Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

journals.aom.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 261 posts

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#91

Post by HPsquared »

pmyteh wrote: post #64
lanevorockz wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cronyism is essential part of Big Government, something that is not necessary for Capitalism but completely necessary for Socialism.

The entire basis of modern public administration (and one of the reasons it can be more bureaucratic than market mechanisms for delivering services) is that it attempts to rigorously exclude cronyism. The reason for civil service tenure, for example, was to stop politicians selling public service jobs to the highest bidder, or handing them over as a quid-pro-quo for favourable decisions. As seen in the late 19th and…

The existence of all these protections against cronyism in the public sector is evidence that it is an inherent problem. If it wasn't, there would be no need for all the protections.

Edit: the problem is kind of moral hazard. Much like a chemical plant or nuclear reactor needs a range of protection systems to prevent the dangerous chemicals from going out of control, public administration needs a range of systems to prevent corruption getting too out of hand.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#93

Post by aww_dang »

vlunkr wrote: post #81

For the political experts out there, what would happen if we stopped allowing lobbying? That seems to me like the most obvious source of corruption. Edit: ok, I should have worded better. What if we stopped allowing corporate lobbying through donations to elected officials? I understand there would be loopholes to close, but isn't this the obvious source of government corruption?

The incentive for lobbying would remain and turn more deeply to black markets. To end lobbying you'd need to remove the incentive for lobbyists to seduce lawmakers.

Instead, remove the power of lawmakers or reduce/decentralize the power as much as pragmatically possible.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#95

Post by netcan »

OK so... the "no true scotsman" game between warring ideologies is what it is. Marx more or less invents "capitalism" in his critique of it. Pro capitalists then came in with their own definitions of capitalism. Later anti-communists insist(ed) that socialism=stalin, and capitalism means liberalism. Whatever. Capitalism means different things. I'm not going to unknot that mess.

But... I will say that etymologically (ie in the early rhetoric), the word "capitalism" meant "regime where capitalists rule." Monarchy = monarchs rule; democracy means the people rule, etc. IE, the old banana republics would have represented near perfect capitalism.

In any case, I don't see why "Academy of Management Perspectives" decided to bring big-c "Capitalism" into it. What part of capitalism are they examining/exonerating? Defining capitalism simply as "private ownership & the existence of markets" is silly. This exists in many times and places that you couldn't credibly call capitalism.

Considering the context (Macedonia?) I think what is meant by "capitalism" is economic policies & changes of the last 30 years. Washington Consensus monetary policies, international/american compatible corporate/contracts law and such.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#98

Post by nopenopenopeno »

vlunkr wrote: post #81

For the political experts out there, what would happen if we stopped allowing lobbying? That seems to me like the most obvious source of corruption. Edit: ok, I should have worded better. What if we stopped allowing corporate lobbying through donations to elected officials? I understand there would be loopholes to close, but isn't this the obvious source of government corruption?

Not a very useful thought experiment once you accept that you’d have to out-lobby the lobbyists to get it done.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#99

Post by mostertoaster »

jacknews wrote: post #60

"...that some government interventions to address the apparent shortcomings of capitalism invite cronyism" LOL, so yet again, govermint is the problem! It should be increasingly clear by now that capitalism itself is the problem. It naturally leads to the rich getting richer, and despoils everything in the name of profit, unless it is reigned in by government, taming it for the benefit of society, not just profit and…

Capitalism will lead to wealth inequality even apart from cronyism.

Yet in general it makes a populace who tries it, more fat, and grants a life of more pleasure, than any of its counterparts.

This itself might be bad for a nation though.

First you get a bunch of people in government who think they should get a percentage of that wealth made by the merchants (just like the feudal lords of old)

Second, the nation becomes so wealthy it has to just keep consuming more and more, and at some point people start having to come up with insane ideas, and gladiator sports, and just become a bunch of addicts because life has no purpose and is too easy.

I think I’m personally ready for some socialist/communist policies so people in my country can experience some actual suffering, and maybe even go hungry, and then at least they will stop talking about the pointless crap they always go on about it.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#100

Post by LeifCarrotson »

dimitrios1 wrote: post #75
usrbinbash wrote: post #26

[flagged]

Any system is not devoid of a system of morals and ethics. The issue we have today is one where the elite are completely devoid of any morals, or they have convinced themselves that they are acting morally in some fashion. This is the issue with any system, whether it be capitalism, socialism, fascism, or communism. A select group of individuals eventually rise to the top, and they work to manipulate the system to th…

Morals and ethics are great but insufficient. In a system with an absence of consequences for unethical and immoral behavior - in fact, with the presence of incentives for those behaviors - even if 99% of the participants are sufficiently morally motivated to reject the siren song of wealth and power (which is a stretch) there will always be a few narcissistic, greedy, power-hungry sociopaths with an excess of inherited wealth that will trample all over your utopia.

It's useful to suggest that everyone behave morally, if more did so the world would be a better place. But it's unwise to build a system where that suggestion is the only check on bad behavior.

Post reply on HN