Why Startups Condense in America

bariswheel writes "The controversial genius developer/writer/entertainer Paul Graham writes an insightful piece on Why Startups Condense in America. Here's the skinny: "The US allows immigration, it is a rich country, it is not (yet) a police state, the universities are better, you can fire people, work is less identified with employment, it is not too fussy, it has a large domestic market, it has venture funding, and it has dynamic typing for careers. Inquire for details within."

Comments

Weak stereotyping

[amightywind]

There are national characteristics - the fact that the World Cup is repeatedly won by a small group of nations that manage to maintain a style over years also shows this.

Horse dung. The World Cup only highlights that America's best atheletes play American football, baseball, and basketball. If they played soccer (your football) their size and speed would transform the game.

But the US style has it's problems. US companies wind up as slaves to the markets and often damage their engineering skills. The problems in the US car industry show this.

It is called global competition. Car industry is down, aerospace, computer technology, industrial equipment are way up. By in large we compete very well.

While the German car industry has come up with fuel injection, ABS braking and constant four wheel drive over the past 20 years the US industry has invented the cupholder and the SUV.

Don't forget satellite radio and Onstar!.

Likewise, somehow the Japanese are great craftsmen. This skill is reflected in the quality of Toyota's manufacturing and the remarkable qualities in Japanese portable electronics. Apple may have invented the ipod, but the walkman and the transistor radio all came out Japan.

You criticize the American car industry but you fail to recognise that Japanese electronics are in dramatic decline. Be fair.

It's good that the world is like this. Countries specialise. But presuming that one companies system is superior for everything to all the others is silly. The best is what is created when the systems work together - as in the computer industry where the parts are made in Asia and the software comes from all over the world, and in particular from the US.

If it made sense to specialize you wouldn't have an EU. The whole idea is to have a widely diverse economy that is immune from downturns in any single industry. Your ideas are totally antiquated and discredited.

Fuzzy logic

[Cannelloni]

1) the US allows immigration: Hardly! It is extremely hard even for skilled people to get a work visa to the US. This was true maybe around 1920, but not any more. 2) it is a rich country: Not a contributing factor. So is Europe and some Asian economies. 3) it is not (yet) a police state. True, but some people are certainly at work trying to improve that. 4) the universities are better: Not true. Some US universities are great, many are not up to European os Asian standards. 5) you can fire people: You can in most countries, or simply hire them as temp workers. 6) work is less identified with employment: What does this mean, exactly? That "temp work" or being a freelancer is atually work too...? 7) it is not too fussy: In what sense? What does this mean, exactly? 8) it has a large domestic market: True, but so does the EU or China. 9) it has venture funding: Yes, that is probably the main contributor. 1) it has dynamic typing for careers: Another one of those fuzzy statements. What does "dynamic typing" really mean?