The things that stand out more to me are:
- Russians tend to be much more prone to risky, dangerous or violent behavior. From reckless driving, silly behavior to unhealthy relationships with alcohol and drugs you really get lots of extremes. Those extremes further fuel tragedies and thus more of this behavior.
- at the same time, Russians are culturally less individualistic. In some sense we in the west care less for the state and more about ourselves. In Russia this balance is slightly different. This impacts the value and care people have for their own lives.
- Russians are a traumatized population imho. WW2 is still a major collective trauma. Another very major source of trauma is corruption. Most Russians I've met are borderline resigned that things can't get good. They can get better, happier for some time, but it's like there's always a huge cloud looming on their lives. I believe their culture of corruption and centuries of endless autocracies makes them negative further pushing violent, risky and unhealthy behaviors.
(Indeed the first chart looks like a scatterplot, so there is no need to invoke anecdata)
But considering the author's expertise maybe he's trying to point towards studying the correlation with hardwork-- a better proxy? Some say that is already factored into GDP calculations.
If people have trust that if they see a problem they can solve it and reap the rewards without the state stealing it from them, they do it. If not, they don't. And those individual actions spread out over millions of people reap compounding benefits
Hmm. To chart the risk for individuals a bit better, maybe that "hardwork" ought to be replaced by "shlep-blindness"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3465521
(From top comment)
>one persons schlepp is another mans passion.
>You'd have to make deals with banks.
E.g. one can argue that Russia is full of passions (but not banks)
Random anecdote, Russians arguably produce the world's best gaming mods. Their unpaid amateur programmers put out content that rivals or exceeds the quality of Western games, if you like doomer-y 90s vibes. An example would be Fonline 2236 (some Russian guy hacked Fallout 1 and 2 into a free, working MMO) or the Skyrim mod for DayZ, which I think is dead now and I needed a translator app to play before the current war started but was the best online RPG experience I've had since Ultima Online.
Coupled with the fact that these types of sectors don't actually employ very many people as a percentage of the population, it makes sense that it would have bad effects on the rest of the population.
Plus if you look at the chart for patents per million tertiary students, UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, are also all in the bottom third so it's not like they're that far ahead.
Most easy to use model of information inequality.
What I mean, usually professional know about his specialty magnitudes more than average person from other specialty.
On other side, market economy have extremely huge number of products on market. For example, USSR in best its years have about million part numbers nomenclature.
How free market economy solve these issues? - They just create infrastructure of entrepreneurs - intermediate actors, who help average person to find product best fit for him.
Unfortunately, in Russia entrepreneurs considered as enemy of society. So they have extremely low number of professional entrepreneurs and people just cannot find products in Russia, and shopping near entirely on global market, mostly from China, and Russian engineers just cannot sell their products.
Why internal market is important. Well, another model - micro-economy pf business. To make business, one need to make three things: 1st somewhere got knowledge, what to do (marketing); 2nd somewhere got investments (money) and invest them into make ready for market product (finance market, loans, credits, angels, vc funds); 3rd make sells (marketing). Unfortunately, only part of make product (without money) is really strong side of Russians, but they are really weak in marketing and their finance market is on very early stage of development. And as I already mentioned, in Russia entrepreneurs considered as enemy, but also they demonized all business, all things touching credits, investments and finances.
And when you trying to go abroad, you definitely will got harder access to finances or investments from other country, then yours. So, usually, exporters enter new country with powerful backup from their own country, and in Russia such backup is just not exist, or to be honest, it exist only for very limited circle of people close to top powers.
As said one American professor, Russians trying to get milk without a cow.
And I've never been particularly impressed by comparisons of patents between countries either. I doubt the legal systems operate the same way and having a word that translates to "patent" doesn't imply to me that it actually means the same thing. Even if they do my impression is that patents are actually progress-retardant - places that make a habit of politely ignoring that part of IP law tend to do quite well (see: China and FOSS software are both interesting case studies).
Nonetheless this is an interesting area to focus on; Russia is an unimpressive country - it really should be in a similar league to China/the US/India and they just don't have the weight that those 3 names do.
He reports that some 80% of his class have left the country. I would say that his generation (i.e., some of the first to come of age in the post-communist period) especially were very eager to find lucrative work in the states and elsewhere. The capitalist structure of early capitalist Russia was quite unstable, not offering good pay, or in many cases even consistent pay, and that's if you could find a professional opportunity.
The graph showing that Russia is neck and neck with Alabama for total US patents granted is absurd and stupid. It doesn't illustrate anything, it's purely there to get in a "Russia is as bad as Alabama!" graphic. They even include the following text which shows how intentional this was:
> Alabama has creditable research centers, of course—the Hunstville aerospace complex and the University of Alabama network among them. But Russia’s population was almost 30 times larger than Alabama’s in 2020.
Great, so Alabama has 30x the per capita patents in a patent system that is foreign to Russia? How many Russian patents does New York have each year? What is even the point of this graphic? Every other graphic is using the correct units (per capita, median, etc) except this one, it's just there to put Russia next to Alabama, because Alabama is "so terrible". The graphic is literally "how many foreign patents does arbitrary region A have compared to how many domestic patents these other arbitrary regions have, not normalizing for anything".
I would like to see how many rocket scientists there are per capita in in Alabama and Russia compared to other regions of the world, but that might not tell the story they want to tell.
Edit: I went to find the answer, and New Mexico and Alabama crush all statistics in terms of per-capita Aerospace Engineers. However, and this is just usual, when you go to https://cambridgedb.com/which-state-employs-the-most-people-... the answer to 'Where the most Aerospace Jobs are located" shows the wrong graphic to make California look good. The graphic was lifted from https://www.bls.gov/oes/2022/may/oes172011.htm, where the correct graphics are the first two on the page, which apparently they scrolled past to steal the one that doesn't address the question they are using it to illustrate the answer to.
To your point, Alabama was chosen to make that point because the numbers are contrary to that stereotype. The stereotype is not fair (they rarely are). But there's another way to look at this.
All of the American South was delt a hard blow in the Civil War and rebuilding afterwards as well as the subsequent industrialization and the fall of cotton, the dustbowl and then the fall of manufacturing has been hard on that region as well. Russia emerged from the end of the Cold War having faced a similar war of attrition but for them this started not long after the end of their own Civil War and a World War. In the same period of time those people met many more hardships but to come out into capitalism only to have oligarchs steal the country's wealth and resources puts them far behind even what Americans could see as an unfortunate part of our own country with similar hardships.
I mean, that is one way to describe the end of slavery. Surely we can say rather large subset got better off despite repeated violent attempts to prevent improvement in their lives.
An interesting (but of course unverifiable) hypothesis is that Khrushchev's trajectory could have been different. Khrushchev supported OGAS (the Soviet would-be equivalent to ARPANET) and aimed to have cosmonauts on the moon by '67. Funding for the domestic intranet and space programs were later cut by Brezhnev. Khrushchev was also strongly anti-corruption and shook down the wasteful Soviet elite, which contributed to his ouster. A lot of the oil and gas fields that continue to power the Russian economy to this day were originally laid down under him as well. The "corn man" also greatly improved living standards, ended the gulags and purges, expanded the Soviet sphere of influence, loosened censorship etc.