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

241–250 of 261 posts

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#241

Post by refurb »

skywal_l wrote: post #124
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?

If we are discussing in good faith, the parent was probably talking about lobbying done by moneyed interests. Which is not necessary for democracy, itself a very broad term in its initial definition which does not include think tanks, political action comities and privately held mass media.

Wait what? You’re saying groups (think tanks, companies) shouldn’t be able to petition their elected representative as a condition of democracy?

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#242

Post by lexapro »

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…

>If they invest it in a company, that investment creates jobs and pays wages

Someone gives up most of their life to make the investor even richer. In exchange they get barely enough to eat and put a roof over their head (in some cases not even that). What a fair deal, praise the investor!

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#243

Post by nybble41 »

csee wrote: post #84
mcv wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capitalism quite clearly requires strong regulation. At least, any sort of positive capitalism that doesn't immediately succumb to monopolies, cartels and corruption. The problem is that the loudest voices arguing for capitalism, also tend to argue against regulation, accountability, and that sort of thing.

They argue against regulations because: - Regulations are often used as a tool of corruption and cronyism, e.g. regulation of housing construction entrenching landowner power. - Regulations can block legitimate progress, e.g. the private antigen tests that were blocked throughout 2020. - Regulations create complexity which acts as both a barrier to entry which creates monopolies, and as a hidden tax. - Regulations ar…

> I still want regulations (or just "laws") that stop pollution, deceptive marketing, and so on.

Not allowing pollution isn't regulation, it's enforcing property rights.

Not allowing deceptive marketing (fraudulent contracts) isn't regulation, it's enforcing property rights.

If you can't see the difference between regulations and property rights then yeah, opposition to regulations will seem a bit bizarre.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#244

Post by nybble41 »

PaulHoule wrote: post #7
Miner49er wrote: post #3

Cronyism is the logical conclusion of capitalism.

Capitalism is not "markets", people have had markets at least as long as we've had agriculture. Capitalism is markets in pieces of paper such as government bonds, tulip futures, corporate stock, etc. Capitalism is a great platform for cronyism because it accumulates huge amounts of wealth in one place. Without capitalism the wages of corruption would be much less.

> Capitalism is markets in pieces of paper such as government bonds, tulip futures, corporate stock, etc.

Capitalism is private ownership of (and thus control, and benefit from) the means of production. Of these things you've listed, only corporate stock is—at some remove—a means of production. The stockholder owns part of the corporation which in turn owns capital goods.

Anyone can save and invest and become an owner of capital. The only thing leading to concentration of wealth (under any economic system, really, not just capitalism) is that most people don't care to sacrifice present consumption for a larger future gain. Fortunately there are some who do.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#245

Post by jacknews »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #78
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…

Don't worry! Cronyism can be a symptom of too much public power, too! Did you think that Chinese firms thrive on merit, or access to cheaper-than-free capital supplied by political connections?

Yes, when I wrote 'private power', I really meant 'personal power'. Some of the worst cronyism is in so-called communist countries.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#246

Post by nybble41 »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #125
lanevorockz wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course Capitalism exists outside of the government. Look at the extremes: Capitalism : Mercantile Exchange were value is created by the providers and users. Socialism : Central Government sets values and controls every single aspect of your life.

Capitalism is based on rules of property and ownership, basically that I can own something, that you can't take it away from me through violence and that I can hire people to improve that something and they won't have an ownership stake on it (unless I want them to.) Those rules come from government. If you think about a society with no centralized rules on property and ownership, it wouldn't be very capitalistic, it…

Those rules regarding property and ownership predate government. The government likes to pretend that only it can enforce those rules, when in fact it is the entity most responsible for violating them. You can't seriously claim to enforce property rights when you yourself are seizing a sizable chunk of everyone's income for your own use. Also, there is no reason at all that the rules need to be "centralized" or promulgated and enforced by some special class of rulers. Property and ownership and the justice of proportional punishment for violating them are all logical consequences of self-ownership and reciprocation. People are perfectly capable of arranging to enforce their own rights without depending on an overgrown, overpriced, centralized protection racket.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#247

Post by nirui »

> capitalism increases inequality, it favors the wealthy at the expense of the poor

Does pure capitalism without cronyism give everybody an equal chance though? What if cronyism is the very product of current capitalism?

Finger swap is useless. To actually fix a problem, we need to find the root cause and fix the entire tree of problems one by one.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#248

Post by usrbinbash »

asow92 wrote: post #224
usrbinbash wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course they create vectors for cronyism, massively. All these improvements require constant vigil by regulatory bodies, the justice system and the public itself. They also rely heavily on the public being educated enough, interested enough and participatory enough to reflect bad behavior in their voting decisions. None of this however is an argument for less regulation. It is an argument for education and politica…

Do you think that kind of vigil is sustainable? Surely there will be some ebb and flow there, and that's what concerns me: what if it flows too far into one extreme or the other and some new, unforeseen scourge worse than what we have today shows itself.

Are people taking care that they are educated, stay informed, have an active interest in what's going on? Then it can work.

It's not an easy process, it is active work in fact, but it is possible.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#249

Post by gremlinsinc »

hypersoar wrote: post #103
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 broad concept of "lobbying" is really just people bringing their concerns to elected representatives. I don't really see how you would ban it entirely.

Easy.... congresspeople are public servants. As such make them be required to have a single bank account for their campaigns. This bank account has a $1 million limit.

Outlaw PACS/Super PACS.

Ban politicians from holding seats on corporate boards for 10 years following serving in any office, except they be returning to a board they already were on. (End revolving door/jobs).

Ban companies from donating at all to all elections.

Require news networks to supply free ads for candidates w/ equal airtime or ban all political ads period (I'd love this one). Let people get picked by merit of their debates alone.

I think the parties should also hold their primaries on the same day nationwide, so there's no 'game' or 'sport' it's just flat out - vote and be done with it, to the victor goes the spoils (the rest of the campaign$$ each candidate has amassed.

We also need ranked choice voting so that 3rd parties can have decent sway ...diluting the current duopoly and making it so interested parties and special interests if allowed would have to work harder and spend more to more parties to get their point across.

There's probably a slew of other things you could do. Of course this requires people in power to take away their own power...like that's gonna happen.

Re: Blame Cronyism, Not Capitalism

#250

Post by gremlinsinc »

refurb wrote: post #241
skywal_l wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we are discussing in good faith, the parent was probably talking about lobbying done by moneyed interests. Which is not necessary for democracy, itself a very broad term in its initial definition which does not include think tanks, political action comities and privately held mass media.

Wait what? You’re saying groups (think tanks, companies) shouldn’t be able to petition their elected representative as a condition of democracy?

Yes, companies aren't citizens.

Secondly, petitions are one thing, petitions with a hidden $1billion folded up in the middle is a bribe.

Bribes definitely should be illegal.

If I were to call up my senator, I should get the same 'attention' as Elon Musk would get if he were donating a Hospital to their hometown.

Post reply on HN