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

#391

Post by derg » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:17 PM UTC

vinhboy wrote: post #111

brenden2 wrote: post #2

I think this plays into the current social unrest as well. People have been trying to separate the looters and protestors, but they seem to completely ignore the extreme inequality that exists throughout the US, especially in this period of high unemployment. People at the bottom have it bad, very bad. Being ignorant of that problem is just going to make it worse. Lashing out at fancy retailers in fancy neighbourhood…

It's easy to see this in graph form. 100K+ COVID deaths, 15%+ unemployment, wide spread homelessness, unaffordable housing crisis, riots and curfew in every major American city. Google DJIA to see a graph of how this has affected the wealthy... I am not blaming the players (well some), but the game is rigged.

And this is all _before_ evictions and foreclosures are allowed to start again. With the number of people already behind on rent and the number of people paying rent on credit cards it could get really ugly without any policy to mitigate this.

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

#392

Post by Frondo » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:17 PM UTC

Apocryphon wrote: post #290

WalterBright wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more powerful the government is, the more it can be corrupted.

And what keeps corporations from becoming governments unto themselves?

The libertarian argument generally goes that competition will keep them all in check, but history has shown again and again how it doesn't work in the general case.

If you want to see what small government/strong corporate control is like, look back a century in American history. Corporations controlled much more of American life than they do even now, and the 20th century regulatory state is all very much a direct response to all that.

Lot less time to go surfing back then, too.

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

#393

Post by Frondo » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:22 PM UTC

learc83 wrote: post #368

WalterBright wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Courts tend to take a dim view of well-monied people bullying the not-monied in courts. Larger companies are well aware of this, so are their employees, and the companies get sued constantly by those employees, and the companies usually settle because it's cheaper. I personally know of many, many cases of this.

>Courts tend to take a dim view of well-monied people bullying the not-monied in courts Even if this is true in theory, it's so completely untrue from a practical perspective that it's pointless to debate.

Don't worry, it isn't true in theory either. Courts don't give a shit about that sort of high-minded honorableness.

Why, the existence of anti-SLAPP laws comes directly out of courts not caring how they're weaponized by well-monied people bullying not-monied people. That's literally the point of anti-SLAPP laws.

GP's claim makes no sense with even the dimmest awareness of the court system.

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

#394

Post by gamechangr » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:22 PM UTC

alexose wrote: post #142

I find it very disappointing that the most reliably lucrative career arc for a programmer nowadays is to get hired by a tech giant and stay there as long as possible. And the second most is probably to go to work for a company that could get gobbled up by a tech giant. I've made a career out of small startups, and I wouldn't trade it for a thing. On the other hand, if I'd gone to work for Amazon straight out of colle…

Why is that disappointing?

That's the "pro" of going with an established company - having reliably high compensation.

The "pro" of going with a startup is the low chance of exceptional pay and the fulfilling work.

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

#395

Post by airstrike » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:22 PM UTC

rapsey wrote: post #89

altvali wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you back that up with data? I'm curious to know by how much and how you reached that conclusion.

I would like to see someone back up the data with regards to automation. Why is the burden of truth on the other side? Fact of the matter is Chinese factories that produce the world's gadgets employ millions. This is reality and not some mythical fully automated factories. Globalism made the very poor in China/Mexico/etc. richer, created their middle class and it made the very rich in US/EU even richer at the cost of…

> Globalism made the very poor in China/Mexico/etc. richer, created their middle class and it made the very rich in US/EU even richer at the cost of US/EU middle class.

This point bears repeating until they finally take it into account when discussing inequality. It's honestly tiring to have to repeat this every time

Minor nitpick: I'd call it globalization, not globalism, as the latter has historically meant something else and currently means something terrible

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

#396

Post by splintercell » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:27 PM UTC

tacocataco wrote: post #356

milesvp wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

you do understand why private individuals own the company and not the workers themselves right? In order for any productive venture to start that are three components, raw materials, labor and capital. Workers only provide labor. Workers may be able to provide raw materials, but that's ridiculously prohibitive to become a worker.

Similarly, you are wishing that the workers must also provide capital, but again it requires workers to have savings. Now obviously I know you don't think of these things like that, you just have a wishful desire that somehow the profits are distributed to the workers and not to some random individual. But the truth is this is the precise reason why the prophets go to the individual who supplied the production process with their savings (just supplying them with savings isn't enough that would only allow you to earn the original money plus interest, but in order to benefit from the profits you must undertake the risk associated with the productive process).

By separating the people who work in a company and the people who undertake the risk associated with the productive venture, you benefit everyone.

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

#397

Post by splintercell » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:28 PM UTC

imtringued wrote: post #263

milesvp wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Why not just split the estate? A single person should not inherit more than 50% of the value of the estate.

Puerto Rico has constraints like that. It is also the poorest part of the Union.

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

#398

Post by Apocryphon » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:33 PM UTC

Aunche wrote: post #383

Apocryphon wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent comment is making a universal statement, and so it would hypothetically apply to companies everywhere, including in India and China. Perhaps then there would be a world without trillion dollar companies, or maybe the workers can figure out a way. The Mondragon Corporation is a tens-of-billions-dollar workers cooperative [0], for instance. This line of discussion is also making the assumption that what's be…

> The parent comment is making a universal statement, and so it would hypothetically apply to companies everywhere I don't find much value in hypotheicals. Even the far right Ben Shapiro admitted he would support UBI if automation makes most jobs obsolete. There are smart workers and dumb shareholders, but at the end of the day, people respond to incentives. Audi workers would never agree to convert their factory to…

> I don't find much value in hypotheicals.

Your opinion doesn't change the fact that your response was invalid. You are responding to a normative, idealistic statement about universal values with your own slightly more concrete hypothetical. A misapplied exercise in practicality.

> Audi workers would never agree to convert their factory to EV had Tesla not already proven that EVs are something consumers actually want.

That seems like a hypothetical without basis. One doubts that General Motors assembly line workers were the ones who killed the EV1.

> Tesla was able to ramp up production as fast as it did because they didn't need to run every decision past a union.

There are some smart CEOs and there are dumb ones. Who's to say that the incentives given to traditional management schemes are truly correct? Businesses fail all the time. Startups, in particular, fail all of the time, and there are no shortage of egregious examples of boneheaded management decisions, or of shortsighted shareholders. Pointing to a Tesla and Musk, or to an Apple and Jobs, is simply survivorship bias.

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

#399

Post by bobthepanda » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:38 PM UTC

devalgo wrote: post #311

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…

> The US, along with every other developed economy, is significantly older today than it was 40 years ago. Looking only at average age doesn't give a full picture, how does this square with the Millenials recently becoming the largest generational cohort? By your logic shouldn't there be a massive wave of young growing companies.

Millenials aren't that young. The oldest ones are hitting their 40s.

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

#400

Post by simonebrunozzi » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 10:39 PM UTC

The problem is not just consolidation, which is certainly happening.

The real problem is that certain industries (e.g. airlines) supposedly compete on prices and service, but large chunks of their stocks are owned by the same investors. It doesn't take a smart brain to imagine what happens behind the scenes...