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

Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

thebignewsletter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 457 posts

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#341

Post by mptest »

scrubadub wrote: post #336
mptest wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are fixing no problems. Before I get back to your comment, I have to ask. You earnestly believe the party voting for children to work longer hours, more dangerous jobs, the party ensuring rape victims and children give birth to their rapists' child and in general remove women's medical autonomy, on religious grounds in a constitutionally secular democracy, are the ones 'defending women'? Shocking position. They…

I don't believe that either the Republicans or the Democrats are defending women, no. They're both patriarchal institutions that are misogynistic in different ways. > They do not, nor has anyone, "demanded everything that's been set up for women now has to include any male who says he's a woman". Sorry but you have been misinformed, this is the currently the actual progressive position. And it has led to horrifying o…

>both sides bad

Yeah, but one is way worse.

>law about criminals

You said "everything". "Everything" is what I'm challenging. No serious effort is made to force women to make any concessions, except by the party that is restricting their medical autonomy. And I guess prisoners? You've certainly got me there, but I don't think I've ever stated a good word about the correctional system.

What you link is a specific law covering a pretty specific category of people, ones already in jail. Not exactly "demanding everything women have be man's"...

You're not going to hear anyone who holds progressive political beliefs tout our countries approach to criminal correction. We house like 20% of the world's prisoners with 4% of the population. Of course prisons are rife with horrible stuff.

>No, what you're describing is a sexist redefinition of woman and man. There's really no need for it. It just reifies sex-role stereotypes

By saying the definitions are flexible I'm somehow reinforcing rigorous gender role stereotypes? That's about as non sequitor as it gets.

At the dr, in prisons, sure, get all biological. But for the rest of us normal people, it does not matter which genitals the person shitting in the stall next to me has. And it never will.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#342

Post by WalterBright »

neilwilson wrote: post #304
WalterBright wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the article falls for the classic trap of "rising prices are not inflation, it's ". Inflation is a general price increase caused by an increase in the supply of money relative to the value of goods and services in the economy. It's simple supply & demand - more money chasing the same number of goods => general price increases. Inflation prices never going down is a clear indicator that this is the cause. A general…

It’s not quite that simple. If I give you a new £20 note and you put it in a drawer then that won’t cause prices to go up. It’s not money supply that’s the issue, it’s money flow vs capacity to produce. There isn’t a fixed amount of stuff and there certainly isn’t a fixed speed at which money can change hands.

> If I give you a new £20 note and you put it in a drawer then that won’t cause prices to go up.

Withdrawing money from circulation (or lighting your cigars with it) cause a reduction in the money supply, meaning each remaining dollar is worth more, which is deflation.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#343

Post by WalterBright »

throwawayqqq11 wrote: post #335
WalterBright wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the article falls for the classic trap of "rising prices are not inflation, it's ". Inflation is a general price increase caused by an increase in the supply of money relative to the value of goods and services in the economy. It's simple supply & demand - more money chasing the same number of goods => general price increases. Inflation prices never going down is a clear indicator that this is the cause. A general…

Inflation should effect wages proportionally to prices. If it does not, its just a price imcrease, which is whats happening. Something, termites, something ...

Inflation does indeed cause wages to rise proportionately. But it takes time. Just like dropping a bucket of water in a bathtub does not immediately cause the entire surface to reach a new level.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#344

Post by sanex »

sologoub wrote: post #333
Animats wrote: post #211

Four. That's the magic number. There have to be four competitors of significant size before prices go down. There are both EU and US studies substantiating this. It's been seen in cellular phone networks, ISPs, drugstores, and banks. Drop below the threshold of four, and the magic happens. Prices go up, margins go up, and consumers lose. Four should be the basis of antitrust policy. Less than four, and there are two…

> Four. Interestingly, the US cell phone industry would seem competitive - major players (Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile) and a bunch of smaller and/or regional players including the incumbent telcos like xfinity and spectrum. Then you dig a little deeper and see that all that “competition” runs on the towers of one of the three and unlike with the reform of British Telecom (BT), there are no requirements for this infra…

5 years ago or so I had T-Mobile for $50/month unlimited everything. I switched off and just went back for $170 for a phone for my wife and I. To pretend to be comparable on a per line basis they gave me a phone number that I literally could not refuse. Before they bought Sprint we had the magic 4 but now it's 3 and a bunch of resellers.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#345

Post by mptest »

bequanna wrote: post #337
elliotto wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is wild to disagree with Pikettys magnum opus with a reference to a yahoo finance news article

The dude is a pure academic and just trying to sell socialism with hand waving. I look at it differently: His ideas are so weak and removed from reality that they can’t even stand up to a Yahoo Finance article. We should be careful taking policy advice from people who have never had real jobs.

So teaching isn't a real job? Authoring books isn't a real job? Someone should probably tell a lot of people the bad news...

>selling socialism with hand waving

Lol, more like selling it with award winning, best selling, taught in colleges books? If you're convinced that's "hand waving" you're beyond lost

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#346

Post by Spooky23 »

ryandrake wrote: post #189
Spooky23 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two Americas, the one that HN folks inhabit and the underclass. The former is doing great. The latter has grown and shifted. I grew up in a rural community that was in the process of unraveling from a prosperous farming and light industrial area to a rural slum. There are zero operational farms in that area today. The one I worked for as a teen was in continuous operation since the Dutch colonial period. Th…

> That’s an example of why the nihilism of MAGA is so appealing. The world is collapsing around many people. And this is what I don't get about current US politics. MAGA = Republicans. The Republican party is the party of generational wealth transfer. The Republican party is the party of elite businessmen lording over the working class. The Republican party is the party of all the economic forces that are unraveling…

MAGA or “conservatives” is different than republicans.

MAGA is a populist movement of nihilists being used by those money people. Problem is none of their problems are being addressed. Jesus, guns, and persecution of various straw men will run out of steam, and the angry populist energy will transition to real unrest.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#347

Post by WalterBright »

lovich wrote: post #295
WalterBright wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's just not feasible or economical to have 4+ broadband networks being built in an area Actually, it is. When telephone systems were invented, lots of telephone companies sprang up and ran wires everywhere. The barrier to this happening with broadband is regulation. Regulators work hard to ensure there is no broadband competition. > it seems like a ton of people see the problems created by capitalism and decide t…

> When telephone systems were invented, lots of telephone companies sprang up and ran wires everywhere. They did and cities ended up looking like this http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--91pqSjxr... There is not enough space to dedicate to electrical and internet wiring with a competition model like this. The physical space is a natural monopoly. What should be done is to treat the wiring as a utility…

Which proves my point. It was not cost that prevents multiple sets of wires being laid. It's regulation, and frankly rather poor management by the government.

For example, a road nearby was widened for bike lanes. While they were at it, a trench was dug before the repaving to enlarge the water/sewer pipes. I emailed the people in charge that they should consider burying the power lines, too. The power lines ran on telephone poles along the road, and the poles were festooned with wires. The power lines regularly get dismantled by trees and wind storms. Laying wire in an existing trench is cheap as dirt. Digging a trench and laying wire and repaving costs about a million dollars a mile (I was told this a few years ago by a power employee).

The reply I received was they'd already made the plans and couldn't be bothered.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#348

Post by WalterBright »

nitwit005 wrote: post #309
WalterBright wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's just not feasible or economical to have 4+ broadband networks being built in an area Actually, it is. When telephone systems were invented, lots of telephone companies sprang up and ran wires everywhere. The barrier to this happening with broadband is regulation. Regulators work hard to ensure there is no broadband competition. > it seems like a ton of people see the problems created by capitalism and decide t…

That sort of industry gets regulated because letting people build multiple incompatible networks is an extremely expensive thing to do. The railways often built incompatible tracks, signaling systems, and so forth, which was a problem nation's still struggle with. Power companies created incompatible systems. Japan is famous for running on two incompatible electrical grids to this day.

There are enormous economic forces that push for standardization. For example, your keyboard is likely connected via USB. USB isn't a government standard. Neither is Standard C. And endless other things that the market standardized. Even 2*4 lumber is standardized. Gasoline is standardized. And so on.

> Power companies created incompatible systems.

They're usually granted government monopolies.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#349

Post by WalterBright »

jmyeet wrote: post #330
WalterBright wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's just not feasible or economical to have 4+ broadband networks being built in an area Actually, it is. When telephone systems were invented, lots of telephone companies sprang up and ran wires everywhere. The barrier to this happening with broadband is regulation. Regulators work hard to ensure there is no broadband competition. > it seems like a ton of people see the problems created by capitalism and decide t…

Let's say it costs $1000 to bring fiber to each household in a given network build. The take up rate might be 35%. That is 35% of connected households become customers. Well that customer has to recoupe $3000 to pay for that build. Now imagine there are 2 last mile networks. The take up rate hasn't changed. If they cost the same then each customer has to recoup $6000. Network overbuilds make absolutely no sense. Gove…

> Network overbuilds make absolutely no sense.

You could say the same about any competition. And yet the evidence that competition reduces prices is enormous.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#350

Post by CPLX »

gruez wrote: post #318
CPLX wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ask yourself the reverse question now. Why can't it be true that the economics profession is wrong, or better yet "not even wrong" and not really even talking about anything that has real world applicability? Given the last few decades that should probably be the starting premise of any analysis.

>Why can't it be true that the economics profession is wrong, or better yet "not even wrong" and not really even talking about anything that has real world applicability? I'm not ruling it out, only pointing out that it's a lazy argument to handwave away the statistics while not providing evidence that's equal or better than the ones you're trying to refute. This is especially true when the discrepancy is from a grou…

I have a degree in economics and both my parents taught economics and I grew up with a couple Nobel prize winners in economics around the dinner table from time to time.

Which, in fairness, I didn’t mention earlier and isn’t necessarily something that moves forward a message board discussion anyways.

But like maybe consider the possibility that at this point “mainstream economics” is a lot closer to astrology than it is to science.

Post reply on HN