system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
How did Japan pull off its post-war economic miracle? How about Taiwan? Is there anything an industrialized economy could learn from them (like the USA or the UK or Canada)?
gpt
it's sort of funny to think "could the US learn from it?" when in fact it was the US that played a large role in these countries' economic booms.  
after world war 2 both countries had their constitutions redone to follow the u.s. democratic model. specifically for taiwan, the u.s. stipulated for land reform since during japanese colonization, most of the land was in hand of few large owners and the institutions in taiwan were very exploitive for japanese food consumption. after land reform, society became more egalitarian with the establishment of institutions that would allow for taiwanese voters to pursue good policies such as higher education. after independence from japan, taiwanese literacy skyrocketed. this created a strong educated labor force with which to fuel an export-oriented economy. why did the u.s. intervene and ask for land reform? because after ww2, there was a concern that the labor class of these new nations would be susceptible to communist ideals if inequality were to persist. 

as for japan, it is a similar idea. the u.s. strongly favored the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) in japan over the leftist parties because it feared the rise of communist ideals taking root. the u.s. wrote japan's constitution after ww2. this set up fairer democratic institutions which tend to lead to more equitable policies since everyone is allowed to vote instead of just a few landed elites. high quality free universal education (primary secondary, ect, not college) helped provide an educated labor force. there are arguments that the strong bureaucracy which consisted of the most talented college graduates played a good role in guiding the economy towards productive endeavors, however if you look at data their recommendations weren't always correct nor followed through by corporations. however, they did play a role in helping japan pivot towards automobile manufacturing. japan (and taiwan and south korea) were some of the poorest countries pre WW2,  poorer than some subsaharan countries. yet despite going against their comparative advantage (japan did not have high capital, aka factories and machines, to set up an auto manufacturing industry), the MITI bureaucracy thought it was a good idea and suggested that policy be made to give them incentives and loans to produce in this sector. they lowered import tariffs on machinery needed to build these factories, while raising tariffs on small foreign sedans during initial stages to allow the growth of this new industry. it paid off and now japan is synonymous with automobiles. 

however there are other explanations for the boom, and as i said earlier, you can't give MITI complete credit for the boom since not all of their shots were accurate nor even listened to by corporations. there is also the theory that low government intervention and free market allowed productive industries to emerge, such as the gaming industry which the government had absolutely no role in. but the same thing could be said about intervention, because without soft initial ISI policies in the auto industry, it might not have taken off. 

there is also a theory on electoral institutions playing a role in japan's boom, since they had a multi member district system which bred more pork barrel type of spending, public work projects which contributed to employment. during the 70s during the rise of leftist parties, there was an emphasis by the LDP to keep urban voters, so they changed their policies to invigorate the pacific coastal urban communities and develop those cities and regions more for exports, build factories ect. the pork they sent to rural areas also helped maintain those areas economically pliable. however an argument could be made that there were economic downturns as well despite the same multi member district existing. 

overall,  one thing important to remember for reproduction is that these booms happened during a very particular time in history. other major developed countries were fighting wars at this time, so countries like japan and taiwan had a viable market to accept their exports. barriers to free trade were also much lower then than they are now. also, cold war fears led the u.s. to want to install these liberal democratic institutions around the world and encouraged liberalization in these parts, out of fear of the rise of communist ideals taking root. if these economies were to have failed, and if their labor classes had risen up on the side of communism, it would spell very badly for the u.s. so it was in their best favor to support egalitarian liberal democracies. 

another reason why this might not be so easy to replicate by rich industrialized nations is due to the stolper-samuelson theory of convergence. poorer countries grow faster than rich countries, because their returns to capital are much higher. imagine giving a poor farmer who uses a simple rake to farm a tractor machine. suddenly their productivity will increase much faster. but farms in rich coutnries like the u.s. are already using the latest technology, and it is much harder to innovate at the edge than it is to adopt existing technologies. for the u.s. to increase productivity in this farm example, it would be more costly to have to invest in new technology (which would have to be invented, not simply purchased from existing markets) and the gains might not be all that much higher. 500 to 520 kernels. versus a poor farmer in a developing nation that went from 30 kernels to 200.

by principle, rich countries will have lower growth rates than poorer countries. 

i guess one thing they could learn from taiwan and japan is to install egalitarian institutions. there is a huge equality problem particularly with the u.s. with who has influence in politics. wealth distribution (similar a la land reformation in taiwan) could help. it is difficult to do because the u.s. in this post ww2 period was much more in favor of championing democracy and equality around the world, and now it has become that which it was once against. it would need to restructure it's society to be more fair, so that fairer institutions could be voted in and actually pursued by politicians. these institutions will ideally help improve its quality of labor and its technological innovations, the strength of its domestic markets.