An Economy of Overfed Middlemen • Hacker News Board

Re: An Economy of Overfed Middlemen

#101

Post by alehlopeh » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 8:56 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #65

WalterBright wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and hide the negative effects from the public at least a little, you're a Real American Hero. Has there ever been a socialist operation (or any other operation) that didn't also do this? Like, say, Chernobyl?

Chernobyl wasn't hiding the negative effects of making money. edit: I think Communism, or at least Soviet communism, is as bad or worse for the environment as capitalism. The difference is that the benefits of Soviet environmental disasters flowed to the nation in general. The benefits under capitalism generally go to fewer people than I could fit in my bathroom.

Look at what the Soviets did to whale populations. I don’t think you can argue those benefits flowed to anyone.

Re: An Economy of Overfed Middlemen

#102

Post by UweSchmidt » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 9:06 PM UTC

rahimnathwani wrote: post #15

Middlemen (e.g. wholesalers and retailers) serve a valuable function. Imagine each consumer having to maintain relationships with hundreds of factory owners and tens of farmers.

The internet was supposed to clear out all the middlemen. The websites consumers and factories use should be completely commodified and under strong competition, and with lots of innovation, like in the early days.

Very disappointing.

Re: An Economy of Overfed Middlemen

#103

Post by semanticjudo » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 9:14 PM UTC

Brokers (what the author calls "middlemen") have existed for ages and served all sorts of purposes in all sorts of economic activities. They serve a specific and valuable function in the economy.

The author muddles the point by bringing this into the equation. The core, valid issue raised is monopoly power. Which will naturally be the end goal of any enterprise. It is governments job to bring reasonable power to bear to prevent monopolies. Ours is failing to do this due to crony capitalism - all of the benefits both sides of the political aisle reap by maintaining the status quo.

Re: An Economy of Overfed Middlemen

#104

Post by rahimnathwani » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 9:22 PM UTC

UweSchmidt wrote: post #102

rahimnathwani wrote: post #15

Middlemen (e.g. wholesalers and retailers) serve a valuable function. Imagine each consumer having to maintain relationships with hundreds of factory owners and tens of farmers.

The internet was supposed to clear out all the middlemen. The websites consumers and factories use should be completely commodified and under strong competition, and with lots of innovation, like in the early days. Very disappointing.

E-commerce isn't just about websites.

If I buy a charging cord from a factory owner, how long before I have it in my hand? And how much will shipping cost?

The fact that I can order a charging cord (or 10 different ones from 10 different manufacturers) and have them delivered tomorrow is innovation.

Re: An Economy of Overfed Middlemen

#105

Post by tomohawk » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 9:24 PM UTC

Academic institutions are the most overfed middlemen. They've insinuated themselves into the ability to have a job in many fields.

Has there ever been a winter that affects academic institutions? Ever been a need to cut back? Tighten the belt? They are like an overgrown jungle.

They often peddle shoddy goods (degrees that will never pay off), to unsophisticated consumers (18 year olds and their parents). Any other industry would have laws and regulations attempting to protect the unwary, but somehow, only angels work in adademic institutions.

They have choruses of shills (guidance councilers and others) telling anyone who will listen that if you don't go to college, your life will be ruined. See how indispensible they are?

Can't afford it? Get a subsidized loan for which the institution has no skin in the game. Can't pay it off after? Not their fault!

Institution needs more money? Just raise the rent.

Re: An Economy of Overfed Middlemen

#106

Post by darth_avocado » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 9:25 PM UTC

Without reading the article and just the headline, I thought this was going to be an article on economy that has a bloated amount of over paid middle management. Was very disappointed.

Re: An Economy of Overfed Middlemen

#107

Post by fleddr » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 9:31 PM UTC

"The text of the Sherman Act bars ‘monopolization,’ so to write that one is trying to build firms that can ‘monopolize’ is, well, remarkable."

Perhaps remarkable to say it out loud, but other than that not remarkable at all and totally logical.

Any company in a free market is incentivized to combat their number one threat: competition. You can combat competition with a good product, but also more hostile methods like outgrowing, acquisitions, patents, lobbying, cartels, etc. Competition is an existential threat so the incentives are very strong. Being the only one playing nicely means your business is dead.

Monopolization in tech is even more incentivized as it's often trivial for competition to copy your approach/product. So "good product" just doesn't cut it.

The only remarkable thing is an almost complete lack of regulation, Sherman act or not. The article is full of examples of monopolies that should not exist. But they do exist. Regulation is non-existing or 10 years late.

Re: An Economy of Overfed Middlemen

#108

Post by fleddr » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 9:33 PM UTC

paulryanrogers wrote: post #2

Sometimes I wonder if 'monopoly' in the US has become a no true Scotsman fallacy. The threshold of direct consumer harm is either so high or evidence requirements so onerous it's as if there is no more Sherman Antitrust Act. The monopolizing doesn't even have to be in a computer or layers of shell companies anymore.

Same for when you read about two large companies merging, pending regulatory approval.

My immediate thought: it's going be allowed. Regulator after 6 months: it's allowed.

Re: An Economy of Overfed Middlemen

#109

Post by fleddr » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 9:35 PM UTC

jmeister wrote: post #40

danaris wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it? Or does it have more to do with the massive industry capture of politics? Not to mention the right-wing ideology of, effectively, if you can make money doing it, and hide the negative effects from the public at least a little, you're a Real American Hero.

There are many progressives who've come around to favouring mega businesses over "mom-and-pop" for: higher wages, stabler jobs, easier enforcement of regulations.. For example: Matt Yglesias

True, the most progressive people (largely just optical) work for the largest neoliberal monopolists.

Re: An Economy of Overfed Middlemen

#110

Post by effingwewt » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 9:37 PM UTC

semanticjudo wrote: post #103

Brokers (what the author calls "middlemen") have existed for ages and served all sorts of purposes in all sorts of economic activities. They serve a specific and valuable function in the economy. The author muddles the point by bringing this into the equation. The core, valid issue raised is monopoly power. Which will naturally be the end goal of any enterprise. It is governments job to bring reasonable power to bear…

No post body was provided.