No money in it, for any of us (yet), but it's cathartic and who knows what will happen. ---------------- We would Love even more listeners, please share and help out. We do this for the love of it. There's no Ads and it's free to listen, so why not? Have a listen and enjoy. We welcome feedback and if you want to take part in the show, get in touch below. Fancy supporting us and our quest for fun? Please Become a Supporter and Sponsor us, we have no way to make a living right now. This podcast is made with love but we need to eat, any donation is very welcome. Thank you xx   Please Buy us a Coffee or Two if you've enjoyed the show, thank you (Yes, I'm Begging) Buy Chris Doc Strange a Coffee or a Signed Copy of my Book "The Honest Hypnotists Guide" Visit Doc Strange the Comedy Stage Hypnotist Bloke in a White Coat   Buy The Dude a Coffee and checkout his extra special mashups, heck, he can even make one just for you. Find us on On Twitter @ChrisDocStrange and the Dude @HolyMole   Oh and if you would like an online knees up and laugh with friends around the World, then you can hire Chris P Tee Magician as your Magical Zoom Party Host, the Party at Yours, Wherever that may be. Any Age, Anywhere in the World. Upto 100 Screens, Any Language (I can mime) Also Available in Person for Covid Safe Entertainment throught the UK from May 17th, Book Now. (Vaccinated & Enhanced DBS)

Earlier this week, the Supreme Court of the State of Arizona ruled in favor of the City of Tucson, Prescott, and other charter cities, allowing them to continue to determine when to hold local elections. Upon direction from Council, Prescott filed an amicus brief in the case State of Arizona v City of Tucson. The case dealt with whether charter cities would be required by state statute to move their local elections (i.e. mayor and council elections) to the fall of even-numbered years. The Court ruled 5-1 in favor of charter cities, allowing them to determine when to hold local... For the written story, read here >> https://www.signalsaz.com/articles/state-supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-prescott-and-other-charter-cities-regarding-ability-to-set-election-dates/

Charter cities can bring long-term economic growth through business and innovation enabled by well-functioning institutions. Mark Lutter, founder of the Charter Cities Institute, talks to OMFIF's Kat Usita about the benefits that charter cities bring and successful examples. 

Today we sit with Sebastian Mallaby, a successful author and esteemed Senior Fellow for International Economics at the Council of Foreign Relations. He has also been a contributing columnist for The Washington Post and previously served on the editorial board. To open the show, we put Sebastian's career into a nutshell before asking him to expand on his background. He tells us about some of his earliest memories as a young roving correspondent in Africa, cutting his teeth in journalism for The Economist. We go on to talk to Sebastian about the World Bank and discover facts about its inception and the evolution of its role since 1944. He discusses some of the World Bank's constraints before turning his attention to former president of the World Bank, Jim Wolfensohn. Listeners will learn about the life and times of Jim as a human being and as a global leader. Dissecting Jim's achievements, Sebastian analyses Jim's structural adjustment programs and comments on the American-Australian's charisma and knack for communication. In the latter half of the show, we talk about the benefits of the Ease of Doing Business Index and find out Sebastian's stance on the matter. We continue our conversation and hear from Sebastian on how the world has changed since he published his book in 2004, as he contrasts between the classical left-vs.-right and modern populist-vs.-technocratic divisions. To find out more from Sebastian, his thoughts on Jim Wolfensohn, and the position of the World Bank, be sure to join us today. Key Points From This Episode: ●     Introducing today's guest, Sebastian Mallaby. ●     We take a look at some of Sebastian's career highlights before we begin. ●     Sebastian reminisces when he covered Nelson Mandela's 1990 release for The Economist. ●     Hear about the motives behind establishing the World Bank's. ●     Sebastian elaborates on the constraints of the World Bank. ●     Hear about Jim Wolfensohn's private and public life. ●     Sebastian's answers to: Is the World Bank due for a shakeup? ●     Hear Sebastian's thoughts on the Ease of Doing Business Index and its efficacy. ●     We cover the changes since Sebastian published his book in 2004. ●     Sebastian's opinion on Charter Cities, and whether or not it has changed. Links Mentioned in Today's Episode: https://twitter.com/scmallaby?lang=en (Sebastian Mallaby on Twitter) https://www.linkedin.com/in/sebastian-mallaby-13a24936/?originalSubdomain=uk (Sebastian Mallaby on LinkedIn) https://www.britannica.com/biography/James-Wolfensohn (Jim Wolfensohn) https://www.worldbank.org/ (The World Bank) https://www.carnegiehall.org/ (Carnegie Hall) https://www.aiib.org/en/index.html (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank) https://www.imf.org/external/index.htm (IMF) https://www.britannica.com/biography/Robert-S-McNamara (Robert McNamara) https://www.forbes.com/profile/robert-zoellick/?sh=61f707032374 (Robert Zoellick) https://www.britannica.com/biography/Paul-Romer (Paul Romer) https://www.stanford.edu/ (Stanford University) https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alan-Greenspan (Alan Greenspan) https://twitter.com/tylercowen?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor (Tyler Cowen) https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003SNJZ3Y/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i0 (More Money Than God: Hedge Funds and the Making of the New Elite) https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01CDVCAXS/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i1 (The Man Who Knew: The Life & Times of Alan Greenspan) https://www.washingtonpost.com/ (The Washington Post) https://www.economist.com/ (The Economist) Support this podcast

What if we just... left? The challenges facing our cities are enormous. Our problems could take years to correct, or decades. The purpose of this season is to explore new ways to reinvigorate our cities, but it's worth entertaining the alternative. What if we built something new, from the foundation up? I sat down with Patri Friedman, founder of both the Seasteading Institute and Pronomos Capital, to entertain a wild idea: Charter Cities. What are they, how do they work, and how do we start over?

Mark Lutter is the founder of the Charter Cities Institute. We find out just what Charter Cities are, why we should care about them, and how they can improve the lives of millions of humans across the globe. 

Para este episodio entrevistamos a Santiago José Gangotena, profesor y vicedecano del School of Economics USFQ. Él nos cuenta sobre las charter cities, o ciudades con jurisdicciones especiales, que son foco de innovación institucional. Para más información sobre el tema, click aquí: https://www.chartercitiesinstitute.org/reading

The Charter Cities Institute has seen rapid growth in recent months, having gone from three employees in February to ten as of this week, so we decided to do something a little different on today's show. Kurtis Lockhart, Head of Research at the CCI sits down with Founder, Mark Lutter, to provide a high-level overview of the concept of charter cities, why their time has come, how the CCI fits into it all, and what the future holds. The first part of the conversation is all about charter cities, how they differ from conventional ones and special economic zones, and why they are becoming more important. From there, we move onto the history of charter cities, getting into some major recent advocates of the movement and a few examples of successful semi-autonomous cities from the post-war era and what we can learn from them. We turn our attention to some of the common criticisms of charter cities next, considering the political threat they could end up posing, how they propose to be different from the countries they exist in, and how to get people to start moving into them once development commences. Following this, we explore the implementation aspect of charter cities, discussing how the CCI is approaching six things that should be considered before building one: Governance, policies, urban planning, site selection, selecting an anchor tenant, and minimizing the risk of expropriation. The last part of our conversation is all about the CCI as an organization – Mark's research that led to its founding, the challenges and successes it has seen, and the vision it has for the future. Be sure to catch this episode for an in-depth look at the potential charter cities and the CCI have to change the world for the better. Key Points From This Episode: •   A high-level definition of charter cities and why they are important. •   How charter cities differ from conventional cities and special economic zones. •   Four aspects of charter cities that enable them to spur long-term economic development. •   How the CCI's version of charter cities would be governed and set up through public/private partnerships. •   Why governments would invite developers to build and collaborate on charter cities. •   The amount of master plan cities being built globally and range of their value propositions. •   The advantages of a charter city over a master-planned one and a regular one. •   Ideal environments to build charter cities in; openness, rapid urbanization, and more. •   Why now is a time where charter cities seem more valuable than ever. •   Reinvigorating liberalism and the cosmopolitanism of trade cities using charter cities. •   How charter cities fit into the effective altruist framework of tractability, neglectedness, and scalability. •   Conceptions of scalability and the work being done to enable charter cities to scale. •   A history of charter cities and how the CCI is building on Paul Romer and Patri Friedman's work. •   Early examples of cities built using a degree of planning and their modern influence. •   Problems with unplanned and planned cities and the ‘slow feedback loop' of cities. •   Lessons to be learned from successful, semi-autonomous cities in the post-war era. •   Common criticisms of charter cities and how they are based on misunderstandings. •   How to get people to move to a charter city; reasons why people start and move to cities. •   Why governments might expropriate their charter cities; the political threat they could pose. •   Issues around building charter cities in upper or middle-income countries. •   The role of incentives in charter cities being less prone to their host... Support this podcast

I had a chat with Mark Lutter, founder and executive director of Charter Cities Institutes about the potential of charter cities to boost a nation’s prosperity and development. Our conversation touched on state capacity, why American institutions appear to be failing, and why Silicon Valley elites have no political influence.You can download or listen right in the player above - or from your favourite players and podcast providers here. You can rate us here, this helps others find the show. Reference guides by CCI for people new to the idea are here. You can also read my writings on cities (here and here). TranscriptTL: Welcome to Ideas Untrapped. Joining me is Mark Lutter. Mark Lutter is an economist and he is the founder and executive director of [the] Charter Cities Institute. You're welcome, Mark. ML: Thanks for having me on. TL: Yeah briefly, please. What are Charter Cities and what do they bring to economic development? ML: Sure, so Charter Cities are new cities with a special jurisdiction that allows them to have a more competitive business environment. And we believe they are important because, over the long run, they're a key determinant of economic performance, economic outcomes and […] governance. If you have good governance, a country will do relatively well and if you have poor governance, a country will do relatively poorly. The challenge can be that it's difficult to reform governance on a national level. There's a lot of special interests groups. There's a lot of politics that goes on that sometimes make the reforms quite difficult to implement. And, Charter Cities, because they're new cities, they can be built on Greenfield sites where there are fewer special interests and because they have a special jurisdiction, it can be politically feasible to implement deeper reforms than might be possible at the national level.So these deeper reforms are to improve the business environment combined with a new city allow for more economic development to occur than otherwise might take place. So if we look at the last 40, fifty, 60 years, we've seen cities like Shenzhen, Singapore, Hong Kong and Dubai emerge from practically nothing to become global metropolises. And we believe that success is replicable. Particularly because there are a little under 80 million new urban residents annually, so urbanization is growing extremely rapidly across Africa and across Asia, and we believe it's quite important to make sure that we get things right now because it's much harder to change governance, It's much harder to change infrastructure once a city is already built. And so we believe that if we can help set up this sort of right institutions now, the right set up now, the right layout of new cities now, it can basically save a lot of headaches over the next fifty [to] hundred years, and help lift tens of millions of people out of poverty and make things better for economic development. TL: Yeah, so, obviously, I'm not new to this idea and we've talked a couple of times about it. Thinking about Charter Cities, it's a big project. So what do you think are the effective financing structures that make them feasible knowing the fiscal challenges that some poor countries face?ML: Sure, so the way we think about Charter Cities is as Public-Private Partnerships with the host country. So we're not asking the host country to build the city, we're asking the host country to help create a governance framework that can make the Charter City more competitive. And we think that this is especially important now in the post-COVID world where a lot of countries, particularly in emerging markets might be resource dependent on oil and like Nigeria. Or copper, like Zambia. And prices have rebounded somewhat over the last few months, but given that they're much lower than they were a year ago, I think there is a reasonable expectation that demand will continue to be relatively low, at least, until a vaccine is discovered. And so that means these countries have big holes in their budget and will need new financing mechanisms and we view Charter Cities as potentially one of those financing mechanisms. Charter Cities, because they're new cities, they can be built on Greenfield sites where there are fewer special interests and because they have a special jurisdiction, it can be politically feasible to implement deeper reforms than might be possible at the national level - ML The Charter City would have a revenue-sharing agreement with the central government. It will be able to attract a lot of foreign investment, create a lot of economic activities, create a lot of jobs and then some of that wealth that is being created would be transferred to the central government that might be able to help plug the hole that is currently being left by low commodity prices. Additionally, we just think if you build a successful city, it will generate a tremendous amount of wealth. We're still in the early Charter Cities phases and the specifics for financing Charter Cities haven't all been sort of worked out, but the general hypothesis is 'look, if you create a successful, functioning city, then there will be a lot of wealth that is created and you just need to capture some of that wealth that can pay for the initial infrastructure investment that can pay for the costs associated with setting up and building a city. So, that's at least the eye level overview of how we think about financing Charter Cities.TL: The question of financing is important here because some would argue, and I think, Chris Blattman has actually made this argument that given the risks involved that these investments may not pay off, it's actually an objection to not doing it. How do you react to that? What are the big payoffs for charter cities as opposed to other development interventions like cash transfers and other forms of aid?ML: Sure, so, it's definitely possible that for one or more charter cities the investments will not pay off. That's the nature of an investment, they're not necessarily secure and so there is always risks associated with investments. The risks associated with charter cities might be higher depending on where the charter city is being built, depending on what the local politics are, depending on the sort of skill of the developer. But I think, I would, I guess, sort of, differentiate as to what we're talking about in terms of investment. So if we're talking about cash transfers. Cash transfers are not an investment per se. Cash transfers are a transfer of wealth. They are basically a donation. It is comparable to charity. And most of the evidence on cash transfers is relatively good. You give people more money, they're able to spend the money to get better things. Recent studies have suggested that this does have relatively long-lasting impact on improving people's lives, so I support cash transfers. Charter Cities, at least, the way we at the Charter Cities Institute conceive of them are led by private developers who are building the physical infrastructure themselves. So this is an investment, not a donation. The expectation is if you raise 700 million dollars to build a power plant, to build roads, to build water, electricity, etc, then you expect a return on that capital investment that can justify the risks associated with that particular project. So this is a commercial venture, not a development venture per se. And we believe that Charter Cities can pass this sort of commercial venture test where, okay, if people who are humanitarians want to get involved, that is great, but as a mechanism for social change, I think the profit motive tends to be important and can allow for more social change in a shorter period of time than asking everybody to change their behaviour out of the goodness of their heart. That being said, there is space for, I think, donations in the Charter Cities space. The Charter Cities Institute, for example, is a 501C3. We rely on donations. We are trying to kind of incubate this Charter Cities space, trying to bootstrap it, creating a network of different city developers, developing a set of best practices, things like that. But we have done at least internal calculations that we have published on the research portion of our website, where we look at GiveWell which is a well-known charity evaluator. And we look at GiveWell and the cost-effectiveness of various charities that they evaluate and based on some assumptions that we make about our own effectiveness and these assumptions, I believe, are quite conservative. We are comparable to the most cost-effective charities in the world; if not more effective than them. TL: Charter Cities, at least, as an idea, in its current framing, is not new. Paul Romer kind of reintroduced the idea a while back. And with implementation - Honduras, Madagascar - they've run into some problems. What are you doing differently at CCI, and how does your model differ from that proposition? ML: Sure, and that's a good question. So Paul Romer obviously pioneered this space but didn't have as much success as I think he would have liked. And what we've tried to do is learn from his impact and see how we could try to have a bit more success this time around. So first let me talk about differences with Paul Romer's model and our model for charter cities. The similarities are: both of the models involve cities with a special jurisdiction that allow them to have a different institutional framework than the rest of the country, an institutional framework that is more conducive to economic development, and to growth. Those are the similarities. I think the differences are that Paul Romer advocated a high-income country, for example, Canada administers a Charter City in a low-income country for example, Honduras. So Canada would help create the administrative structure, they would be responsible for it, and that is the mechanism by which part of Honduras could have good governance. We have not pursued that model for, I think, two reasons. One, we're not sure it's feasible. There is a lot of blowbacks associated with charter cities, we're sometimes accused of being neocolonialists, and I think having a high-income country act as a guarantor in a low-income country brings up some of those unpleasant historical memories that might make getting political buy-in a little bit more difficult. The second reason we're not pursuing that model is we're not sure it's the best model, even if you, sort of, assume away the political challenges of it. So looking at, for example, the response of many countries in the West to COVID, the US has had a relatively poor response to COVID. Our institutional capacity as somewhat decayed, we aren't as vibrant, as effective as we were 50, 60 years ago, there's a general lethargy in our own institutions, and I think that that lethargy would likely translate to helping to build new institutions in emerging markets. And so there is a question of 'is the high-income country the best institutional entity to help administer a charter city?' And we believe it is not. So what we do is we partner with new city developers. There are by Journalist Wade Shepherd...he estimates there are over 200 mass or fenced cities being built around the world right now. So we try to partner with these new city developers, typically private entities, sometimes they're public but we prefer our partner with the private ones because they tend to be a little bit more effective to figure out okay, they're building a new city which might have a hundred thousand residents, which might have a million residents, so we partner with them to try to improve their governance system. And this might mean working with the government to improve the special economic zone framework. If there is a relatively advanced special economic zone framework in place, we might work with the city developer to figure out okay, what does it actually mean to create this new administrative structure from scratch. So that's the difference in approach.I guess before I go into why I think we'll be effective, I think, a few other points. One, Paul Romer was quite effective at generating attention and, sort of, starting the conversation and working with governments, at least, up to a point. We're taking a bit more of what might be described as, sort of, a systematic approach. We're somewhat worried about the ecosystem of charter cities being too dependent on a single person or on a single country. So we try to diversify risk by partnering with a lot of different organizations, by working in a lot of different countries, by really helping to spread the idea of charter cities as far as possible such that if one project goes under a hard time or fails, there are other projects that we can shift our attention to make sure the momentum for charter cities is not lost. As to, I think why we think that we will be successful where he was unsuccessful, I think we've learned a lot from him; and in addition, I think the last 10 years, there's been a bit of an increased interest in charter cities. And then second, we're just seeing it on the ground. We have engaged two projects where we are helping them create these legal structures, these administrative entities from scratch to governing these cities. The projects have a degree of political buy-in. We are regularly reached out to by new city developers who are interested in improving governance in those cities. We're basically at the beginning of a charter city's moment, and I think over the next year, the next two years, it will become clear to everybody who isn't paying attention now that the charter city's moment is here, that these projects are real, people are building them, people are moving dirt, people are moving in, money is being raised, etc. that it is no longer just [an] academic discussion, but it is a matter of sort of on the ground, things happening and executing.TL: I mean, hearing you speak, I thought of a question, which is - to a layperson, like, what exactly are the channels of improvement to income and livelihoods in building a new city, for example?ML: Sure, so, If we look at a city like Shenzhen, 40 years ago in 1980, Shenzhen was a number of small fishing villages, the total population in the area was about a 100,000 residents. The average income was about $500 a year. It was a very impoverished area and currently, Shenzhen is the manufacturing capital of the world. It has a total population of around 20 million people, they have a subway system that rivals New York. It is a sort of, shiny, gleaming metropolis that really transformed in just 40 years. So while China had several sort of specific conditions that mean that the success of Shenzhen is unlikely to replicate at that magnitude. For example, China had first basically prevented urbanisation from occurring, so there was a pent up demand for urbanisation. As well as China had very stringent regulations and laws which had precluded a lot of economic development. And while Africa, for example, many countries have bad regulations, I'm not sure they were as bad as China in the 1980s. But that being said, we believe that a degree of that success is still possible even if you get half of Shenzhen, that's a city of ten million people, that sees your income rise by like 10, 20X over a 40 year period. That is a huge change. If you look in a lot of sub-Saharan Africa, for example, what's occurring now is called urbanization without industrialization. And this means that people are moving to cities. And typically when people move to cities, they become more productive, they are able to make more money, they live better lives, they leave their kids better off, and it's this virtual circle. And now, unfortunately, in some parts of sub-Saharan Africa this is not occurring. People are moving into cities but their productivity is not increasing, they're not making more money, and their kids are going to stuck at the same sort of level in income and quality of life that they are today. And what we believe charter cities can help do is to, I guess, help change that to help create these opportunities for these people that are currently being left behind by the global economy and to create this positive dynamic, this positive feedback cycle that leads to people's incomes being increased by 5 percent per year, 10 percent per year. Which because of the power of compounding interest, if your income is increasing at 5 percent per year, that means, every 14 years, your income doubles. So 28 years later, your income will be four times what it was originally. Forty-two years later, which is about the total working life of an adult (about 42 years), your income will be 8 times what it was when you started. You've seen an 8 fold increase in income, [which] is just tremendous. So if we can help create that dynamic, if we can help generate this type of growth, I think that will lead toad to a big improvement in a lot of people's lives.TL: It's interesting you talked about Shenzhen before we move into the specifics of that. Shenzhen is usually described as a special economic zone. Is that different from Charter Cities, or is essentially the same thing? ML: Sure. So, Special Economic Zones. We consider Charter Cities to be a subset of Special Economic Zones. The special economic zone is just an area that says that the laws of the host country don't apply to this area, or like some subset of the laws. But typically, special economic zones tend to be relatively narrow in their focus. They might only encompass an industrial park, they might only be a few dozen or a few hundred acres. They have a relatively set degree of difference from the host country in terms of laws, so it might have lower taxes or it might have a one-stop-shop but they don't really have this deep regulatory reforms. They tend to focus on a single industry, so maybe textile, manufacturing or maybe electronics, they aren't broad-based. Very rarely do special economic zones have residential. And lastly, they tend to be too small to generate sustained economic growth. If you have an industrial park that might be successful, that might create a lot of jobs but that's not really going to create this dynamic positive feedback cycle like a city can. Shenzhen whilst frequently described as a special economic zone, at least, according to our definition, it is more like a charter city. The jurisdiction is 320 square kilometres, so that's the size of a city. It is multi-use. They have residential, they have commercial, they have industrial. They have the sort of full dynamics that you expect to see in a city with a lot of different economic parts moving. There was a lot of authority devolved from the central government to the city government. So while many special economic zones might only have like a tax incentive, basically in Shenzhen, with the exception of military and like Mail distribution, you can almost experiment with whatever you want you on the Shenzhen city level. And that allowed for a lot more autonomy than most special economic zones allow. So while Shenzhen is sort of colloquially referred to as a special economic zone, it fits our definition and our understanding of what a charter city is a little bit more closely than most special economic zones around the world which are quite different from Shenzhen and as such haven't had the same impact that Shenzhen has had.TL: Two-part Shenzhen question here. I agree with you, Shenzhen fits better with what you are describing. I mean, there was an industrial zone in Shekou, and of course, there was the whole area that was developed for all kinds of things, tourism and the rest. Now, the first question is that there was a lot of planning and execution in making Shenzhen work. How does the administrative capacity of the host country, how does it affect the execution of a Charter City?ML: Sure, and I think this is an important point. One of the increasing discussions in economics and international development has been focusing on state capacity in which the administrative capacity of a country or a government can be thought of as - are they able to execute on tasks in a timely and effective manner? So a country with this higher state capacity would be able to build a road cheaper and more quickly than a country with a lower state capacity. And in Shenzhen it was the local government that administered the city. China has had 3000 years [of] history of statehood. So they have a lot of experience in capacity with administrating cities and they just had to adapt it the circumstances at hand. And I think one of the challenges in some emerging markets is that there isn't that long history of statehood. There isn't that long history of administrative capacity, and so the current governments are not being very effective in administering the entire country. So if they start to administer a charter city, you would see a similar type of dysfunction. To solve this problem, we are advocating a special jurisdiction with a separate administration from the host country. And so the city would remain part of the host country, it would be governed by a separate bureaucratic apparatus, it would have different standards for hiring, different standards for firing, different standards for promotion, etc, which would allow it to develop a more effective administration than the host country. And so, to this end, we're engaged in [a] sort of early-stage discussion about helping to establish this administrative apparatuses and we're beginning to think about what it means to develop a pipeline of administrators for a Charter City that would help [to] work with educational establishment to create certificates, to create courses that might help teach you how to administer a charter city. 'Cause this is sort of a monumental challenge, there are so many moving parts and you don't really want to hire people from the host country because then they bring the bad culture of the host country government, they bring the sort of, I don't know… the sclerosis that often exists in host countries' bureaucracies that leads to the need for charter cities. But you don't want to transplant that bureaucratic dysfunction to the charter city, so you would have to basically create a new administrative system and a new education system to train those administrators. TL: Yeah, so with the special jurisdiction, what guarantees continuity? I'm imagining that the government of the host country would still have some form of authority over that jurisdiction however limited. And what guarantees that another administration does not come in and say, 'Oh, yeah, well, for political reasons or whatever, we're going to withdraw our support for this.' Or is there a specific framework that you've outlined which guarantees long-term autonomy?ML: Sure. I'm glad you asked that question, that is one of the challenges for charter cities. How do you ensure that there is administrative continuity in the charter city and the host country hasn't changed their mind and limit some of the authority that they had previously granted to the charter city? We are seeing that, for example, right now in Hong Kong, where the Chinese government is passing a national security law that many on Hong Kongers believe changed the sort of terms of the agreement in 1997 when Hong Kong was transferred from the British to the Beijing government. There is no silver bullet for preventing, right? You can't do a magic trick and say 'alright, there is no risk of expropriation of the charter city' but there are a number of strategies that can be developed to mitigate that risk, and in fact, we published an outline of these strategies on our website called the Risk Mitigation Guide. It is in the reference guides. And it should give an understanding of strategies that can be taken to mitigate that risk. So basically, they're business project, they need to be profitable while obviously they're political projects as well. They need to get buy-in from the host country and so there are several ways to do that. First, you need to make sure that the development of the charter city itself has an extensive stakeholder management engagement in the planning processes. So you need to work closely with the host country at the central government, you probably want to work closely with the local government, whether it's state or provincial to make sure that you acquire the land justly, to make sure there is buy-in. You could, for example, offer the state or the national government an equity stake in the charter city to align interests of the government with the charter city itself. Second, you probably want to involve business and community leaders in the charter city. Successful institutional change requires the allegiance of the ruling elite, so making sure that there is an incentive for those people who are particularly influential in the country to align with the success of the charter city is important. Third, you probably want to attract industries that create a lot of jobs. It is politically difficult to change something if a lot of jobs are being created, if a lot of investment is being had, things like this. So, make it more difficult for the politicians to take action against the charter city by creating a lot of jobs, by making it successful, etc. Third, most countries in the world are signatories to a variety of international treaties. So if you sign a contract with the host country and they expropriate you, depending on how you draft that language, you might be able to go and sue them in the international court, and if you win to confiscate their overseas assets. This is basically a last-ditch solution. If you get to this stage you've already lost. But it might help sort of as a bit of a deterrent against host country trying to confiscate your assets by demonstrating that there is some recourse to that action of expropriation. Another strategy is to list the city on the Stock Exchange. So after 10 or 15 years after the city is successful, maybe you put a listing on the local Stock Exchange for a certain percentage of the value of the developer who has built out the city. What does this mean? Well, this oftentimes, the pension funds and other sorts of financial managers will buy that stock and so pension funds and these financial managers tend to be relatively politically powerful and therefore if their future income streams are depending on the success of the charter city, then the host country might be less likely to take actions against the charter city. And Lastly, I think just to really emphasize the first point - it's very important to make sure charter cities are integrated with the local government, with the community - that the benefits of charter cities are being widespread. The best way, I think, to ensure that there's a minimum of risk of expropriation is just to make sure that it becomes very apparent that the charter city is being successful, it's creating jobs, that everybody is being engaged and participating in the upside of a charter city. TL: The second part question is that… I mean, I'm glad you talked about local governance. In building a charter city, I imagine there are allocative decisions that the government would have to make. I compare Shenzhen to maybe some other initiative like Gurgaon in India and one thing the Chinese government had with Shenzhen is that it still maintained control over the allocation of land. And, at least in my opinion, that allowed some kind of diverse development in terms of the industrial and residential developments that took place, and also in the building of public goods, in the provision of public goods generally. But what you see, at least, I wouldn't call them charter cities, with projects like Eko Atlantic City and others of such is that, yes, they are planned but, maybe for financial reasons, the allocative decisions are made solely for real estate developments. Maybe that helps in recouping some of the investment. So, I guess what I'm asking is, where should the allocative decisions lie to create the proper incentive for a truly income enhancing city to develop?ML: Sure, yeah, and I think that is an important question and looking at Shenzhen versus Gurgaon in India. Gurgaon is quite interesting, for the listeners who don't know, basically because of this sort of historical quirk, there was no government which allowed for no zoning and land use regulations and so a lot of tech companies and sort of large companies went and built offices there, advanced infrastructure there, so it has a lot of office buildings, things like that but because there is no governing structure, the public infrastructure tends to be quite poor. So if I remember correctly, there are basically no sewers, most of the buildings have to run on generators. It allows this freedom to build but it combines that with this lack of government. While Shenzhen, the government has been relatively effective in providing public goods, at creating an open space that allows for its success. And I think if we look at all the planned cities around the world being built today, Eko Atlantic being one example, I think you capture it well in saying that they are real estate, they're not really cities. So, real estate you tend to define everything very carefully, it's 'we build a thousand houses and we sell them each for this much money and this is what the margins are' etc, while a city is evolutionary, it's dynamic. The sort of level of planning of the city government tends to be much smaller. It's not saying we're going to build an apartment building here and we're going to build a commercial district here. It's trying to create the enabling conditions for growth and for success. And what we're trying to do is trying to kind of change the conversation with some of these new city developers to focus on more of an inclusive model where it's aimed at a broader set of residents. Where right now a lot of the new cities are aimed at sort of upper middle income or above, but how can you push the price point down? So one of the projects that we're working on is a document that is tentatively called a draft master plan. What this will do is it will be a master plan for a charter city. We're thinking about having it on 30,000 acres with 1 million residents, but we're explicitly targeting an income level of $1500 annually, which is a little under, I think, the per capita income of Nigeria. It's comparable to the per capita income of Zambia, of Kenya. We're explicitly trying to develop a model where it's accessible to this broad income segment, but we're not saying these are the types of houses that people would already build, we're just kind of thinking about okay, where is the infrastructure going to be? How do we attract an anchor tenant? How do we attract residents? How do we make it dynamic such that people's incomes increase over time? It's possible to build a sort of exclusive gated community where high-income people go and live and work and they end up being quite comfortable there, and I encourage people to do that. That's just not the model that we are particularly interested in. And I think it might be a good business venture but it has limited implications for [the] broader society and what we're interested in is how we can help effect social change to generate economic development and to lift people out of poverty, and I think to do that, it's important to help make sure charter cities are inclusive, allow for all segments of society experience the benefits of living in a fast-growing and dynamic city. TL: A bit of a curveball, so to speak, here. There's a lot of planning involved in charter cities. Do you think that that's a challenge to a free-market model of development?If you look in a lot of sub-Saharan Africa, for example, what's occurring now is called urbanization without industrialization. - MLML: In a way, I mean, I'm sure some market-oriented economist might not like what we are doing. I remember when I was doing my PhD at George Mason I was chatting about this with some people, they were like: well, how do you plan? But if we remember the Keynes versus Hayek rap video, the question is 'who plans for who?' So there always need to be some level of planning, right? We do it on an individual level. We do it on a corporate level, even government does it on some level. If you're just planning for, how many police, how many courts? What should the military do? Things like that. And so we might be taking a slightly more active role in planning than some free markets economists might advocate for in terms of thinking about what the anchor tenant should be, how to attract them, how to create these sort of supply linkages. In the draft master plan that we're developing, we are thinking about basically how to create a type of industrial policy because what we want is, okay, when it starts, maybe you focus on textile manufacturing or some relatively low skilled type of employment, but how do we make sure there is skill transfer over time such that the city can move its way up the value chain, can create more jobs and can have this positive dynamic to help lift people out of poverty rather than just being stuck at textile manufacturing now and then 30 years from now? TL: That's interesting. I spoke with Garett Jones, and one of the things he proposed that developing countries [should] try to do is to become an attractive destination for high skilled labour, you know, a labour quality argument of sorts. Do you think charter cities can be a channel for such attraction of high quality, high skilled labour to developing countries which obviously has benefits?ML: Yeah, I think it can. A charter city if developed correctly will probably be more safe than the host country because the place will be more effective. The charter city will be more dynamic. There will be more opportunities and so if there is a high skilled worker who are in their early career and want to do it abroad. Or maybe their ancestors are from a country and want to sort of return and kind of give back or maybe they are first-generation immigrant and want to give back, then I think a charter city would be a probably more attractive place to live than the rest of the host country because it would be more dynamic. There will be more opportunities. It would be a more exciting place to live. That being said, I think I disagree slightly with Garett Jones on the premise...you definitely want the higher-skilled workers for the knowledge transfer. It depends on exactly what he means by this, but Dubai, for example, was able to attract a lot of high skilled workers primarily from Europe, while Shenzhen developed without that many highly skilled workers. They had a lot of investment from Hong Kong. And they had a lot of managerial talent that could come from Hong Kong. So I think it's quite important to, I guess, create these linkages with different areas, different cities that can help the skills transfer process, and then you probably also want to help high skilled workers come in to fill senior administrative positions. But I think to make sure charter cities are scalable, the vast majority of the new urban residents over the next 30 years are not going to be highly skilled. They're going to be relatively impoverished coming from rural areas. We're not going to have sort of the skills that we typically associate with the modern economy, and I think what is important is to realize that and to create systems and processes to allow them to improve their skills, to allow them to get better, to allow them to, sort of, transform the city into somewhere that they would be proud to call home. TL: I'm curious. What exactly made you, Mark Lutter, interested in this problem? Why did you choose to work on this other than teaching at GMU or writing papers and other things you could have done as an academic?ML: Sure. Well, I'm not sure I could have done that much as an academic. I'm a pretty mediocre academic, I like getting my hands dirty a little bit more. LaughsWhat initially got me interested? I heard a talk where the speaker mentioned Michael [indistinct] and who tried to start a Freeport in Somaliland. And in fact, there is now a Freeport being built in Somaliland by Dubai Ports World in Berbera. And basically, what got me interested was I saw it as an Idea that has massive potential that not that many people were paying attention to and talking about and it got me really excited and so I stayed interested in it and sort of realized that I could have a meaningful contribution to making this, I think, really exciting idea take place. And that's why I've stayed interested in it. I like things that can have a big impact and to me, charter cities are one of the things that might be able to have the biggest impact in the 21st century and so it's quite exciting to be involved. TL: So how important is geography in the development of charter cities? I know proximity to ports is very important to facilitate trade. So, but how does it really feature in your own model?ML: Sure, so geography is obviously quite important because - are you on a trading route? Is there an urbanising population that you can draw from? What are the industries that in the area that you can sort of help supplement? We typically think about locating a charter city has being independent on several factors. You probably want to be within about 2 hours of an urban centre so you can piggyback back off their infrastructure because building an airport or a port is very expensive, but if you are within two hours of them you can acquire a large enough chunk of land to build the city because one of the challenges of building a charter city is actually getting enough land to build the city itself. But if you're 2 hours away, you might be able to acquire enough land but you're still close enough that you can access their airport, that you can kind of access their labour market, that you'll allow for a bit more trade than would take place if you were in the middle of nowhere.Like, you want to be on emerging trade routes. So for example, there's a lot of activities going on in East Africa right now. A lot of people are building ports there. That might be an opportunity for a charter city there. Thinking about how new technology might change sort of migration patterns. Maybe the Hyperloop comes, or maybe supersonic jets come, how does that change human sort of spatial organization? And then can you identify opportunities to locate cities because of that? There might be [an] opportunity for a charter city, for example, in Canada or maybe in Central Asia because Siberia and Northern Canada, with global warming, are going to open up and allow for more agriculture, for more natural resource extraction, things like that. So there will be a demand for people to live there and a new city might allow for it to become sort of a gateway to those respective regions. So basically looking at how human sort of trade and human migration patterns are occurring and then trying to identify those long-term trends and then build in a place that can take advantage of those trends to become a regional hub and provide services to the broader area.TL: The reason I asked that question is this. Someone like Paul Romer I think in his paper with Brandon Fuller would say - you need to build X amount of cities to take the addition we're going to see to the number urban dwellers by the middle of the century. I think their own calculation added about 3 billion additional people living in cities. But someone like Alain Bertaud will say you may not really have that much quality location to do what you want to do, at least, to have the kind of effect that you have in mind. So does geography, giving that land is fixed...does geography limit the potential of [a] charter city in a way? ML: Yeah it could, but this is a question that I think is dependent on data. Alain says that most of the good ports have already been taken. He's probably true (right) about that too a certain extent, because humans being, sort of, social, commerce-oriented mammals will tend to live in areas that are advantageous for that. So a lot of the natural ports already, probably have some degree of human settlement there. And so many of the good locations for cities have probably or even taken, have all of them been taken? Probably not. History is weird and people make decisions based on, sort of, contextual circumstances that might have left some potential city locations just untouched because of this weird set of historical events. So this is something that I'm certainly interested in exploring more. It's a project that I would like to undertake. It's basically hire some people, and identify 50 potential locations for charter cities. Just like lookout where trade is happening, where urbanization is happening, where it is possible to acquire large chunks of land and identify basically 50 of these potential charter city locations to see, okay is the land available? Is it good? How easy is it to acquire? To answer questions like that, if any of your listeners are interested in helping out, with some donations, we can actually start getting this sort of concrete answer to that question.TL: For the audience, I’m going to put up links to the reference guides from the Charter Cities Institute on the website and every other available resource. You wrote an article recently about America's foreign policy and how charter city can play a role in its geopolitical competition with China, specifically the belt and road initiative. Do you care to expatiate on that point?ML: Sure, so I think if we look at, um... the US in some way still has a positive image even with the recent sort of killing/murder of George Floyd. We saw a global outcry of that because I think people rightly hold America to a higher standard versus the outcry that we saw of the sort of Uighur, basically, a genocide in China where people have kind of ignored that because I guess they expected [the] Chinese to do it to a certain extent. But American engagement with the rest of the world has, I think, left a little something to be desired over the last 40 years. Iraq was a disaster, Afghanistan is a disaster, Libya is a disaster, so I think there's a need for rethinking American engagement. Combined with the fact that China is pretty aggressively now pursuing their image on the global stage in terms of building infrastructure with belt and road, in terms of wooing foreign politicians, foreign leaders, to get them to be China's friend. So my article was aimed at… particularly people in the, for example, the Development Finance Corporation in The United States to hopefully get them to see charter cities as a potential way to offer a positive influence on the world. And while specifically, I think what American engagement could look like is having Americans who can help with governance, having Americans who can provide financing options if you use American contractors to help build the city, to help develop governance norms, to basically provide the supporting infrastructure for charter cities which I think are important because right now when developing countries are looking around the world, they think 'okay, what policies do we adopt? Who do we want to be like?' All of them are thinking like let's be like China. China has had tremendous economic growth over the last 40 years. They've lifted tens of millions of people out of poverty which is a great thing. Unfortunately, at the same time that's been coupled with a sort of lack of respect of human rights, with no democracy, with no freedom of speech, these things that are inimical to human flourishing, and they think because America has developed so long ago, the possibility of following a similar pattern to America's development is just outside of people's minds. And so I think what charter cities can hopefully help demonstrate is this sort of we call them American values, but I think they are universal values of things like freedom of toleration of markets really can work for everybody and can provide an alternative development model to the one that China is currently claiming. TL: Sticking with the US, I know you write about it, others write about it, are the institutional (I want to say rot. I don't know maybe that's the right word), you know, are they as bad as some analysts say it is, especially in the light of COVID-19?ML: Yeah, I think it rot is probably an appropriate word. We basically have coasted the last kind of 40 years off of existing institutions. We haven't really been challenged. We haven't updated any of our systems. Everybody is complacent. If you think about it, part of the reason is that nobody has actually helped build an institution in the US. Rather, the most dynamic part of the economy is Silicon Valley because there are people there who are building new things. So people are required, to a certain extent, to have this like very broad set of managerial competencies that you don't need to have if you grow up... and I'm not just saying in government, in government you just develop these very specific set of skills, but also in a lot of large private corporations. How many new national banks have been invested in the last 30, 40 years? And so because of that, you grow up learning a very specific set of competencies which is OK in terms of like keeping the system going, but it means that anytime you're presented with an external shock, you just don't know how to react. And COVID was that shock, which I think exposed a lot of the existing inadequacies in the American system that people were unsure of, like unable to think outside the box. Our bureaucrats were quite skilled at figuring out how to pass the buck, how to not take responsibility for things. But they had no idea how to actually take responsibility and then how to actually enact change that will be beneficial. And we're seeing that continue today, you still can't buy N95 masks on Amazon, it's 3 months after the fact. This is a very solvable problem but our institutions are fundamentally broken and I think you can add that to the growing culture war where you have red states where a lot of people are refusing to wear masks because it's not a pandemic, it's a dempanic, this is a fake disease, really idiotic stuff like that. And then in blue states, you're seeing some of the elite institutions basically begin to eat themselves. The New York Times has basically been taken over by Social Justice Warriors staffers who sort of opposed an op-ed by Tom Cotton, the senator from, I think, Arkansas. And I didn't like that op-ed, it was a bad op-ed but he's a senator for goodness sakes. I mean, if you are the paper of record you should allow senators to publish sometimes even if you don't like their arguments. And so we're seeing this, sort of, I think deeply dysfunctional institutions combined with this deeply dysfunctional culture that will probably take decades or generation to really sort themselves out. There isn't a lot of sort of, I don't know, capacity left at the seams. Even the late 60s, '68 when we saw a similar social unrest, there was something solid. There was a core underneath and I think that core it's quite atrophied. I'm a little bit nervous about the future of the US. TL: And I mean it's interesting to me that you talked about Silicon Valley because, at least, from an outsider's perspective here, it amazes me how little political influence Silicon Valley has. LaughsAnd I have one analogy and I think I tweeted this though I got a lot of pushback here and there that I don't think, and I may be wrong about this... I don't think that the Koch Brothers, for example, would have struggled to build more housing in Silicon Valley. And we have people that are vastly richer than the Koch brothers in the Valley. I mean, what is going on? Why do they have so little political influence? They get railroaded even by the local government. ML: Yeah, I mean, I think that's a good question. One of my friends likes to joke that Silicon Valley thinks they're above politics, but in fact, they are below it. You've seen, I think, Apple pledged 2.5 billion dollars to affordable housing in the Bay Area. Microsoft, I think a billion to affordable housing in San Francisco, Mark Zuckerberg, I think, 500 million to affordable housing in the Bay Area. And like the problem is just that, okay, if you're spending half a billion dollars to put it crassly. Like just buy off the entire City Council and just tell them to legalise housing. And I think it's a sort of combination of historical circumstances. One is that because most of Silicon Valley is in the world of bits and not in atoms, they just haven't interacted with the government that much. So because of that, there was no need to really figure out how to work with government, it was like you ignore us, we ignore you. To use this sort of Chinese proverb - the emperor is far away, I'm on the other side of the country, and so they didn't really interact with the government that much, and because of that just saw it as kind of part of the ecosystem, not something that to pay attention to. I believe that is changing now.I think Mark Zuckerberg's congressional hearing like a year ago was a wake-up call where the congressmen were asking Mark Zuckerberg, how do you turn on the iPhone? And it's like, OK, well, when you have the political leaders who are that disconnected with what is actually going on, there is a serious challenge. That being said, it will take a number of years for Silicon Valley to actually figure or politics out. There is, I think, several challenges involved in that. One, I think Silicon Valley has a bias towards nonprofits, they figure if something is a good idea, you should be able to make money off it. But nonprofits are a kind of integral parts of influencing government. Second is Silicon Valley likes things that scale. Government necessarily doesn't really scale. At least it doesn't scale in the same manner that a technology startup does and so because of that you have to put all of these resources in, to help mobilize people, to help create a network, to help influence things and you're unable to tell whether it's actually working for a long period of time. So the technology startup, right, okay, you work for a year, you get product-market fit. After product-market fit, you grow at 10 per cent month over month for a period of like three years or something. So if you're growing 10 per cent month over month, you can see it's working, you can see something is happening. While with politics, you might pay activists on the ground, you might pay lobbyists, but it might take years before you actually see legislation that's even proposed, much less implemented. And most of Silicon Valley just doesn't really operate on those...they're not used to those time horizons and so they're unwilling to sort of put the resources necessary to actually engage them. Now I think a third reason is that Silicon Valley is very, I don't know...it has a very universal mindset. So New York, if you look at New York, all the high net worth people in New York, When they donate to charity, they typically donate to New York charities. So they donate to the Met, they donate to Central Park. They get status by paying for things in New York City, so you have all of these goods supported by basically the billionaire class in New York. In San Francisco, people get status by doing universal things. So the effect of altruist movement, for example, is quite popular in San Francisco. But these universal things, while I think they have a great impact on humanity because you don't get status by helping to improve housing in the city, there just isn't as much focus on the city itself, it's a little bit neglected and so there hasn't been this (the) same mobilization of Silicon Valley elite to coordinate to help fix the city as with New York where the elite do spend a lot more money on improving the city's quality of life. TL: That's interesting. I hope they wake up and they get it right.ML: Me too.TL: Final question, Mark. Ten years from now, if you're looking back at all these things you're working on, particularly charter cities, what do you hope to have achieved? ML: Yeah, in ten years I figure we probably [indistinct words] three dozens or so charter cities that are either up and running or are like in advanced planning stages. In ten years, probably a few million people living in charter cities and with the potential population to reach 10s of millions. I want charter cities to be sort of understood and discussed at every world forum, like the World Economic Forum. All these, like, sort of highfalutin events. I want them to be part of the language, like right now, for example, if we think about International Development there are some themes that come up all the time. I think gender equality and global warming kind of pervade every discussion, as well as randomized control trials, they all pervade every discussion about development, I want to charter cities to help pervade those discussions and not just pervade those discussions but actually be improving people's lives on the ground. TL. Yeah. That's a goal I can get behind. Thank you very much, Mark, and I wish you all the best. ML: Thank you for having me. This is a public episode. Get access to private episodes at www.ideasuntrapped.com/subscribe

Mark Lutter (@MarkLutter), founder and executive director of the Charter City Institute, joins Erik. They discuss:- The key factors that make countries successful or prosperous.- The different schools of thought on charter cities.- What the key factors to get right with a charter city are.- What Silicon Valley understands and misunderstands about charter cities.- Why there are few true entrepreneurs in the US anymore.- His thoughts on Balaji Srinivasan’s ideas about charter cities.Thanks for listening — if you like what you hear, please review us on your favorite podcast platform. Check us out on the web at villageglobal.vc or get in touch with us on Twitter @villageglobal.

Mark Lutter (@MarkLutter), founder and executive director of the Charter City Institute, joins Erik. They discuss:- The key factors that make countries successful or prosperous.- The different schools of thought on charter cities.- What the key factors to get right with a charter city are.- What Silicon Valley understands and misunderstands about charter cities.- Why there are few true entrepreneurs in the US anymore.- His thoughts on Balaji Srinivasan’s ideas about charter cities.Thanks for listening — if you like what you hear, please review us on your favorite podcast platform. Check us out on the web at villageglobal.vc or get in touch with us on Twitter @villageglobal.

Did you know there are different kinds of local government for your town? Turns out, there is! Whether you have a statutory local government, or a charter local government can change the operations and procedures of “how things get done” in your hometown. The distinction between the two often occur around a town’s stance on a particular issue but, is only ~really~ limited by general law at the state level. This episode focuses on the differences between the two forms of government along with the pros and cons of each. Who's on it? Jared Perry Sam Tuten Bret Allphin Any good resources? Knox Pages Case Study on Charter Government Ohio Municipal League City of Athens, Ohio Recorded July 2020 Questions? Email us at support@mytownhustle.com Shout out? As always thank you to The Saylor for the hot jams. Check him out NOW at iTunes and Spotify!

We interview Kurtis Lockhart, Head of Research at the Charter Cities Institute and PhD candidate in Political Science at the University of Oxford. We discuss Charter Cities in Zambia and Nigeria, International Relations, Geopolitics, China and Hong Kong, UBI, Infrastructure, Migration, Human Rights, Intra-African Trade, Education, Urbanisation, Free Trade, Regional Integration, and Culture. You can find us @secretbunkerpod on IG and Twitter, The Secret Bunker Podcast on Youtube, Reddit, and all podcast hosts. Reach out to us at any of these and thesecretbunkerpodcast@gmail.com as well as leaving audio messages on secretbunkerpodcast.com, which will be live answered on a future episode! Music: Reach The Top by Shane Ivers - https://www.silvermansound.com --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/secretbunker/message

Made popular by Nobel Laureate and economist Paul Romer, charter city is a new vision for building prosperous cities that can unlock economic potentials and solve common issues in urbanization and poverty for their citizens and countries they are part of. In this episode, Dr. Mark Lutter, Founder of the Charter Cities Institute, discusses what charter cities are, why they are unique compared to special economic zones (SZE), how they can promote progress and growth within a country by reducing regulatory barriers, and how successful examples like Shenzhen and Dubai embody both their advantages and drawbacks. Due to rapid increases of urban population, many governments in the developing world have shown to be ill-equipped to provide the necessary infrastructure to support the cities. Dr. Lutter has long called into question the conventional and popular idea that urbanization leads to increased productivity and economic growth, and he believes that charter cities could be a bold solution to poorly managed urbanization and global poverty. Our conversation goes over how charter cities can address the pent-up demand for urbanization in developing countries while creating opportunities for all the stakeholders involved, from locals to the governments of host countries. In doing so, we also analyze how new projects arise from private partnerships and how they can integrate with the goals of their host countries and communities. While charter cities can address the needs of developing countries, they are also worth exploring in mature economies. Allowing people to build new cities in the US or Europe can provide an alternative to existing cities while creating an incentive for regulatory arbitrage, which can trickle down to the rest of the country. The model of charter city offers a blank slate in commercial law, can be developed on greenfield sites (untouched land with no current residents), and can allow for deep governance reforms to be enacted with minimal interference or resistance because of the lack of existing interest groups. Charter cities may be the perfect place to experiment new governance structures proposed by “techno-utopians” from Silicon Valley to around the world. Dr. Lutter also addresses criticisms for charter cities, such as the possible need for strong central governments during the establishment of charter cities and their incentives to reap the benefits and interfere with organic growth. We also go over a famous charter city blunder in Honduras and the concerns that it would entrench the local elite while limiting freedom of locals. In this context, we also discuss how charter cities can be built so local can actually share the fruits of the progress enabled by the city, as well as how political ideologies intertwine with charter cities and their economic success. Dr. Mark Lutter is the Founder and Executive Director of the Charter Cities Institute, as well as the host of the Charter Cities Podcast. He is on the Board of Directors of Explorer Academy, a Zambian education platform. He is an advisor to and has a financial interest in the Victoria Harbor Group, a firm that is building a new Hong Kong. He has a PhD in economics from George Mason University where his research focused on charter cities. Prior to launching the Institute, he was Lead Economist for NeWAY Capital, an asset management firm which made early stage investments in charter cities. He has been published in several newspapers and magazines including the Chicago Tribune, City Journal, CityAM, and Cato Unbound. Currently, Dr. Mark Lutter is involved with several charter city projects. In this episode we discuss his recent work in Zambia, Nigeria, and with the Hong Kong-based Victoria Harbor Group. We also go over how the Charter Cities Institute was formed and what the next steps are for this nonprofit.

Garett Jones is one of the smartest people I have ever talked to - and he is at his usual brilliant best in this conversation. We started by trying to see how his latest book fit into the context of less developed countries with weak rule of law. I have often remarked that Garett is underrated as a development economist. I still think so.You can listen or download to the podcast on any platform of your choice (some links here), and you can also rate us here.TranscriptTobi: WeIcome to Ideas Untrapped and today I am on with economist, Garett Jones. Garett Jones is a professor of economics at George Mason University and he has written two excellent books "Hive Mind" and "10% Less Democracy". Welcome, Garett.Garett: Thanks very much for having me, Tobi.Tobi: Thinking on the margin is something I admire so much which is what you did quite well in your latest book 10% Less Democracy. Are economists just better at this than everybody else, and if yes, why?Garett: You're right. I do try to do that a lot in the book. I agree with you, Economists, I think, are better at this than other social scientists because it's just so much a part of our training. It's so normal for us to think, do you want to buy two more peanut butter sandwiches or two fewer? Should this company hire three more workers or fire two workers? So that kind of marginalist thinking which is where... the Marginal Revolution of the 19th century embodies that. Yeah, that really helps us think about big social questions in a very productive way. When I applied this to democracy what I realised it was quickly, something that a lot of people know, which is that all of the things we call democracies are a blend of democracy with oligarchy of one form or another. So getting the balance right is more important than an all-or-nothing question. All or nothing is off the table, thank goodness, but getting the blend right between insiders and outsiders, between elite and the masses, that's something that can be evaluated and fortunately, my economist friends have evaluated it. For some people, they'll quite naturally assume that democracy means an independent judiciary, the rule of law, impartial, fairly uncorrupt government. And those things are not democracy. They are good things but they are not democracy. - GJTobi: So given all the trade-offs that are involved with social decisions and reforms, how can we be better at thinking on the margins? We live in an era of protest movement where people want sweeping changes and that's not really how society works, so how can people better train themselves to be marginalist thinkers?Garett: Yeah, you're right. There aren't that many questions where we have to go all or nothing. Most policy questions can be a question of incrementalism, so I think whenever possible we should just ask ourselves 'if I can dial this up a little bit or dial this down a little bit, which would be the better way to work? Which would be the better way to move?' Whether that's thinking about whether I want my judges to have a little bit longer terms, whether I want my voters to have a little bit more information before they walk into the voting booth, whether I want a healthcare program to be available for people who are 62 rather than 65? Just thinking about it in terms of small changes helps us better evaluate...it helps the mind better weigh the benefits versus the cost of the decision. Because when we talk about revolutionary change, there are often just too many things going on for our brains to even weigh them, to even weigh the benefits, and weigh the costs. So marginalism, I think, is better suited for human minds and fortunately most, but not all, political decisions are well suited to a little more vs a little less.Tobi: I read your book, great book by the way...Garett: Thank you very much.Tobi: The writing is fantastic, I'm a big fan. In the book, I know you are applied the 10% Less Democracy framework to rich countries...Garett: Yeah.Tobi: But I've been trying to extrapolate and apply it to developing countries, and one thing I noticed (you can shed more light on this) is, sometimes it feels like low-income and middle-income countries are torn in some kind of institutional paradox. You have multilateral institutions like [the] IMF who have these prescriptions that are bureaucratic but have long-term benefits - Central Bank independence, don't manipulate the exchange rate, keep inflation low, be responsible with your budget, and all that. And on the other side of that, you have think tanks, aid agencies and other foundations (who are also interested in development and give it advice) who seem to favour radical democratisation of everything, basically. So what do you think, as a policymaker, as a voter in a low and middle-income country, how best to approach this paradox on a mental level?Garett: I think a message that I bring up early on in the book is that most of the clear benefits of democracy come from a moderate level of democracy. As Amartya Sen, the Nobel laureate who showed that if you want to avoid famines, what you need is democracy. In modern times there's never been a famine as he defines it in a functioning democracy. But his measure for functioning democracy is a pretty basic one. It's competitive elections and a free press. And that's not too hard a standard for a lot of countries to meet and more countries are meeting it now than they were meeting it, of course, three decades ago though, perhaps, less than a couple of years ago. So if you're pushing for democratisation, I think we should draw on the best evidence we have for what it is, what kind of democracy we need to get the benefits of democracy, and that seems to be a moderate level. Also, there is a lot of lazy talk about democracy where people stuff all of the good things they like into the word democracy. For some people, they'll quite naturally assume that democracy means an independent judiciary, the rule of law, impartial, fairly uncorrupt government. And those things are not democracy. They are good things but they are not democracy. So I think just clearly speaking about what it is that you want is valuable because we realised quickly that the things we like out of modern so-called democracies are a blend of the rule of the people and the rule of insiders, with a third thing that I don't talk much about in the book directly but the rule of law - the impartial rule of law, a bureaucracy that just operates on its own according to [the] rules that have been around for a long time. That is undemocratic and it seems to be very useful. So simply talking clearly about what it is we want in a reform and is this valuable reform truly about the voice of the people or is it more about something like an independent bureaucracy? That would help us get away from this lazy jargon of calling everything good democratic.Tobi: You also discussed the relationship between democracy and growth in your book and you conclude that the evidence is a bit of a muddle. What I was thinking when I was reading that part, I thought about Chile...Garett: Uh-huhTobi: And one of the famous examples when economists and some other thinkers discuss Chile is to look at GDP growth from the Pinochet years and the democratic years, and then they conclude that, oh, GDP growth is higher after Pinochet and hence democracy is better. But again, if you look at that history a bit, you'll see that there were some things, though they weren't palatable and I'm not saying I prefer autocracies here or anything...there were some hard reforms that Pinochet pushed through that clearly had benefits even during the Chilean democracy. One such rule was the inability of the parliament to hike the budget. You either cut it low or you pass it as it is which introduced a lot of fiscal responsibility in the budgeting process. So what do you think is responsible for this muddle in the evidence in the relationship between democracy and growth? Why can't we get a really clear picture?Garett: A big problem is the real-life fact which is just that a lot of autocrats do a terrible job. They come into power and they make the place worse off. So some autocrats come to power and appear to make the country better off, or at least, it predicts better performance and other autocrats come into power and things get worse. So when we stop looking at individual anecdotes and when we pull them together and do something rigorous and statistical, the evidence that autocrats are more likely to create great reforms looked pretty weak. There are plenty of anecdotes, right? We can call them case studies where autocrats are associated with and may have put into place things that look like good pro-growth reforms. Pinochet gets a lot of credit for this kind of stories but also Park Chung-hee of South Korea. The problem is that (a) we don't have a great counterfactual (b) maybe they just got lucky. And that's why using rigorous cross-country comparisons is more useful than individual case studies and when we do that, it's very hard to find evidence that either democracy causes growth or that an autocrat taking over causes growth. It's too much of a coin flip to recommend any particular policy if our goal in choosing a government is economic growth. So this is why we should stick to the things where we have better evidence and so these big changes - autocrat in charge versus free press multi-party democracy, there there's a muddle. That's the reason why the framing in my book 10% Less Democracy is about smaller changes where we have better identified better causal stories with better testings like independent central banks, independent judges. We have more evidence for the small things than we do for the big things.Thinking in marginalist terms is important but also good public education really can improve policy if we teach true important economic ideas to people - GJTobi: Looking at this really well, is it really about voter control? Because I imagine the issues are different, for example, I think voters care a lot about Central Bank independence than, say, a national minimum wage for example. So isn't the case that in some situations or on some issues, again, sticking with Central Bank independence, politicians adjust ill-informed or ignorant and they're not necessarily responding to voter preference?Garett: That's a great point. It's always a good idea to wonder whether the politicians themselves are poorly informed and they don't have an incentive to be very well-informed on most policy issues. A friend of mine had a conversation with the prominent United States politician who I won't name and this person said...the elected official said 'my job isn't to understand all the details of the policy, that's what my staff job is. My job is to keep track of all of the other members of Congress and find out how to cut deals with them.' So their real specialty is deal-making, deal cutting. They don't know that much about the detail of policy. So you are right that basically part of the problem is that the politicians themselves don't know that much, but they need to know enough to be able to pick someone who's good to run some of these things. So running [knowing] someone who is competent to run an independent central bank, it's kind of a hard job but you can outsource that to some staff; and if you're worried about things working pretty well for a long time, then you'll task your staff with picking somebody who seems like a pretty good candidate who won't cause much trouble and who will make the economy look pretty good before the electorate. So this idea that elected officials don't know that much themselves but they do have an incentive to get some things right when they know they're going to be held accountable by the voters.Tobi: But again, wouldn't less democracy, at least, in some cases lead to populist backlash? I mean, we're seeing that with Brexit...Garett: Oh, yes.Tobi: Some part of the American polity is also in that mode. The EU is a very good example where some British voters say 'oh, we are not going to be subjected to Brussels' rule'. There's a case of Africa, also, where people respond quite negatively to what they perceive as external technocratic interventions. So wouldn't less democracy run a risk of populism in the long-term?Garett: Actually, that's a great point and it's the one that I literally never discussed in the book - it's the idea of a populist backlash. Because it's one of these things that is important and too hard to quantify. The risk of a populist backlash to 10% Less Democracy is a little bit like the risk of a doctor being reluctant to give someone tough advice about diet and exercise because the person just might not come to the doctor anymore. So this is an important question - when should informed people, when should people who are relative experts just not push that hard for the best solution because they are afraid the patient won't take the medicine? In a way that's part of the reason I stick to 10% Less Democracy. I just want people to think about a little bit longer term, a little bit more independent Central Bank because I think these things are less likely to provoke that kind of backlash. But, you're right. But know this, to the extent you're right, this should tell us something about the cost of democracy - if one of the costs of democracy is that voters don't want things that are actually good for the voters, this should be part of our understanding [of] what democracy really is. If the problem is that the voters don't want to take advice that's just some person's opinion, 'ok, well, who cares?' Voters shouldn't have to listen to some person's random opinion. But if voters don't want to take [a] medicine that's actually good for the voters themselves, that should be part of our understanding of one of the weaknesses of democracy and something we should try to find a solution to. Maybe it's the solutions I present in my book, maybe it should be something else, but understanding the weaknesses of modern democracy is important to improving it.Tobi: A good illustration of that point is trade policy. I was just reading Matthew Klein and Michael Pettis's book where they basically say that trade wars are class wars.Garett: Uh-huh.Tobi: It's a reaction. And also it's a tactic for politicians to whip up voter sentiments and possibly win votes. How can people, again, I'm quite interested especially on the key issues that matters like central banking, like trade policy... things that affect the welfare and long-term prosperity, how can voters be a lot more informed to know that taking the choices out of my hands does not really mean I'm being oppressed?Garett: Yeah. This is really an important question. Part of it is that there is some evidence that just education in schools really changes people's minds. So when my colleague Bryan Caplan - he wrote a great book Myth of the Rational Voter, and he wrote a follow-up article where he looked at whether education or IQ scores were better predictors of pro-market attitudes. And he found that particularly on free trade, there was evidence that education itself, years of education was a better predictor of pro-trade attitudes than IQ. This is a signal and it's a reminder of something that made a lot of us believe which is that one of the things you learn in school is that people in other countries are good and, sometimes, they are great people and you should care about them. Also, you might learn some complicated ideas like the benefits of free trade. So education that is focused on teaching true and important facts about public policy, I think, can be a big part of this. But there is another element, another solution is just that we should think like a marginalist and go up the marginal cost curve. Push for a little less populism on topics where the voters aren't going to resist as much. Voters around the world have been pretty cool comparatively speaking with independent central banks - letting neutral banks lend out money and respond to financial crisis, (and) I think people can kind of understand why that's better than having one political party trying to lend to its buddies all the time. So, yeah, thinking in marginalist terms is important but also good public education really can improve policy if we teach true important economic ideas to people.Tobi: Let's let's go of the cuff a bit. Why did East Asia converge faster than the rest of the developing world?Garett: This is a great question. I mean part of it you could say that they actually had pretty high levels of productivity before say about 1800. This is part of what the deep roots literature shows, of Putterman and Weil and Bill Easterly at NYU - that, like, before 1500, before the great age of exploration, East Asia was pretty close to the technological frontier for the planet as a whole and so what's happened in the last 50 years in a way is a return to trend. That's not an answer. That's just more of a reminder that sometimes the more things change the more they stay the same. But when I look for the proximate cause, something more like a proximate cause, then I turned back to my first book, Hive Mind, which is that as far back as we have data on test scores, East Asia with particular countries we had good tests on in the ’60s and early 70s - Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, and soon after that Singapore - these countries were doing pretty well on standardised tests no matter how we measure it. And I think that good cognitive skills are [a] really important ingredient of being able to jump to the technological frontier, and I think that good cognitive skills are an important part of running a good competent government. Those aren't the whole story, fortunately, China's decision to turn away from communism was one of the best decisions in all of human history; that mattered a lot for well over a billion people. But the fact that as far as we can tell, test scores, human capital as currently measured was pretty high in East Asia in the sixties and early seventies, that gave them a good solid launching pad for modern prosperity.Tobi: You've hinted I think on your Twitter feed, I'm not sure anymore, that economists know the causes of long-run prosperity. What's your explanation for that?Garett: We're really good at the proximate causes, the very nearest causes. These are simple things that come from the Solow growth model. Robert Solow, [the] Nobel Laureate, just helped us think about where do GDP come from and having a lot of machines per worker, having a way for people to use them productively is really crucial. Machines aren't your enemy, they are your friend. A lot of technology isn't your enemy, it's your friend. But when we try to look one step behind that, say, why do some nations wind up with a lot more productivity and lot more capital per worker than others, then there's more debate but a lot of people would jump just straight to something like institutions. Some places have great institutions, good competent governance, neutral rule of law, and that means the capital is willing to flow from around the world to good places. I would also add on human capital however measured - whether it's years of education or test scores are both very quite robust predictors. So economists know what works and the simplest version is one I said years ago which is, have pretty high test scores and don't be communist, and you're probably going to be rich. So if a country can find a way to raise its test scores through better run schools, through better public health, and it can avoid the massive mistake of totalitarian communism, then it's got a pretty good future ahead of it.Tobi: In your view why did you choose test scores, I mean, what's the best case for cognitive ability in human capital and long-run prosperity ahead of all these other proximate causes you mentioned like institutions or geography or industrial policy and all these other factors?Garett: The simplest version is just that it's what shows up in the data when I and others have run very serious horse races. So Eric Hanushek, professor at Stanford, leading education researcher, he's found that test scores whether you call them IQ or math and science scores are very astonishingly robust predictors of national prosperity and they really beat out years of education. There's a lot of emphasis on trying to raise measured use of education but the problem is that we know that there is schooling and then there's schooling. So if you just get a diploma but nobody ever taught you anything, the schooling didn't really make you more productive. Another reason though is because of the well-known finding from psychology research which is that skills predict kills. People who are above average in math tend to be above average in verbal stuff. People who are above average at vocabulary test tend to be better at solving three-dimensional puzzles, and so for reasons that are still poorly understood there is what I call a DaVinci effect and what others call a g-factor across mental skills. So running a modern economy at a high-level involves kind of a little bit of everything. It's a little bit of a smorgasbord, it's a little bit of a casserole. It's probably unlikely to be the case that there is going to be this one simple thing that solves all the problems. What you really want is something that is equivalent of a Swiss army knife, something that's a mediocre tool for everything rather than one tool for just one thing. And cognitive skills whether you called them IQ or g or whatever seem to be this version of sort of Swiss army knife where there's a little bit of everything. So people who do better on standardised tests tend to be a little bit more patient. Groups of folks who do better on standardised tests tend to be more cooperative, they're more likely to see the invincible hand and support market-friendly policies, they are more likely to be tolerant of others who are unlike them and these are all great things for a nation. So like I said, running a modern economy near the frontier of productivity involves a lot of little things - low corruption, competent governance, foresight, voters who understand the benefits of trade; the one thing that I can get us a lot of all those little things is higher cognitive skills.Tobi: You wrote a paper a few years ago which I like very much...Garett: Thank you.Tobi: O-ring sectors and Foolproof sectors. And if I understand your model correctly (and you're welcome to set me straight here)... so thinking about this paper and this model, if I am a high-skilled worker in Nigeria, for example, overall you're saying the returns to skill for my education and my skill level is marginal compared to a low-skilled worker. But if I move to the United States of America where obviously there are a lot more high-skilled workers than in Nigeria, the returns to my skill will still be marginal but then there's this huge gains at the national level between both countries that are pretty large, can you explain how that works?Garett: Yeah, so I'm building here on the work of Michael Kremer who just won the Nobel prize last year. He wrote a great paper about the O-ring theory of economic development. He said that a lot of economic tasks in modern economies, especially the richest economies, are kind of like building a space shuttle where if you make one mistake, even in a very complex process of launching a space shuttle, the space shuttle tend to blow up killing everyone on board. This is actually why the space shuttle challenger was destroyed because of the failure of an O-ring (basically a big piece of big rubber band) that was an important part of keeping the rocket safe. So one small failure can destroy the value of an entire product, of course, that's true with a lot of things that we value like smartphones, automobile transmissions, one broken link can destroy the whole thing. Thing is that economists without even realising it, we use another model, routinely, that's not O-ring often without thinking about it - we kind of assumed that workers of different skill levels can get to be mushed together and it's nice to have skilled workers, but maybe you can throw maybe two high-skilled workers and three low-skilled workers, maybe they are perfect substitutes for each other. You know, just throw more bodies at it and eventually the job will get done, there are certainly jobs like that. So part of what I did and really my contribution in this paper, the O-ring sector and the Foolproof sector, was to say 'what if some parts of the economy work like Michael Kremer's world where things like building a space shuttle or smartphone? Not if other things are like the way economists normally think about the world, the Foolproof sector - where if you throw enough people at it eventually the job will get done.' And I said 'what if workers have to decide which of these two sectors they are going to work in?' So let me think about you as an example... high-skilled worker, and you're trying to decide what sector you're going to work in. Well, one of the great ideas in economics is that you're going to go to where the pay is highest, ignoring all the other complications for your life, and so really the net message is that there's always going to be some combination of workers balancing between the two sectors. So if low-skilled workers are superabundant and high-skilled workers are scarce, just about all of us are going to be taking on these foolproof tasks where perfection, exact precision is not crucial. And if high-skilled workers are really abundant, most of us will be working on O-ring type tasks but there will always be some of us, sort of, in-between. This helps explain why the capital goods, hi-tech goods are made in just a few places in the world and in particular, they're usually made in places where the workers are really really expensive. You would think that firms will try to find the cheapest workers possible for any task but instead hi-tech manufacturing, especially cutting-edge hi-tech manufacturing, tends to happen in countries that are pretty high wage. The only thing that can explain this, if people are rational, is that it must be critical, it must be crucial to have high-skilled workers working on those tasks. So one of the lessons of this is that lower-skilled workers can find something really useful to do in a high wage country because if they come to a high wage country, they are competing against a lot of other high-skill workers, so all they have to do is be an okay substitute for that high-skilled worker in some tasks, maybe it's mowing lawns, maybe it's doing routine legal work and all of a sudden those workers can earn a lot more than they would in their home country. So the O-ring-Foolproof paper is in a way an important message for the value of low-skilled workers in high wage countries, but it also helps explain why cutting edge, frontier technology innovation only happens in the highest skilled countries where workers are super expensive.Tobi: The national returns to skill, how does it work with these two sectors?Garett: Well, there is an element of, sometimes, the real world is more complicated than the model, and that's, of course, true here. I have to say that I suspect there is a critical mass element to high-skilled workers. For instance, if I can bring a million of Japan's best engineers to a lower-skilled country, a million of them could run a lot of fantastic factories, be great workers and end up giving a lot of great employment opportunities to lower-skilled folks, so there is this element of...outside the model of... a critical mass element. But the O-ring-Foolproof story is a reminder that high-skilled workers who are in relatively low-skilled countries are often going to be, like, unable to make use of their full potential. Being able to have an O-ring sector of your own to go work in is really where the magic happens of economic prosperity. The greatest things that are happening and the way that economic frontiers are being built is in these O-ring sectors, and, to me, it's a reminder that this is a case for the brain drain. A case that the brain drain actually helps the world as a whole. Brain drain issues are complicated and there are lots of forces pushing both ways but I want to emphasise that there is this positive element to the brain drain which is getting high-skilled workers into countries that can make great use of high-skilled workers really helps the whole world. Has Michael Clemens has pointed out, one benefit of that is that migrants who go from low-skilled to high-skilled countries send back a lot of remittances and those remittances are super valuable. I'd like to emphasise another point, which is getting those high-skilled workers from low average-skilled countries to higher average-skilled countries means that they can contribute to the growth of ideas which makes the global pie bigger.Tobi: You sort of preempted where I was going with that. There was also this essay by Michael Clemens and I think Justin Sandefur about this brain drain issue where they sort of asserted that another element to the brain drain issue that the incentive to migrate and earn more in high wage countries leads to more production of high-skilled workers even in low-wage countries. So Nigeria exports a lot of doctors to the UK, it means a lot more students would want to be doctors so that they can migrate to the UK or wherever where they can earn a lot more than they would in their home countries. Now, here is my question: isn't there a sort of negative effect to this in that their home countries get stuck in the poverty trap... a lot of these high-growth sectors never gets built and some of these countries just depend on remittances which can be pretty tricky?Garett: Yeah. This is a hard problem. Another problem with the brain drain is that it means that the government which really needs a lot of high-skilled workers to basically run competent bureaucracies and manage difficult technical questions, a lot of those folks are gone. They've gone to move to other countries where they can earn a lot more. So I don't want to pretend that the brain drain issues are simple to resolve. But I think that the point you're making, I tend to think of it as less of a problem because people are very reluctant to move. There's a lot of evidence that people are reluctant to move from their home country and they need a really big wage premium. So if things were even sort of mediocre, if there were some moderately hi-tech positions in the home country, you would have very high rates of retention. I think that's pretty clear from the evidence from the fact that people are very reluctant to move. If they can find any excuse to stay, they stay. That's speaking a little informally but I think the data backs that up. Also though, there is this element of where the threat of exit does make home countries behave a little better. The fact that some people might leave does make a home country government say: well, we want to make ourselves more inviting. If we think about what's happened in China (to give an extreme example) over the last few decades, there's been a lot of brain drain from China as Chinese graduates, high-skilled workers often, have moved to many different countries across Asia and across Europe and North America, and one of the reasons that the Chinese government wants to be somewhat open, somewhat...wants to be unlike its totalitarian past and more like [its] authoritarian present is because they want to feel like they can come back. So the threat of exit does discipline national governments in an important way that we shouldn't forget. Brain drain means it's harder to build these hi-tech sectors that you're pointing out, but a brain drain also gives those home country governments a better incentive to behave well. I think of this as a sort of Tiebout voting with your feet story which economies should always be open to, that people voting with their feet sends a very powerful message to governments and informal and formal evidence, I think, backs up that. Tobi: Can national IQ be deliberately raised on a scale that matters? I know you talked about nutrition in hive mind. Also, I look at things like assortative mating and other things but can it really happen on a scale that moves the needle on national prosperity?Garett: This is a great question. I feel like one reason I wrote Hive Mind was to get more people thinking about the very question you asked. Like, my comparative advantage is what does IQ cause rather than what causes IQ? But I believe the Flynn Effect is real. I believe [it is], at least, substantially real. The Flynn Effect is as you know, but your listeners may not, is the longtime rise intelligence scores that's been documented around the world. Public health interventions, people getting healthier and living longer lives, I think that obviously is increasing people's cognitive skills (like, the public health element has just got to be real). I'm less confident but I'm still fairly confident that good education raises cognitive skills big enough to move the needle. And the third one is this broadly cultural story which is really Flynn, I want to attribute this to Flynn himself. My colleague Tyler Cowen and I talked about this in our podcast back in January when I was on Conversations with Tyler - IQs in East Germany rose at least five points, maybe much more, in the decade or so after the end of communism. I think there are these cultural influences on intelligence that are not just teaching to the tests, there is something about a modern open society that I think challenges the mind and makes it work better in a wide variety of settings. So I want to stick with those three right now that public health interventions are first order, good broad-based education is suggestively very important but I can't say conclusively, and then third; there is more evidence I have to say for this big cultural effect - that when your country becomes more like Popperian open society, more [a] mixture of capitalist and loosely democratic, people seem to use their brains in different ways on a regular basis that shows up on the IQ tests. Tobi: Why and I'm sure you must have experienced this maybe in discussing your work or maybe on social media and in other ways. Why is intelligence still a taboo subject so to speak? When I sit with my friends and we talk about development and I bring up Hive Mind...and people bellyache about 'oh, we can't do this or that' and you mildly suggest that 'hey guys, have you considered that our national IQ is pretty low and maybe, maybe that's why we can't get some of these things done.' There's a natural push back that you get. Why is intelligent still such a taboo subject?Garett: I think part of it is because people assume that when you're talking about intelligence you're talking about something that is supposedly a hundred percent or nearly a hundred percent genetic and something that is essential to a person in some very deep way. So I think it's very essentialist as an explanation. I think that's a mistake, I think the evidence does not support that position. And here's a test of it, because instead of using the word "intelligence", use the word "national test scores" and you talk about how education can raise test scores in an important way, then people get much less defensive about it. People are much more open to these very same ideas, the very same channels. So I think a big part of it is that intelligence sounds like something that is intrinsic to a person, unchangeable, nearly immutable and so any ascription of causation to that is personal. So I think discussing it in a Flynnian way, the way that James Flynn has, which is very evidence-based (and) where we think of intelligence as being something like an intermediate outcome... it's not the deep root cause of everything, it's an intermediate outcome that in turn is caused by other stuff. I think that opens people up to thinking about how people's minds create the economy we live in. I'd much rather talk about how our minds create the world around us than talk about what some deep, supposedly essential thing called an IQ score. Of course, the history of the misuse of IQ test is important. The mistakes and evils that have occurred in the name of intelligence research are important. But there are many other things that have been used in evil ways in the past and we cut them slack, and democracy will be, of course, one of those. But I think something about intelligence makes people think it's intrinsic, it's basically immutable and so you're telling people to despair. And if there's one thing to think about when thinking about human cognitive skills is we shouldn't think about despair, we should think about trying to find ways to improve all of the nations in the world not just the lucky few.Tobi: That's interesting. Tell us about what you're working on right now what's your next big project.Garett: I'm on sabbatical and finishing up right now and I'm writing my third book in what I call my Singapore trilogy. And that's going to be a book really about the deep roots literature which I'd mentioned earlier. I'm interested in why the past is prologue. Hive Mind is a book, in a way, about the short-run. About almost proximate causes. 10% Less Democracy is a book about the rich countries. My third book is going to be a book about the whole world and a book about persistence. A book about why the more things change, the more they stay the same. So, again, this is going to draw on the deep roots literature, it's going to draw on the late Alberto Alesina's work on cultural persistence - how migrants carry their attitudes from their home country to the country they move to to a large degree. It's been a lot of fun to write this book because it's so data-driven and it's based on a lot of research that is very influential within economics and not influential at all outside economics and my job is to change that.Tobi: You've been an advocate so speak of high-skilled migration.Garett: Uh-huh.Tobi: How does your argument square with people like Bryan Caplan and who call for open borders, I mean, just let them come?Garett: So Caplan's comic book where I make an appearance on open borders, that's a great fun read I think people should look at that and give his ideas careful attention. I like to remind people that institutions do not just create themselves ex nihilo. That they are actually created by people and I just really want people to think about that a lot. High-skilled immigration means bringing in more informed voters and low-skilled immigration means, 'well, we really need to put a lot of effort into educating those folks' and hope that they support great institutions that will keep the country rich for a very long time. Fortunately, there is a lot of evidence that even the most optimistic supporters of open borders tend to emphasise that high-skilled immigrants have a lot of positive externalities, it's easy to make that case, and less skilled immigrants have... they are more like a wash, there is probably a plus in the short to medium run but closer to a wash than with high-skilled immigration. So I want people to think hard about where good institutions come from and if people coming to your country are going to support better institutions, that should be great news. And if people [who] come to your country are likely to tear it down, you have a little bit more concern. Caplan addresses this in his book in a number of ways with his keyhole solutions. But I think the next 20 to 30 years of both academic research and historical experience will let us know which way low-skilled immigration is going to shape the government of rich countries. Tobi: Charter Cities. Are you optimistic, are you a fan? How best to think about it from a skill and immigration perspective?Garett: Yes, so, Charter Cities which is an idea that's often associated with the Nobel Laureate Paul Romer. The idea that countries should create small little areas within there that are governed by another country's rules. A country that's well-governed, frontier. So say a poor country could say 'hey, we're going to let Singapore run a small part of our country or let Singaporean legislation or Singaporean case law hold sway in this part of our country. I tend to think that the biggest barrier to charter cities as the revenge of democracy. It's very hard to avoid what voters want. I would like to believe that countries with great institutions could franchise their institutions to other poor countries, but the problem is that institutions are created by people and we need to figure out why the institutions are weak in the first country (the country that's starting the charter city). There's a pretty good chance you're going to get a revenge of democracy there and a reversion to the old ways. Some of my GMU colleagues and I have joked that Singapore should franchise it's government to a lot of countries the way McDonald's franchises it's operating model. It would be great if we could do this but it's hard to avoid the norms of democracy especially when, as I note in 10% Less Democracy, some degree of democracy is really important to have. So Charter Cities being in tension with democracy, that's the real problem we have in making Charter Cities durable. I think the solution is to have moderate Charter Cities. Countries where, say, Singaporean law or Japanese law or South Korean law is the default but the local voters can overrule it with a two-thirds vote. Something like that might be much more durable than a full charter city solution. Starting with the default of some rich country's rules but let the local voters overturn it piece by piece and build that change into the original set of rules so that people don't feel like this is out of their control. Tobi: I'm going to ask you a very specific question. So, say, I win the election in Nigeria and I ask you 'hey, Garett, my country is going to be 300 million people in 2050, what are the policies that we can embark upon right now that can get us to a middle-income country over that time period', what would be your advice?Garett: I think my biggest piece of advice would be: find a way to become a credible, attractive place for massive amounts of high-skill immigration. How do I get five million people from China, a million and [a] half people from South Korea, two million people from America to move to Nigeria? Some of those folks will, perhaps, be people of Nigerian descent, people whose ancestors are Nigerian and who want to come back. Some of those folks will be folks who just saw that there is going to be some great tax deals, some great tax incentives to move back. I think people are policy and becoming an attractive place for high-skilled immigration like Singapore is a great way to make your country richer.Tobi: Thank you very much. I've been speaking with Economist Garett Jones and it's wonderful to have you Garett.Garett: It's been great talking with you, Tobi. This is a public episode. Get access to private episodes at www.ideasuntrapped.com/subscribe

My long term goal is to create a world where people can start countries. Like they start companies today.In this episode of Build The Future, we talk with Patri Friedman (@patrissimo), the founder of Pronomos Capital where they're supporting the development of charter cities and new forms of governance. In doing so, they're building the future of how new cities are creating, how they're run, and how they innovate. Key IdeasLaw as Code, Cites as Product — Similar to code, law can operate as an open source library or database of the best laws that people around the world are continually contributing to and adapting. As a result, the cities and governments that are built off of these laws will be best positioned to serve their people.Everything as Insurance — In these charter cities, insurance would be used as a way to control who is allowed to visit the city. Everyone may buy liability insurance based on the risk they pose given their past history, psychological profile, and assets they own. Rather than being discriminatory, the efficiency of markets could make this a very accurate model reducing and providing compensation for any harm or damage that occurs.Markets Eating the World — By creating more markets, such as a market for governments, competition between different ways of doing things will arise which forces those who want to be at the forefront to optimize and improve their solutions. Links:Follow Patri on Twitter (@patrissimo)Pronomos VCCharter Cities InstituteLearn MoreIf you're interested in learning more about the future of education or discussing these ideas, sign up for our weekly newsletter below where you'll receive deep dives into the future, new episode announcements, and opportunities to join in on discussions about the possibilities of tomorrow.

En el episodio 24 de SI, el podcast de Somos Innovación, Federico N. Fernández conversa con Paz Gómez respecto de las iniciativas innovadoras para la gobernanza privada. Específicamente acerca de las ZEDEs hondureñas y el proyecto de Ocean Builders en Panamá. Nuestra invitada: Paz Gómez (ECU) es analista de políticas en Econ Americas. Es cofundadora y coordinadora académica de Libre Razón, un grupo en Quito, Ecuador. Tiene una licenciatura en relaciones internacionales y ciencias políticas de la Universidad de San Francisco de Quito y estudia una maestría en moneda digital y blockchain de la Universidad de Nicosia. En redes pueden encontrarla en Twitter en @PazenLibertad y en las webs de Econ Americas (https://econamericas.com) y Libre Razón (https://www.librerazon.org). Lecturas vinculadas: Comenzar Tu Propia Ciudad: Una Vieja Nueva Idea (https://bit.ly/318I8dy) Seasteading Startup Docks in Panama (https://bit.ly/2BzIqPQ) Whatever Happened to Charter Cities in Honduras? (https://bit.ly/2zXUWIu) Somos Innovación en Redes: Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/innovacionsomos/ Twitter - https://twitter.com/LatAmInnovacion Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/SomosInnovacionLatAm/ LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/somos-innovaci%C3%B3n/ Web: SomosInnovacion.lat Acerca de Somos Innovación: Somos un grupo de individuos e instituciones que están convencidos que a través de soluciones innovadoras es cómo las personas se involucran en la resolución de problemas. Por ello, cuando los innovadores crean nuevas tecnologías o nuevos modelos de negocio, las mismas deberían permitirse por defecto. A menos que se pueda presentar un argumento muy sólido contra una nueva invención, el derecho a existir de las innovaciones debería ser siempre respetado. Son los consumidores quienes deben aprobarlas o rechazarlas en el mercado. La verdadera catástrofe es no permitir este proceso a través de excesos regulatorios o prohibiciones. El Futuro Llama.

Joining us on the show today is geopolitical strategist, speaker and author, Peter Zeihan! Our conversation spans a wide range of connected topics, centering on the immediate future facing the United States and the global economy, with particular attention given to the question of China. Peter holds a somewhat less common position on China's supposed power, arguing that the country is a paper tiger, waiting to ignite. He does a clear job of explaining this perspective and how so many casual theorists seem to have got it completely wrong. Drawing the argument back to the US, Peter then explains the stability, even in today's chaos, that the country has and by extending his scope to Europe and the Middle East, he shows the huge part that geography plays in the unfolding of political and economic power struggles. We discuss the examples of France and Germany, as well as outlying African countries and Peter underlines the central part that geography and access play in all of their destinies. Bringing the conversation firmly into the present, we then consider the role of technology and particularly the latest tech innovations in possibly disrupting the established order that Peter is describing. According to our guest, even AI and the rest of the digital revolution is not yet enough to overhaul the legacy of the industrial revolution and it will still take many further developments for this to occur. We get into the question of the global economy and the trajectories of the world's strongest currencies; again Peter demonstrates why America's positioning will allow it to be non-reliant on others, a definite strength moving into an uncertain age. For a fascinating chat, and a brilliantly articulated argument you may have not encountered before, join us on Charter Cities today! Key Points From This Episode: •   The coming global disorder and the focus of Peter's latest book Disunited Nations.  •   Considering different theories of the current global economy and trade.  •   Ideas of China's growing economic and militant power and the holes that exist in these theories. •   China's political immaturity and fallibility and what a spectacular fall might look like. •   The part that geography plays in the unfolding events in China and the rest of the world. •   Europe's outlook; geography and the areas that have historically lent themselves to control. •   The role of technology in disrupting the deterministic power of geography in European development. •   American geography and the coincidental advantage that it offers the country. •   The power of shale gas and how this can affect the US' need for involvement in foreign energy markets. •   A future where the US disengages from relationships with the rest of the world. •   The links between culture and geography and how this influences technological adoption. •   Technology and geography and what this combination means in a modern, AI context. •   The limits of the digital revolution in heralding a new age. •   The interesting example of India; population, poverty, positioning, and continuity.  •   Looking at the Saudi Arabian economy and their dysfunctional education and military systems. •   The broader Middle Eastern dynamic and looming conflicts. •   Expectations for Africa and the lasting effects of coronavirus on immigration. •   The two paths for Africa's continued industrialization and how they diverge. •   Currency flows, the ultimate power of the dollar, and the trajectory of other historically strong currencies. •   Human capital and looking to the examples of Israel and South Korea as outliers. •   Long-overdue shifts in the... Support this podcast

As the pandemic-driven recession tanks fiscal revenues, governments are seeing radical ideas such as charter cities with new eyes. Mark Lutter, founder and executive director of the Charter Cities Institute, argues for privately built and managed urban centers to attract investment and jobs. He believes charter cities have the potential to lift millions out of poverty in the developing world by fostering policy competition between jurisdictions. In this week’s segment with the Discovery Group, Jim Paterson, CEO of ValOre Metals (TSX-V: VO), outlines the 2020 exploration program for its platinum-group element project in Brazil.

As the pandemic-driven recession tanks fiscal revenues, governments are seeing radical ideas such as charter cities with new eyes. Mark Lutter, founder and executive director of the Charter Cities Institute, argues for privately built and managed urban centers to attract investment and jobs. He believes charter cities have the potential to lift millions out of poverty in the developing world by fostering policy competition between jurisdictions. In this week’s segment with the Discovery Group, Jim Patterson, CEO of ValOre Metals (TSX-V: VO), outlines the 2020 exploration program for its platinum-group element project in Brazil. Show notes: http://goldnewsletter.com/podcast/charter-cities-investment-development/

Read Suthen's 10,000-word essay here. We live in a world of unprecedented urbanization. Cities have brought society huge rewards, including record-high economic growth and value creation. Yet, cities are in a world of trouble. Their archaic infrastructures are showing cracks and their streets are congested to the point of being un-drivable. Who should we look to in order to tackle these problems? One surprising answer that I will explore in this essay—Walt Disney. Disney had everything figured out from innovative features, special legislation to even having a PR strategy. Despite his untimely passing, we have a lot to gain from applying his ideas to today's projects whether its the Charter Cities movement or something else. As Marc Andreessen said, it's time to build. Who better to learn from than Walt Disney himself?______________________________________________________________ Suthen is an avid learner - writing for his weekly newsletter where he shares lessons relating to personal growth, building companies and becoming financial independent. He also hosts a podcast where he interviews up-and-coming leaders across all fields, giving his audience a perspective into a diverse range of careers. During the week, Suthen leads a corporate development and M&A team at Constellation Software. Suthen is incredibly passionate about understanding how different systems work - particularly in urban environments. He's always up for a conversation to learn, build and share interesting ideas on anything related to cities, building businesses or personal growth. You can connect with him on Twitter, website or newsletter.

For our first full episode of the Charter Cities Podcast, Mark is joined by Gyude Moore to discuss his experiences in and the history of Liberia, and what this story can teach us about charter cities in Africa and emerging markets. Gyude takes a brief look at the defining moments in Liberian history for this discussion, mentioning the population that arrived from America in the 1800s and the civil war he was born into at the end of the 20th century. We hear more from his personal story of moving to the US for college and then returning to a governmental position thanks to the Scott Family Fellows program and how this turned into a role as the Minister of Public Works. Gyude comments on the characteristics of the Liberian government at this time and the systems and attitudes that halted progress and reduced funds. From there, we move into Gyude's main passion and argument, that paved roads make up the backbone of any economy, a technology that has become completely commonplace in most of the Western world and the dearth of which results in much of Africa's economic stagnation. Gyude makes the connection between the US' reliance on the road network for so much of their strong economy and then compares this with Africa's road infrastructure, concluding that Africa can never progress without better, paved access between cities and hubs. The later part of our conversation moves into a discussion on Chinese involvement in Africa, the Belt and Roads Initiative and how Charter Cities might aid the propulsion of African economies in a way that other means might not. Gyude is a passionate and experienced planning mind, with lots to share from his native Liberia and beyond, so tune in to get it all! Key Points From This Episode: •   The influence of the end of the American slave trade on Liberian history and culture. •   Gyude's early years, growing up during the Liberian civil war. •   Comparing the encroaching civil war in Liberia to the current spread of the coronavirus. •   The influx of people into Monrovia at that time and the strain it placed on infrastructure. •   Gyude's move to the US for college and landing in Baltimore to an unexpected reception. •   Heading home to Liberia and the program that recruited Gyude to work with the state. •   The period in which Gyude took up a position as Minister of Public Works. •   Entrepreneurial spirit in government; aspirational work in the public sector in Liberia. •   Gyude's experiences of corruption in Liberia's emerging market. •   Cultural and mindset shifts for better long term benefits and installing systems in chaos. •   The technology of paved roads and what it enables a government and population to achieve. •   Gyude's idea for the incentivized development of cheaper materials for paved roads. •   Enforcing accountability for government projects, initiatives and funds.  •   Gyude's critique of the Belt and Road Initiative and estimates of necessary funds. •   Assessing the involvement of China in Africa and the debt that is already present. •   The importance of planned cities in the lives of citizens and economic growth. •   Looking to the example of Asia and what Africa can and cannot learn from their model. •   The core of what appeals to Gyude about charter cities and how they can help. •   Risks that accompany the charter city model and the power of the host country. •   Skill sharing for the benefit of a local population; the rise in Africans hired by China. Links Mentioned in Today's Episode: https://twitter.com/gyude_moore (Gyude Moore on Twitter) https://www.chartercitiesinstitute.org/ (Charter Cities Institute)... Support this podcast

We are so happy to welcome you to the Charter Cities Podcast, where we highlight the different facets of building a charter city. Through this platform, we hope that listeners will not only gain a deep understanding of charter cities from urban planning to politics and finance but also the necessary steps that it takes to build them. In this episode, we do things a bit differently, with Mark Lutter, founder of Charter Cities Institute, and host of the podcast getting put in the hot seat. His CCI colleague, Tamara Winter, interviews him on a range of topics, both directly and not so directly, related to charter cities. We learn more about the mission of CCI and why Mark believes that charter cities are a good model for economic development. While Paul Romer, famed economist, unsuccessfully tried to get charter cities off the ground, Mark explains why he believes CCI's approach will ultimately be more successful. Mark also sheds light on how charter cities are complementary to but different from economic zones. While these delineated areas are often politically motivated, the vision behind the charter city is much broader than that. CCI hopes to contribute to aspects such as site selection, urban planning, and governance, and in doing so, take a holistic approach to building a new city. Mark also discusses what it takes to build governance capacity, some of the charter city constraints, and how partnerships helped him launch CCI. We learn more about Mark as well, from some of his favorite books, the African cuisine that's made the biggest impression on him, and how he has carried the lessons from his federal bureaucratic parents with him. We couldn't have hoped for a better first episode, and we hope you join us for the journey to come. Tune in today! Key Points From This Episode: •   The two ways that CCI's attempt at creating charter cities is different from Paul Romer's. •   Why Mark is skeptical about using services as a means of building charter cities. •   Find out how charter cities are similar to and different from special economic zones. •   How regulatory arbitrage can produce favorable outcomes and what CCI is doing about it. •   Charter cities need good urban planning and infrastructure in conjunction with good governance. •   Two of Mark's favorite books that he's read related to places he has been. •   How growing up with parents who worked in federal bureaucracy has shaped Mark. •   What industrial policy is and what charter cities should be cognizant of when pursuing it. •   Why, despite admiring China's Belt and Road Initiative, Mark is cautious about it. •   An overview of Honduras' charter legislation and what went wrong in execution. •   Find out what it would take to build a government from scratch and successful examples. •   Which historical leaders would have been good charter city founders? •   Learn more about the constraints that charter cities face and how they're likely to change. •   Why Mark would opt to build charter cities in Canada rather than the US. •   Mark's motivation for founding CCI and his proudest CCI achievements thus far. •   Find out about the two key partnerships that helped Mark launch CCI. •   Why the state shouldn't be trusted with industrial policy. •   What Silicon Valley is not understanding about politics and how they can change it. •   Mark's favorite non-charter city books and what we can learn from historical eras. •   An overview of the Hanseatic League and how it can be used as a governance model today. •   How Mark's thinking about charter cities has changed since founding CCI and how listeners can get involved.   Links Mentioned Support this podcast

Mark Lutter is the Founder of Charter Cities Institute. The Charter Cities Institute is a nonprofit dedicated to advancing human flourishing by building the ecosystem for charter cities worldwide.   Brought to you by Haberland Group (HaberlandGroup.com) and Hardy Haberland's Programs (HardyHaberland.com).   This podcast is brought to you by Haberland Group. Haberland Group is a global provider of marketing solutions. With multidisciplinary teams in major world markets, our holding companies specialize in advertising, branding, communications planning, digital marketing, media, podcasting, public relations, as well as specialty marketing. If you are looking for a world-class partner to work on marketing programs, go to HaberlandGroup.com and contact us.   This podcast is also brought to you by Hardy Haberland's Programs. Hardy provides educational programs for high performers who want world-class achievement, true fulfillment, and lasting transformation in their lives. He also provides consulting for established brands and businesses that have generated a minimum of $3 million in annual sales. If you need a catalyst for transformation and a strategist for success at the highest level, go to HardyHaberland.com and apply.   If you enjoyed this episode, please consider to rate, review, and subscribe on Apple Podcasts/iTunes. It takes less than 60 seconds and it really makes a difference. Rate, review, and subscribe at HardyHaberland.com/iTunes.

Mark Lutter is the Founder of Charter Cities Institute. The Charter Cities Institute is a nonprofit dedicated to advancing human flourishing by building the ecosystem for charter cities worldwide.   If you enjoyed this episode, please consider to rate, review, and subscribe on Apple Podcasts/iTunes. It takes less than 60 seconds and it really makes a difference. Rate, review, and subscribe at HardyHaberland.com/iTunes.

Here are the links to today's episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7rwSMCZcaY https://habana.ai/ https://www.pronomos.vc/ https://www.villageglobal.vc/podcast/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFb5gosfKJY&t=22s https://marketurbanism.com/2016/12/27/are-charter-cities-a-solution/ --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/matt-gaboury/support

Patri Friedman (@patrissimo) of Pronomos Capital joins Erik on this episode. They Discuss:- Why now for charter cities- The role of Incrementalism versus disruption in creating charter cities- Request for startups- Which geographies will be the most important for the charter city movement- How will geopolitics affect the growth of charter cities- What’s going to be the spark that allows charter cities to take off- The role of venture capital in funding charter cities- How will national identities evolve over time- How crypto networks will play a role in real world governance- The future of nation states- The decline of religion and its role in society- How will charter cities affect equality - When to overcome evolutionary instincts versus when to accept them- What’s the future of cities and suburbs- The future of Silicon ValleyThanks for listening — if you like what you hear, please review us on your favorite podcast platform.Check us out on the web at villageglobal.vc or get in touch with us on Twitter @villageglobal.Venture Stories is brought to you by Village Global, and is hosted by co-founder and partner, Erik Torenberg.

Patri Friedman (@patrissimo) of Pronomos Capital joins Erik on this episode. They Discuss:- Why now for charter cities- The role of Incrementalism versus disruption in creating charter cities- Request for startups- Which geographies will be the most important for the charter city movement- How will geopolitics affect the growth of charter cities- What’s going to be the spark that allows charter cities to take off- The role of venture capital in funding charter cities- How will national identities evolve over time- How crypto networks will play a role in real world governance- The future of nation states- The decline of religion and its role in society- How will charter cities affect equality - When to overcome evolutionary instincts versus when to accept them- What’s the future of cities and suburbs- The future of Silicon ValleyThanks for listening — if you like what you hear, please review us on your favorite podcast platform.Check us out on the web at villageglobal.vc or get in touch with us on Twitter @villageglobal.Venture Stories is brought to you by Village Global, and is hosted by co-founder and partner, Erik Torenberg.

In this conversation with Mark Lutter, we dive deep into the world of Charter City development. Hope you enjoy this podcast!

Iyin Aboyeji, Co-founder of Andela & Flutterwave and Mark Lutter, Founder & Executive Director of Charter Cities Institute join us to discuss the concept of how Charter Cities can drive economic development in frontier markets around the world.

The theme that connects both of the interviews in today’s episode is the value of planning for the future. That can be as simple as thinking about the ways that driverless cars will affect the car insurance industry, as Ian Adams from TechFreedom discusses. Or it can be as big as Dr. Mark Lutter, Founder of the Center for Innovative Governance Research, advocating for charter cities, a place where the best urban ideas can be implemented from the outset rather than waiting for something to go wrong and having to struggle against regulatory inertia. What is the latest regulatory news for driverless cars? What challenges do autonomous vehicles present to the insurance industry? Why is California such an innovative space? Will there be a migration pattern away from California? What is a charter city? What leads to economic growth?Further Reading:Creating the Charter Cities Ecosystem, written by Mark LutterTechquake: The Biggest Threat to California’s Tech-Sector May Lie Directly Beneath its Feet, written by Ian AdamsCalifornia Needs to Hit the Brakes on Minimum Staffing Requirements for Automated Vehicles, written by Ian AdamsRelated Content:When Will We Get Fully Autonomous Cars?, Building Tomorrow PodcastFlying Taxis: Cleared for Takeoff?, Building Tomorrow PodcastIs China Beating the U.S. at Innovation?, Building Tomorrow Podcast See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

We're pretty optimistic about innovation here at Techdirt, but it isn't an automatic good thing all by itself: implementation and intention matters, and that means political entanglements and complicated questions about governance, and that calls for big, new ideas. This week, we're joined by Tamara Winter from the Center for Innovative Governance Research to discuss new experiments in government like charter cities and special autonomous zones. Also, learn more about: Shenzhen - https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/2501/564470PUB0buil10Box349496B01PUBLIC1.pdf?sequen Val D'Europe - https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/08/03/disney-has-built-a-pseudo-paris-near-paris The original vision for Disney World -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLCHg9mUBag&t=920s

Governance matters. Policy change quickly took China from famine to fortune; Singapore from swamps to skyscrapers; and Hong Kong from fishing village to financial centre. Unfortunately, many governments are hard to reform and — to put it mildly — it's not easy to found a new country. This has prompted poverty-fighters and political dreamers to look for creative ways to get new and better 'pseudo-countries' off the ground. The poor could then voluntary migrate to in search of security and prosperity. And innovators would be free to experiment with new political and legal systems without having to impose their ideas on existing jurisdictions. The 'seasteading movement' imagined founding new self-governing cities on the sea, but obvious challenges have kept that one on the drawing board. Nobel Prize winner and World Bank President Paul Romer suggested 'charter cities', where a host country would volunteer for another country with better legal institutions to effectively govern some of its territory. But that idea too ran aground for political, practical and personal reasons. Now Mark Lutter and Tamara Winter, of The Center for Innovative Governance Research (CIGR), are reviving the idea of 'charter cities', with some modifications. Gone is the idea of transferring sovereignty. Instead these cities would look more like the 'special economic zones' that worked miracles for Taiwan and China among others. But rather than keep the rest of the country's rules with a few pieces removed, they hope to start from scratch, opting in to the laws they want to keep, in order to leap forward to "best practices in commercial law." Links to learn more, summary and full transcript. Rob on The Good Life: Andrew Leigh in Conversation — on 'making the most of your 80,000 hours'. The project has quickly gotten attention, with Mark and Tamara receiving funding from Tyler Cowen's Emergent Ventures (discussed in episode 45) and winning a Pioneer tournament. Starting afresh with a new city makes it possible to clear away thousands of harmful rules without having to fight each of the thousands of interest groups that will viciously defend their privileges. Initially the city can fund infrastructure and public services by gradually selling off its land, which appreciates as the city flourishes. And with 40 million people relocating to cities every year, there are plenty of prospective migrants. CIGR is fleshing out how these arrangements would work, advocating for them, and developing supporting services that make it easier for any jurisdiction to implement. They're currently in the process of influencing a new prospective satellite city in Zambia. Of course, one can raise many criticisms of this idea: Is it likely to be taken up? Is CIGR really doing the right things to make it happen? Will it really reduce poverty if it is? We discuss those questions, as well as: • How did Mark get a new organisation off the ground, with fundraising and other staff? • What made China's 'special economic zones' so successful? • What are the biggest challenges in getting new cities off the ground? • How did Mark find and hire Tamara? How did he know this was a good idea? • Should people care about this idea if they aren't focussed on tackling poverty? • Why aren't people already doing this? • Why does Tamara support more people starting families? Get this episode by subscribing to our podcast on the world’s most pressing problems and how to solve them: type 80,000 Hours into your podcasting app. The 80,000 Hours Podcast is produced by Keiran Harris.

Mark Lutter is the founder and executive director of the Center for Innovative Governance, where he studies, advocates for, and helps build charter cities across the globe. He joins Michael Gibson to discuss what charter cities are, why you would want to start one, how to start one, and what the future of charter cities looks like. Visit medium.com/1517 for show notes and additional info on this month's episode.

Mark Lutter (@MarkLutter), founder and executive director of the Centre For Innovative Governance Research, joins Erik on this special two-hour episode to talk about charter cities. They start off by discussing how Mark became interested in the idea of charter cities. Mark explains the two main schools of thought when it comes to new forms of governance and talks about his philosophy for figuring out the best way to govern and how that involves charter cities.He talks about the recent interest from Silicon Valley in charter cities and some of the projects that have been going on in the space. Mark talks about seasteading and why the promise of that project wasn’t realized. He points out that there are over 200 masterplanned cities being built around the world.Mark explains the differences between charter cities and special economic zones and the main models for charter cities and special economic zones. Erik asks what forms of government Mark would advocate for if he was building a brand new charter city from scratch. Mark talks about the reasons for avoiding centralized planning and reasoning from first principles and instead running experiments to see what kinds of phenomena emerge. They also have a lightning round where Erik names an individual and Mark explains where he agrees and disagrees with that individual’s thinking.Thanks for listening — if you like what you hear, please review us on your favorite podcast platform. Check us out on the web at villageglobal.vc or get in touch with us on Twitter @villageglobal.Venture Stories is brought to you by Village Global, is hosted by co-founder and partner, Erik Torenberg and is produced by Brett Bolkowy.

Mark Lutter (@MarkLutter), founder and executive director of the Centre For Innovative Governance Research, joins Erik on this special two-hour episode to talk about charter cities. They start off by discussing how Mark became interested in the idea of charter cities. Mark explains the two main schools of thought when it comes to new forms of governance and talks about his philosophy for figuring out the best way to govern and how that involves charter cities.He talks about the recent interest from Silicon Valley in charter cities and some of the projects that have been going on in the space. Mark talks about seasteading and why the promise of that project wasn’t realized. He points out that there are over 200 masterplanned cities being built around the world.Mark explains the differences between charter cities and special economic zones and the main models for charter cities and special economic zones. Erik asks what forms of government Mark would advocate for if he was building a brand new charter city from scratch. Mark talks about the reasons for avoiding centralized planning and reasoning from first principles and instead running experiments to see what kinds of phenomena emerge. They also have a lightning round where Erik names an individual and Mark explains where he agrees and disagrees with that individual’s thinking.Thanks for listening — if you like what you hear, please review us on your favorite podcast platform. Check us out on the web at villageglobal.vc or get in touch with us on Twitter @villageglobal.Venture Stories is brought to you by Village Global, is hosted by co-founder and partner, Erik Torenberg and is produced by Brett Bolkowy.