askchapo

We've previously discussed the recent book Abundance and adherents recognizing that China has exceeded the US in terms of the metrics that actually matter: which country has the infrastructure and is at the technological frontier. Adherents effectively contend that capitalism can be sufficiently reformed to let the flow — and while providing a damning critique of US incapability to build any infrastructure whatsoever (e.g., California's million dollar toilet, housing crisis, and continued high-speed rail failures), still seem to contend copying China wholesale is not the best system because China moving too fast brings its own kind of issues (e.g., short-term visibility projects solely for local officials to get promoted, corruption to blame corporations for actual local governance failures, etc.) and following science with disregard for ethical/environmental/etc. consequences citing things like the one-child policy.

We’re gonna win so much, you may even get tired of winning. And you’ll say, ‘Please, please. It’s too much winning. We can’t take it anymore, Mr. President, it’s too much.’ And I’ll say, ‘No it isn’t. We have to keep winning. We have to win more!’

— , probably

I'm assuming this is going to be a mainstream Dem candidate position, whether or not they actually claim to have any positions, and more importantly need to do some dunking IRL, but keeping in mind the Mao quote, would appreciate those who have investigated the issues further to speak on them. A year later, what are your favorite internal critiques of the Abundance lib position, even if we assume Dems will actually do something and try to implement such an agenda?