Home
One of the biggest problems with the world is that we're bound by so many legacy systems. For example, it's hard to deal with global warming because there are so many entrenched interests. It's problematic to get power from where it can best be generated to where people live. The tax system is a mess. Banking is a hodgepodge of regulations and products glued together. I could go on. The point is that anything that has been around for awhile is a complicated and inconvenient mess compared to what its ideal form could be.

My idea for today is that established nations could launch startup countries within their own borders, free of all the legacy restrictions in the parent country. The startup country, let's say the size of modern day Israel, would be designed from the ground up for efficiency. Buildings and cars would be so energy efficient that the startup country could generate all the power it needed from sun and wind. The extra power created during the day would be stored as heat in molten salt, or maybe by pumping water up to a mountain lake. (Both energy storage methods are already being used in places.)

The entire banking system would be automated. There would be no cash in the start-up country. You wouldn't need to "apply" for a loan because the virtual bank would always have a current notion of your credit-worthiness. If you need a mortgage, just type in the address of the home you want to buy and your pin code. The bank automatically checks your income and expenses from your bank account records, along with your employment status and credit background. You have your loan in less than one second. And you don't need to sign anything.

The tax code in the startup country would be simplified to the point where residents might forget it exists. I won't argue the flat tax versus sales/use tax here, but the point is it could all be collected automatically by the virtual bank. There would be no such thing as an accountant or tax auditor in this new country. (I have argued before that the government could be the only insurance company, for every sort of risk, from health to fire to auto, with its profits substituting for taxes. That's another discussion.)

The Fire Department would be tiny. You can design modern homes to be virtually fireproof. And let's say cigarettes are banned, because we can, to further reduce the fire risk.

In my book The Dilbert Future I imagined a world with cameras in every room, and on every street corner, recording all the time, but encrypted so that literally no one could view the video without a court order. You wouldn't need much of a police force in that scenario because every crime would be on video, along with the entire escape route, all the way to the criminal's bedroom. Maybe that's too Big Brother for you, but if you reflect on how much privacy you've already given up to technology, it's not that much of a stretch.

Most of what is scary about the government having power is the lack of transparency. The startup nation would have full transparency. Any citizen could log on to his computer and see what court orders had been issued for what videos and why.

Campaign contributions would be eliminated because all campaigns would happen on the Internet so that running for office would cost next to nothing. Once elected, any citizen would have access to the elected politician's full banking records, including investments.

I could go on, imagining every element of the startup country as an optimal design, from its local government to the layout of its streets, to the livable nature of its homes. The point is that the startup country could be awesome. And only the most employable folks would be allowed in at the start, so the economy would be blazing, mostly from IT jobs and light industry.

Arguably, China accidentally performed a variant of this experiment with Hong Kong. Oversimplifying the history, Hong Kong was part of China and leased to the United Kingdom for 99 years, like a startup country within a country. When the lease expired, China presumably made a fortune by getting it back in a far more robust form than it could have generated within the Chinese system.

A startup country designed today could, in fifty years time, become a tax-generating windfall for the parent country. And it would also test a lot of concepts for building, banking, economy, energy, and lifestyle.
 
Rank Up Rank Down Votes:  +174
  • Print
  • Share
  • Share:

Comments

Sort By:
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Aug 23, 2010
I would suggest my country, Italy...
if nothing else, you will get a good inspiration for your strips just looking at the behaviour of our people and our politicians, so... a good return on investment....
 
 
Aug 2, 2010
"Scottland".
 
 
Jul 31, 2010
Many Southwestern cities are like this. Let me use a small example: Anthem, AZ is built perfectly, all the houses are big and nice, there isn't any rundown impoverished sections yet and all the streets are on a grid so you can't get lost like in a city like London. However, you can get lost because everything looks the same.
My point is, your ideas are wonderful but even those solutions would have some pitfalls and it would sacrifice diversity. Why are you so afraid of a chaotic, uncontrollable world? It makes things interesting. Stop trying to make the perfect house, city, country, world and enjoy it as it is.

Also, stop saying that I should be allowed to be spied on by a Ring of Steel just because of technology. Even if anyone can search for my name on Google, I still have a lot of control over what those results are. The difference is who controls what that information is and where it goes.
 
 
-1 Rank Up Rank Down
Jul 31, 2010
The people who now have so much free time....because f efficiencies....need to go to the gym and people bicycles with electricity generators. Everyone wins....they get to go exercise, stay slim and healthy....they get to wear fashionable gym clothes most of the day.....and the country gets more electricity.
 
 
-2 Rank Up Rank Down
Jul 30, 2010
One more thing, you could power practically the entire country with one or two large nuclear reactors (assuming the initial population is small) there for you wouldn't need to implement the unweildy and hugely inefficent (and inconvenient geographically) storage systems.

A pre-fab mass transit system, say electric/magnetic rail, and an integrated community planning system would be a much easier way to be energy efficient.
 
 
-1 Rank Up Rank Down
Jul 30, 2010
While I think the notion of a start up country is intersting, doable, and a very cool experiment, a couple items you mention are a little unreasonable/scary.
You will not power an modern society with strictly solar and wind power as the technology stands. Your nation would have to be located in a rather inhospitable climate, hot, arid, and climactically turbulant and use a vast amount of it's land for these resources which would limit agriculture, housing, transportation etc.
The whole Orwellian camera thing is downright scary, and you should know NOTHING is hacker proof. The whole "absolute power" maxim would apply, the more the government knows, the more power it has, the more authoritarian it becomes.
The government becomes the bank, the insurance company, the universal policeman, elections run over the internet, presumably by the government! Isn't this the exact type of corporate control lunacy Dilbert rails against every day!?
Ban cigarettes, really? That's going to be in the Constitution? If you really want to stop fires why not ban wood or paper? That would be much more effective.
History has shown repeatedly the more centralized a government and economy become, past an intial stage of progress, the less efficient and more authoritarian it becomes. China is booming right now because the government has relaxed economic controls, but it is still a human rights nightmare because is has not done so politcally.
 
 
+2 Rank Up Rank Down
Jul 29, 2010
If you live in the USA, then "about the size of modern-day Israel" might sound doable. It's, like, one-fifth of Kentucky. Surely the country could spare that...? Until you try asking Kentuckians to pick out the 20% of their land they don't really need any more - good luck with that.

If you live in (say) the UK, then you're talking about one-tenth of the whole country, a country that already has eight times the population density of the US.

As for the 50-year-tax-windfall effect - three words: Declaration of Independence.
 
 
+1 Rank Up Rank Down
Jul 29, 2010
There are already over-planned cities being built as "models for the future"; the latest is in Dubai. I don't think they will be any more successful than Halle-Neustadt, East Germany (see http://ti.org/vaupdate53.html ).

What makes a country prosperous is capitalism: specifically, giving enough protection to private property that people can make themselves rich and expect to stay that way. That is the advantage that America has enjoyed over the rest of the world until now. It is also the advantage Hong Kong had over China when Mao was alive.

What makes a country poor is the reverse: leaders whose only vision for their country's future is to confiscate whatever wealth they can find and hide it in their Swiss bank accounts. Most of Africa's governments fit that description, and because there isn't any cultural tradition of private property there, reform isn't likely any time soon. And until it happens, no one will invest there.

I would like to see more experiments along the lines of Hong Kong, if poor countries can be persuaded to allow such leases without a fight. But that's where I'd want to do them. America today is still one of the best countries in the world if only because most of the rest are so awful. Let's limit our tinkering to places so badly off that almost any change would be for the better.
 
 
Jul 29, 2010
Uh-oh. Looks like I got censored. Sorry about that, thought it was a legitimate point.
 
 
Jul 29, 2010
I beleive jobs could be a big issue. You made many things efficient that employ large numbers of people. Accountants, Police, Firemen, Bankers.... These people would be jobless - with many of them having no other useful skills.
 
 
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Jul 29, 2010
Robert nozick "Anarchy, State, and Utopia"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy,_State,_and_Utopia
 
 
Jul 29, 2010
c.i.r.c.u.m.s.t.a.n.c.e.s. triggers your censoring software? Your censoring software is junk.
 
 
Jul 29, 2010
"The point is that the startup country could be awesome."

What would make this country so awesome? We already have far more opportunity to peer into the decsion-making and inner-workings of our government than 99.99% of us are willing to exercise. Our currency is already handled mostly digitially: My paychecks are direct deposited, My taxes taken out automatically, and I pay for everything with a debit card. Honestly, I like cash in certain !$%*!$%*!$%*!$ My annual "accounting" usually revolves around a couple hours arguing about how my wife (or I) am spending money, and an hour of filing taxes with cheap software. It's a minimal effort. Presumably my wife and I will continue to make impulsive decisions with money, so saving me an hour a year seems like a marginal advantage. I've already demonstrated that I am not willing to make the kind of sacrifices that it would take to be energy efficient -- We all have opportunities to be efficient today and most of us don't do much about it.

Your concept is based on ideologies with no lifestyle benefit. Taxes, economic strategies, politics and energy efficiency are trendy political topics today, but most people don't invest effort and money into these things. That's because these topics are boring as hell. I don't, in fact, believe that "transparency in government" is a genuine problem. It's a political fashion. Digital currency doesn't intrinsicly solves any problem. It doesn't sound like this startup country will be especially cheap, and the AMOUNT OF TAXES I PAY is about the limit of my interest in the whole tax conversation. Energy efficiency is ultimately achieved by having less stuff and living in smaller spaces. That doesn't sound appealing.

Apart from having inherent disadvantages compared to "real" western countries, and a lot of trendy ideologies (that will fade quickly, like all trends), what does the startup country really offer?
 
 
Jul 29, 2010
@Kiefler:

Scott said "most employable" not "most educated". Plumbers, mechanics, gardeners, cooks, etc. are all VERY employable. Those jobs require the person to be physically present and cannot be outsourced to foriegn countries. The IT and light industry Scott was talking about would be the core industries but all the other personnel neccesary to support the people who work in these industries would still exist.

On the other hand, if this startup country was part of the U.S. and it truly was meant to represent the future, ONLY those type of jobs would exist. In fact, many of those jobs might be done remotely by robots or robotic devices controlled by people in other countries. The main local industry might be maintaining the robots! :)
 
 
+2 Rank Up Rank Down
Jul 29, 2010
"The Fire Department would be tiny. You can design modern homes to be virtually fireproof." You're just trying to bait me into referencing Fahrenheit 451. You know you’re doing this, too, but I won’t bite.
 
 
+3 Rank Up Rank Down
Jul 28, 2010
Scott,

Normally, I have to agree with you, even if I find your ideas a little crazy.

But today, I take exception with this particular phrase, "And only the most employable folks would be allowed in at the start, so the economy would be blazing, mostly from IT jobs and light industry."

The problem with this: Who is going to do everything else? Toilets plugged, cars broken down, garbage full, roads to be built, lawns mown. Who will wash your car, cook the food when you go out to eat, watch your children while you work, stock the shelves at the grocery store, or pick the grapes for your wine?

Even if you all start equal, work creates wealth. In theory, you would get paid according to what you create. Even though that's not true, everyone will still not be paid equally. It would only take (in my opinion) about three days to create a class society, with the "higher producers" at the top and the "supporters" at the bottom. It might take 15 days if you wait for a pay period to take effect.

A society requires someone willing to do every job. As my father (a self employed plumber, the man who plunges your toilet) would attest to, if you can afford to do something other than plunge toilets, you will choose that other thing. The free market society says that a man or woman will only plunge your toilet if there is nothing else they can do to make the same amount of money.

Where do you find these people in your new society?

Your fellow (and newly minted) MBA,
Donald Smith
 
 
Jul 28, 2010
Sounds like a hackers paradise as they would be the only ones free in your fascist paradise.
 
 
Jul 28, 2010
I'm sure that Scott's startup country idea is inspired by Romer's Charter Cities. But I'm impressed by how much more compelling "startup country" is than "charter cities" as a phrase. Good job!
 
 
Jul 28, 2010
Webgrunt: I suppose you could militarily invade your "startup country", but that's likely to cost real big $$ (using the Israel-size analogy) or damage a lot of the coolness you want to gain. Nobody "lets" colonies arm themselves, it just happens. Plenty of colonists/colonizers have been killed with machetes and spears. The Gaza Strip indicates that the level of constraint needed to make a startup country mostly weapon free is strikingly contrary to the Utopian goals Scott sets out.
 
 
+1 Rank Up Rank Down
Jul 28, 2010
I think Singapore is oen of the closest examples of a startup country that we can find - and they are doing quite well. Smoking is not banned but chewing gun is! Too bad the IT technology was not so well developed during the 60's when Singapore was created.
 
 
 
Get the new Dilbert app!
Old Dilbert Blog