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

231–240 of 261 posts

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#231

Post by simonh »

bradlys wrote: post #217
simonh wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>AFAIK its not one person being paid more than another thats the issue.. its those that are paid because they were born with money and add nothing to society that i think bothers people. Sure, but how many wealthy people inherited their wealth and contribute nothing? It's actually a tiny fraction. It is quite common for people from better off backgrounds to be more successful, but arguably that's result of the previo…

The issue isn’t the number of people who are inheriting massive sums of wealth or what not - the issue is what people with lots of wealth end up doing (solely improving their own lives) and how that wealth could be used otherwise. (improving the lives of all)

I’m actually struggling to think of how someone could use wealth to solely improve their own life. If they invest it in a company, that investment creates jobs and pays wages, buys equipment and services that people were employed to provide. Even if they spend it on luxuries and entertainment, somebody had to make the luxuries, or provide the entertainment and they benefit.

Clearly productive investment is better, that last point is a bit tongue in cheek, but there’s at least some truth to it. The least productive use I could think of would be buying bitcoin, which is basically just funding turning electricity into heat.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#232

Post by pwinnski »

golergka wrote: post #155
Miner49er wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If left unchecked, it'll keep increasing until the people are forced to starve or "eat the rich".

No — that relies on the assumption that we're playing a zero sum game, which we're not. There's nothing stopping wealth inequality from raising at the same time as living standards for the world's poorest do. In fact, it's exactly what's happening right now.

There may be nothing stopping wealth inequality from rising alongside living standards for the poorest--but that is not what is happening right now. That trend ended in the US during the 1980s, and it is no longer true that "the rich are getting richer while the poor are also getting richer."

On a global scale, it may be possible to show that the world's poorest are improving. I hope so! But when people talk about income inequality, they're generally referring to national economies, where living standards for the poorest have been declining as the number of billionaires skyrockets.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#233

Post by ajuc »

flavius29663 wrote: post #226
ajuc wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What actually happens - you get communism and capitalism and both are equally evil when applied 100%. But you can get make them less concentrated, add less or more regulation and get to some sane compromies. You end up with some kind of social welfare state with mostly free market economy. At that point it doesn't matter where you started off, it's just branding.

> equally evil That is a very hard to defend statement...mass deportations, famine, misery and all the other staples of communism are not nearly as bad in capitalism. And if capitalist countries do this to each other, it's not capitalism per se to blame, it's other aspects of politics (imperialism, colonialism, Neo-colonialism etc.) that can be separated from capitalism. Whereas communism on its own cannot separate f…

Well, if you attribute soviet and chinese atrocities to communism you should also attribute colonial empires atrocities to capitalism. And then it's basically arguing about the estimates.

> And if capitalist countries do this to each other, it's not capitalism per se to blame, it's other aspects of politics (imperialism, colonialism, Neo-colonialism etc.) that can be separated from capitalism

That's just the branding decision I was speaking of. You chose to brand the sane modern version of capitalism - still capitalism, but sane modern version of communism - socialism. That way you get the conclusion you want cause of your political beliefs. I don't really care for branding, but lets be honest - it's not some universal truth, it's just a consequence of your decision of assigning labels to political systems in a particular way.

BTW famines were pretty common before Haber-Bosch process. Usually caused by natural causes + mismanagement. Sometimes also by bad intentions. None of these are political-system-specific. See the famine in Ireland for capitalist example.

> This should over time reduce the amount we spend on social programs, which is in line with what I believe as a liberal that wants less taxes.

As I see it in future most of the productivity will be concentrated in top 1% of people assisted by global empires of AI and automation and protected by IP laws [1]. And the rest of us will pay almost no taxes because we will provide almost no value so there's nothing to tax. If the rich fear the revolution and state control enough to pay for everybody else - we get post-scarcity. If not - we get a dystopia. Possibly both in different places or for different groups of people.

As for the mechanism - I don't really care. Make it UBI or make it 95% employement with most people doing useless jobs for 8 hours a day. End result is the same.

[1] thought experiment - in a world with self-improving general AI and IP laws but with no political mechanism to force someone to give up his IP to others - how do you prevent a world-wide monopoly

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#234

Post by swader999 »

Devasta wrote: post #205
swader999 wrote: post #53

Capitalism without fair competition is not capitalism. There needs to be rules and regulation to have a level field. Huge barriers to entry, monopoly, oligarchy and so on all pervert capitalism. Currently, it's far far away from a good place.

How is capitalism without competition not capitalism? The capitalist is served very well by it, earning huge piles of money.

Competition is a key tenant of capitalism. It doesn't optimize and serve society without it. It holds individual's and corporation's self interest to maximize profit in check.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#235

Post by golergka »

pwinnski wrote: post #232
golergka wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No — that relies on the assumption that we're playing a zero sum game, which we're not. There's nothing stopping wealth inequality from raising at the same time as living standards for the world's poorest do. In fact, it's exactly what's happening right now.

There may be nothing stopping wealth inequality from rising alongside living standards for the poorest--but that is not what is happening right now. That trend ended in the US during the 1980s, and it is no longer true that "the rich are getting richer while the poor are also getting richer." On a global scale, it may be possible to show that the world's poorest are improving. I hope so! But when people talk about in…

I wasn't talking about US, and that's exactly the point: global poorest are rapidly improving. And the only reason why a national economy like US is seeing income inequality is exactly because in reality, it's not a "national economy". It's part of the global economy, and in particular it's the part where the richest people from all around the globe end up.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#236

Post by Devasta »

swader999 wrote: post #234
Devasta wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is capitalism without competition not capitalism? The capitalist is served very well by it, earning huge piles of money.

Competition is a key tenant of capitalism. It doesn't optimize and serve society without it. It holds individual's and corporation's self interest to maximize profit in check.

Capitalism serves capitalists, any serving of society is a side effect of same and is certainly not intentional.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#237

Post by flavius29663 »

ajuc wrote: post #233
flavius29663 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> equally evil That is a very hard to defend statement...mass deportations, famine, misery and all the other staples of communism are not nearly as bad in capitalism. And if capitalist countries do this to each other, it's not capitalism per se to blame, it's other aspects of politics (imperialism, colonialism, Neo-colonialism etc.) that can be separated from capitalism. Whereas communism on its own cannot separate f…

Well, if you attribute soviet and chinese atrocities to communism you should also attribute colonial empires atrocities to capitalism. And then it's basically arguing about the estimates. > And if capitalist countries do this to each other, it's not capitalism per se to blame, it's other aspects of politics (imperialism, colonialism, Neo-colonialism etc.) that can be separated from capitalism That's just the branding…

> That's just the branding decision I was speaking of. You chose to brand the sane modern version of capitalism - still capitalism, but sane modern version of communism - socialism.

That is not just branding. Communism had these tenets whenever it was tried. The only logical conclusion is that it's inevitable to get there. Capitalism had it's bad years, but now it's pretty good, it lifted billions out of poverty.

Communism still did intentional famines well into the 1940s, after WWII. Pol Pot was even later. By then, capitalist countries are much more tame and humane. Blaming intentional famines on the lack of fertilizers is just arguing without good faith. It's much more because of 1. lack of regard for human life and 2. central decisions like exporting food in a drought. These 2 traits are so common in communism that I believe they're inseparable.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#238

Post by bradlys »

simonh wrote: post #231
bradlys wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue isn’t the number of people who are inheriting massive sums of wealth or what not - the issue is what people with lots of wealth end up doing (solely improving their own lives) and how that wealth could be used otherwise. (improving the lives of all)

I’m actually struggling to think of how someone could use wealth to solely improve their own life. If they invest it in a company, that investment creates jobs and pays wages, buys equipment and services that people were employed to provide. Even if they spend it on luxuries and entertainment, somebody had to make the luxuries, or provide the entertainment and they benefit. Clearly productive investment is better, th…

A lot of the time they just don’t spend it and create dynasties. A lot of the wealth goes around and stays within the wealthy circle. Very little of it trickles down.

I mean, honestly, your narrative is very much in line with trickle down economics - which we know doesn’t work…

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#239

Post by refurb »

thrwn_frthr_awy wrote: post #137
refurb wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lobbying is just communicating your desires to your elected representative. If we stopped it, we stop democracy?

Lobbing in the US at least I’d typically referring to large institutions , not citizens. The elimination of lobbying in the US is most often reference to the Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court.

We want to ban large institutions from communicating with their elected representative?

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#240

Post by refurb »

thrwn_frthr_awy wrote: post #129
refurb wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who lived in a communist system…no, cronyism is how you survive in a communist system. Otherwise you starve.

So you lived in a communist system with cronyism. That doesn’t invalidate OP statement. Cronyism is going to negatively affect all governments.

OP said capitalism.
Post reply on HN