Live data from Hacker News

The rise of the corporate colossus is a giant problem

economist.com

81–90 of 151 posts

Re: The rise of the corporate colossus is a giant problem

#81
post #56

Blame "too big to fail" and negative interest rates. When big banks had problems, the solution was to make even bigger banks and giving them free money in order to look good. They take savers money with negative interest rates and give it free to big banks and companies like Google, Microsoft or Deutsche Bank. Given that if you(as a person or small company) ask a bank for money you will have to pay 20% interest rates…

This argument doesn't make any sense to me. Neither Google or Facebook or Apple have been using cheap loans to fuel growth. They have more cash flow from operations than they know what to do with, they don't need loans.

Re: The rise of the corporate colossus is a giant problem

#82
post #56

Blame "too big to fail" and negative interest rates. When big banks had problems, the solution was to make even bigger banks and giving them free money in order to look good. They take savers money with negative interest rates and give it free to big banks and companies like Google, Microsoft or Deutsche Bank. Given that if you(as a person or small company) ask a bank for money you will have to pay 20% interest rates…

Capitalism without the corrective downward functions of capitalism creates scary unwieldy beasts. Moral hazards are very real yet the people who wished to avoid this in 2008-09 by letting them fail were called reckless (myself included) as austerity would have caused a ripple effect which hurts the incomes of regular people.

But instead of giving temporary safety nets to protect those regular people - while weathering the storm of a recession and rebuilding the system into something better, an evolution of sorts - the US gov went head and gave safety nets to the big corps and maintained the status quo of the last generation.

Which allowed the type of behaviour your talking about to flourish.

Basically the government and financial power players kicked the can down the road for the next generation to experience the effects of competitionless financial exploitation. The priority was (and is) valuing the financial industries short-term health over the organic growth of business, the flow of capital to things that create jobs (aka small/medium businesses which employ 90% of people), and long term wealth generation.

I personally don't find it surprisingly that it took 8 years for median incomes to rise again while the top tier upper class has been doing absolutely fine since the crash. This was by design of a liberal democratic administration.

Yet regular people are in no better position to deal with the next recession (particularly economically and to a lesser extent socially as US health care is slightly better but still embarrassingly bad) and the same people who caused the last one have likely been given better jobs, raises, and positions of power from which to influence on the next political administration.

Re: The rise of the corporate colossus is a giant problem

#83
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It has been in decline for decades I don't have time to put together a great convincing case, so I'll just say that this is very different from my view. Some high level regulations have been removed, sure, but meanwhile almost every corner of life now has regulations and regulators that have to be obeyed and asked for permission. It would be nice to have some kind of objective measure(s) of the overall level of sta…

I would guess your view derives from the fact that the parts of the regulatory state that have grown since the 1970's have more direct effects on individuals and small businesses: environmental, workplace safety, anti-discrimination, anti-money laundering. But there isn't much money in gaming those. The big-money sectors of the economy: telecommunications, transportation, manufacturing, and finance have been deregula…

I am unclear how that's an argument for thousands of pages of regulations covering minutia.

Re: The rise of the corporate colossus is a giant problem

#84
post #47

A libertarian explanation is that in the age of the Regulatory State, it's often more important to be the biggest lobbyist than to make the best product. "In the Game of Crony Capitalism, you lobby or you die."

Some seem ridiculous, and some don't. That said, I've seen some called ridiculous that I thought made sense. E.g. I've seen people call requiring nutritional data be available a ridiculous regulation. Maybe the ones I find ridiculous makes sense to some people out there.

Hm, I do like products with nutritional data. But isn't the non-regulatory solution here to just not buy products without nutritional data if so? I mean, I'd certainly contact my favorite brands and request that. If they won't hear me, then maybe there's a local alternative that could?

Re: The rise of the corporate colossus is a giant problem

#85

A libertarian explanation is that in the age of the Regulatory State, it's often more important to be the biggest lobbyist than to make the best product. "In the Game of Crony Capitalism, you lobby or you die."

Advertising. A democratic republic is ruled by advertisers - the ones best able to persuade the public.

Do you mean politicians and bureaucrats? (I'm not joking, I'm asking)

Re: The rise of the corporate colossus is a giant problem

#86

This article did a good job of staying relatively neutral for such a controversial subject. It seems as though an oligopoly of multinational conglomerates will be the only choice for essential consumer products in a short 10/20 years. Without competition from smaller open-minded businesses, only innovation in rent seeking will take place. The companies that end up in control of the infrastructure and hardware will en…

It's not so strange that we get fewer "smaller open-minded business(es)" though, considering the increasing regulatory burden. Of course, they are maintainable - but they do consume a lot of resources to tick them all off.

Most of the regulations doesn't actually directly cost to comply with, but you'd need more staff or dedicate more time to things that are not your core business - that's money out of the pocket.

Re: The rise of the corporate colossus is a giant problem

#87

A libertarian explanation is that in the age of the Regulatory State, it's often more important to be the biggest lobbyist than to make the best product. "In the Game of Crony Capitalism, you lobby or you die."

It's not just regulation. The government actively subsidizes our largest industries - tech research via military spending, agribusiness via farm subsidies, oil firms via direct subsidies and global military intervention, and on and on.

Re: The rise of the corporate colossus is a giant problem

#88
post #69

> None of this helps the image of big business. Paying tax seems to be unavoidable for individuals but optional for firms This kind of grinds me. There are tons of tax breaks for individuals: mortgage interest deduction, tax-free health care, etc. In fact, the exclusion of health care benefits from taxation costs the government more than all corporate tax avoidance schemes put together.

There are a few tax breaks for individuals, but many more for companies. They're called "business expenses" :). I wish I could deduct everything I required as an individual (notably, there is no rent deduction for individuals).

Re: The rise of the corporate colossus is a giant problem

#89
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One specific problem is that global companies are currently able to engage in tax arbitrage where they get to shuffle their profits around the world to wherever the most favorable tax rate is. This leaves many of the countries that actually host these companies and provide services to them - like educated employees, transportation infrastructure, and a judicial system - without any tax revenue from the company.

The solution is simple. Stop taxing profits. Tax consumption. Defining "profit" is nigh impossible. Starbucks is headquarted in the United States. Their research in Canada. Their beans from Columbia. European distribution is out of Germany. London finances new franchises. A location in France sells a latte for 4€. How much of that 4€ is profit and how big of a slice does each country get? Because each country has a v…

But the consumption is already taxed in Europe: out of that 4 euros, 80 cents goes to France immediately in the form of VAT.

Re: The rise of the corporate colossus is a giant problem

#90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is simple. Stop taxing profits. Tax consumption. Defining "profit" is nigh impossible. Starbucks is headquarted in the United States. Their research in Canada. Their beans from Columbia. European distribution is out of Germany. London finances new franchises. A location in France sells a latte for 4€. How much of that 4€ is profit and how big of a slice does each country get? Because each country has a v…

But the consumption is already taxed in Europe: out of that 4 euros, 80 cents goes to France immediately in the form of VAT.

Then they shouldn't complain about Starbucks paying too little corporate tax. If they want more then raise VAT. It's nigh unavoidable.
Post reply on HN