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

#351

Post by learc83 » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:55 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #347

learc83 wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They tend to be unenforceable in California, they certainly aren't unenforceable in other states.

Yeah, they are unenforceable in other states, and in all of them if they are determined to be unreasonable in court. https://www.legalnature.com/guides/are-non-compete-agreement...

>Yeah, they are unenforceable in other states

Yes there are other states that have similar limits, and many other states that don't.

>and in all of them if they are determined to be unreasonable in court

That's a tautology. A court can refuse to enforce any contract for many reasons. The problem is that what may be considered unreasonable in California might not be in Georgia.

It's also not super helpful for someone who can't afford a lawyer to fight it. Or for someone who can't find another job because companies don't want to deal with the hassle.

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

#352

Post by firethief » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:58 PM UTC

seph-reed wrote: post #256

Frost1x wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And its growing ever more unavoidable in daily life for anyone trying to live. Pretty much everyone is becoming subject to these authoritarian regimes (corporate structures) as they invade and carve away at our democracy through financial influence, regulatory capture, etc.

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.

Like REI?

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

#353

Post by Apocryphon » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:58 PM UTC

_2d30 wrote: post #348

Apocryphon wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Why should we disincentivize saving? It's clear why we should tax land, the value of land is not driven in almost any way by ownership of land so the returns to land are unjustly gained AND it's economically efficient to tax land as it's fixed in supply. However, taxing savings (capital gains, wealth) is unclear in value. What would, for example, be the benefit of shifting investment to consumption? In other news, I…

I'm not advocating any specific plan and I find Georgism to be worth a new look and calls for a LVT to be compelling, I'm just saying that I think those who focus solely on it, some of whom advocate abolishing all taxes and only using an LVT, to be impractically utopian.

That said, I see no reason as to why we shouldn't at least experiment with other alternate tax regimen as well, and that may include tax savings at least for the highest earners. To echo others' statements, why shouldn't those at the absolute highest levels of savings endure a little redistribution? It wouldn't matter much to Bezos.

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

#354

Post by shoo » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:58 PM UTC

dclowd9901 wrote: post #273

This paper still dances around the real issue. Why has worker power decreased? Yes, we can say that capital owners capitalised on the fact that workers were willing to give up more. But why were they? Unions can explain some of it, but why did Unions go away? Why is it, when two workers sit in two rooms with two managers, one of them is willing to take less than the other? Consumer credit is why. Because of consumer…

Is there any research that supports this claim that access to consumer credit is primarily responsible for decreasing worker power?

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

#355

Post by ip26 » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:59 PM UTC

markus_zhang wrote: post #199

chillacy wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you but substitute WORK for Value Creation. It's way to easy to "create jobs" which are essentially busy-work with 0 to negative productivity. In the coming decades, economic productivity will become more and more important as gains from elsewhere start to taper out.

Agreed. Value Creation is a better word. Idea world is to have everyone getting rid off the necessary of repetitive work (of course he can still do it if he wants) and everyone is motivated to create value, in one way or another, and people generally don't say things like "Hey because I build rockets/control banks I should have a much more lucrative life than the rest of you guys". If we look at history, most of the…

Isn't "Value Creation" just another one of those buzzwords used to bamboozle investors? It's not that it doesn't exist, but it's so abstract & academic as to be impossible to measure.

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

#356

Post by tacocataco » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:59 PM UTC

milesvp wrote: post #241

bedhead wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've long argued for massive estate taxes on the very rich that forces a partial reset on wealth and avoid medieval times when land ownership was just passed down generation to generation. It's the only fair and practical wealth tax I can think of. I have no problem at all with Bezos being filthy rich, however, I have a giant problem with his kids and all descendants being billionaires. A huge estate tax would also m…

The bigger problem with estate taxes (and btw estate taxes often imply death taxes in US law) that you may not see is how they effect smaller players. One of the things fueling corporate consolidation is asset liquidation upon death. If I start and own a small company that’s worth $10million, when I die, there is likely a strong desire to liquidate that company in order to allow for some inheritance to multiple peopl…

Sounds like the workers should own the company, not private individuals.

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

#357

Post by s1artibartfast » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 9:00 PM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #340

s1artibartfast wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do taxes besides social security and medicare have very little impact? Taxing capital gains like income would have a significant impact. Federal income tax caps out 37% and california income tax caps out out 13%.

Because the amount you pay into social security and Medicare are quite large in terms of percent of income, if you make less than $100k. Of course, you later get paid SS or receive Medicare services, which makes it less clear that these items should be considered taxes.

Sorry, but I genuinely am missing the point you are making. I agree that SS and medicare are large taxes for those making less than 100K. Are you saying that this is a reason we should not increase capital gains and should instead increase SS and MC?

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

#358

Post by chente » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 9:01 PM UTC

matchbok wrote: post #244

deegles wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should everyone have to work? We are 100% capable of creating a society where everyone's basic needs are met with the automation and technology we have today. The idea that a person is only worth something if they work needs to be deeply reexamined.

No, we aren't. Not even close.

Because of attitudes like this. There is enough money out there to solve many problems but it is hoarded by a certain amount of people and then a bunch of people go around saying, "better things aren't possible."

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

#359

Post by AQuantized » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 9:01 PM UTC

tmh79 wrote: post #323

WalterBright wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Those attributes stem from them being a monopoly, they don't create it in the first place. He's questioning the implication that being less competitive and slower growing would allow you to obtain more of a monopoly.

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

#360

Post by learc83 » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 9:01 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #336

learc83 wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> No private company would be able to negotiate with that many land owners to build out fiber on a large scale. Before the government stepped in to anoint winners and losers in the phone business, companies sprang up everywhere and strung their own wires.

Telephone lines were almost always built following existing public roads or private railroads (that were built with government assistance and government land grants) even in the early days.

There is no history of a successful, large scale infrastructure project built without government assistance. Either directly or due to the fact that much of it was built on government land.

(unless maybe you consider some case where private infrastructure was built in one large area controlled by a small group of owners, but that's basically just a government by another name and doesn't apply to modern America.)