Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends • Hacker News Board

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#321

Post by devalgo » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:22 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #279

Aunche wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democracy is not an efficient way of running a business. Look at the multi-trillion dollar deficit as an example. Workers are incentivized to choose themselves over the health of the company or the customer. Also, people overwhelmingly would rather exchange their stake in the company for the equivalent value in cash. It's only when the company's valuation skyrockets when they retroactively declare this to be unfair.

I often hear people complain about others making money in the stock market, so I suggest they invest in stocks, too. They respond saying it's too risky.

>They respond saying it's too risky

Well it literally is. If they are talking about Wall St. bankers they have no way to replicate the results of those people. Wall Street can make poorly thought out multi-trillion dollar bets on housing bonds and when they go bust they get bailed out and still get their Christmas Bonuses. There is no similar mechanism to protect a non-institutional investor from similar levels of risk.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#322

Post by devalgo » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:25 PM UTC

zby wrote: post #271

zorked wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a bit like saying "Here we are in 1650 under an absolute monarchy. The people are the majority, they could topple our illegitimate hereditary government and make it a democracy, but they haven't done it yet because they certainly prefer things this way".

I don't know - there are cooperatives - it is not like you need to risk your life to work at one. Somehow they are not that popular. There are also partnerships - which are kind of close to cooperatives, when they employ only the partners and for example outsource office cleaning and stuff. In some industries they do pretty well - for example in law. Why cooperatives do poorly? Maybe people usually are not very good…

>Why cooperatives do poorly?

I don't think you have evidence to back this up. The reality is that cooperatives are very rare, so 99% of people don't even have to option to work for one. It's probably not even clear to the vast majority of workers that such a thing is even possible. This says nothing of the extreme aversion to anything even remotely resembling collectivism in the US.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#323

Post by tmh79 » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:25 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #275

dcolkitt wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Monopolization almost certainly is occurring. The left usually cites weak antitrust enforcement. The right usually cites regulatory barriers that make it expensive to compete without economies of scale. I actually think both sides are at least partially correct. However what almost everyone overlooks is the demographic transition. The US, along with every other developed economy, is significantly older today than it…

> Since older firms, tend to be larger, slower growing, and less competitive, it's not wonder we've seen an increase in monopolization. This is self-contradictory.

how is this contradictory?

Firms that are monopolistic are less competitive, larger, and slower growing. Reducing monopolistic tendencies increases capital growth, competition, and reduces average firm size. This is well understood economics.

Monopolies arent' some hypercompetitive ultra capitalist battlespace, they're fat and happy, and the most impactful teams they employ are lobbyists and policy folks in DC. Look at like, comcast and what they did with the FCC.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#324

Post by s1artibartfast » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:25 PM UTC

tathougies wrote: post #307

s1artibartfast wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the exact opposite. Taxing capital gains and eliminating corporate taxes would incentivise value creation. Low tax dividends and capital gains benifit individuals without active participation in the value creation.

> Low tax dividends and capital gains benifit individuals without active participation in the value creation. Presumably, actively working (like with a job) to generate wealth to invest in other enterprises is 'active participation in the value creation'. I mean, sure, if you want to introduce steep capital gains on invested capital that was inherited, or won, or whatever, that's fine.

>Presumably, actively working (like with a job) to generate wealth to invest in other enterprises is 'active participation in the value creation'.

This is my exact point. Working (like with a job) creates value. Investing money in a secondary market for stocks generates no value whatsoever. Perhaps it keeps some stock brokers emplayed

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#325

Post by Apocryphon » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:28 PM UTC

_2d30 wrote: post #101

rfulop wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with this argument. Capital gains should at least be taxed as much as earned income.

But then if you want to help people build wealth that don’t have it, you make it much harder. I really feel like people need to look into land taxes a la Henry George: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_George Taxing things like capital gains differently or implementing a generic wealth tax can actually hurt those we want to help to build wealth as well as incentivize things like expatriation of wealth. Can’t expatr…

Why not all? Tax land, capital gains, and wealth. Adjust brackets prudently.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#326

Post by devalgo » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:28 PM UTC

megaman821 wrote: post #217

jtr1 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an argument a lot of non-authoritarian socialists make: democracy only governs the few hours when people are not sleeping or at work, so a deeper, fuller democracy would include running workplaces democratically as well. Whether by employee-elected boards, cooperatives, democratically run unions (a necessary distinction), or some other form of collective control, that the consent of the governed is a question…

It seems that all the forms of collective control you listed are perfectly legal. If the majority of workers prefer workplaces like that then those places will thrive. What you are implying though, is that the government forces all workplaces to conform to your desired control scheme. So fuller democracy equals government limiting choice, as long as it is your desired choice.

>If the majority of workers prefer workplaces like that then those places will thrive

The majority of workers have probably never even heard of worker coops and those that have probably imagine it to be related to socialism and therefore un-American.

>So fuller democracy equals government limiting choice, as long as it is your desired choice

So more democracy actually == more authoritarian. Astounding logic.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#327

Post by cool_dude85 » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:31 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #258

cvlasdkv wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing inherent in "basic economics" that postulates that fulfilling or fun jobs pay less. I also find the idea of "basic economics" laughable given how impossible economics is in the first place. I mean, yes, if you assume spherical cows...

Cet. par. , if doing a job involves less disutility for the worker, people will demand less pay to compensate, since pay demands will be at the breakeven net utility point. Basic economics.

Boss, I counted up my utils for the month, and it looks like I'm enjoying this new project. I have handily computed for you an appropriate rate at which to cut my pay. Basic economics demands it be so.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#328

Post by jamiepenney » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:32 PM UTC

dwiel wrote: post #270

seph-reed wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been playing with the idea of equity cash lately. Something where the more money you've spent at a place, the more say you have in how it is run. Not really sure of what way that could be done, but the premise feels right so far.

Is there a way a startup could set up this business model, or would it necessarily require all the tax and legal implications of a publicly traded company?

This is how cooperative supermarkets work - they're consumer co-ops.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#329

Post by Aunche » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:36 PM UTC

clarry wrote: post #298

Aunche wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democracy is not an efficient way of running a business. Look at the multi-trillion dollar deficit as an example. Workers are incentivized to choose themselves over the health of the company or the customer. Also, people overwhelmingly would rather exchange their stake in the company for the equivalent value in cash. It's only when the company's valuation skyrockets when they retroactively declare this to be unfair.

> Workers are incentivized to choose themselves over the health of the company or the customer. And maybe that is how it should be? Maybe life shouldn't be about the most efficient way to run a business.

If Earth was government by one big country, you'd have solid point, but most Americans would prefer that the next trillion dollar companies not all be based in India and China.

Also, what's best for the workers isn't necessarily what is best for society. Globalization is anti-worker, but it helps the consumer with cheaper prices, the company with extra profits, and developing countries afford what developed countries take for granted like antibiotics.

Re: Declining worker power vs. rising monopoly power: explaining recent macro trends

#330

Post by learc83 » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:37 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #312

Apocryphon wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government directed Facebook to suppress Snap? https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/04/snap-ceo-isnt-expecting-mu...

Think about your local ISP. They usually have a local monopoly because they use the government to make competition illegal.

You need government to build an ISP in the first place. No private company would be able to negotiate with that many land owners to build out fiber on a large scale.

And once a company does build a network, absent government regulation requiring them to let other companies use it, the existing infrastructure is an enormous barrier to entry.