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

How Europe crushes innovation

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 146 posts

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#111

Post by gwbas1c »

latexr wrote: post #96
gwbas1c wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> at the expense of the majority I disagree First, the vast majority of tech work is not in risky startups. Second, the risk is known. That is why high salaries are negotiated going into startups. Third, most comprehension is not in equity. Startup employees do invest in their retirement outside of their equity. Fourth, anyone can invest in software in the public market and through institutional investments like mutu…

> I disagree And then all your examples are about tech work and startups. Other types of work exist, and they comprise the majority of jobs. Labour laws don’t exist only for startups and tech workers. You’re also ignoring the argument of the article . > Criticize the system if you want. What's better? Feudalism? Communism? Let’s please leave out the purposefully exaggerated bad examples and engage in good faith. You…

> You’re also ignoring the argument of the article.

No I'm not. I've spent most of my career in the 4/ths of startups that aren't wildly successful. I've also walked away from situations where I wouldn't get paid because I'm not financially independent.

I'm not "rolling in dough," but I've done pretty well for myself. Of course I want more, but I'm well past the point of "enough."

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#112

Post by latexr »

gwbas1c wrote: post #111
latexr wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I disagree And then all your examples are about tech work and startups. Other types of work exist, and they comprise the majority of jobs. Labour laws don’t exist only for startups and tech workers. You’re also ignoring the argument of the article . > Criticize the system if you want. What's better? Feudalism? Communism? Let’s please leave out the purposefully exaggerated bad examples and engage in good faith. You…

> You’re also ignoring the argument of the article. No I'm not. I've spent most of my career in the 4/ths of startups that aren't wildly successful. I've also walked away from situations where I wouldn't get paid because I'm not financially independent. I'm not "rolling in dough," but I've done pretty well for myself. Of course I want more, but I'm well past the point of "enough."

> I've spent most of my career in the 4/ths of startups that aren't wildly successful.

That has nothing to do with the point. And again, you’re only focusing on one type of job which is not the only one which exists. There are other people in the world.

> I've done pretty well for myself. Of course I want more, but I'm well past the point of "enough."

And therein lies the issue. No, it’s not “of course”, that idea of “I have enough but want more” is not a universal desire. But it is a major source of the world’s problems. That’s how we get to major corporations exploiting workers, customers, polluting the environment, rigging elections… All because of “more” well past what they need. That is called “greed”.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#113

Post by gspetr »

gwbas1c wrote: post #90
latexr wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the argument the article is making. The point I’m making is that “innovation” which consists of a select few being better off at the expense of the majority is not something to be celebrated.

> at the expense of the majority I disagree First, the vast majority of tech work is not in risky startups. Second, the risk is known. That is why high salaries are negotiated going into startups. Third, most comprehension is not in equity. Startup employees do invest in their retirement outside of their equity. Fourth, anyone can invest in software in the public market and through institutional investments like mutu…

>anyone can invest in software in the public market and through institutional investments like mutual funds, ETFs, ect.

"Public" being the keyword. There is some irony in being on HN, a YC site, yet a random HN user cannot invest in a YC company: https://jaredheyman.medium.com/on-the-176-annual-return-of-a...

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#114

Post by surgical_fire »

ImageXav wrote: post #108
surgical_fire wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that was sound advice. I had the opportunity to move to the US and likely make 2-3x what I make in Europe. My question is - what for? I earn enough money here that I could buy a nice house and raise my family in relative comfort. Why take unnecessary risk when I already have what I want?

I guess that's the crux of it. From an individual perspective it makes sense to stay in a stable environment, especially if a family is involved. However, I think from a societal perspective it is desirable to have people who gamble on creating new products which can raise the bar in their given industries. Also, just because the start up fails doesn't mean it was a waste of time. If you manage to provide employment…

But that will always come down to individual preferences. Typically people that have the desire to take risks don't need that sort of advice, they will be looking for that sort of thing already.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#115

Post by naldb »

surgical_fire wrote: post #103
naldb wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually it’s everybody’s problem, since job inflexibility is one of the reasons why Europe is so poor compared to other first world countries. Who exactly benefits from a business going under? Its bigger competitors? The less well off are the ones that suffer the most from oligarchic sectors and cartels.

> Actually it’s everybody’s problem, since job inflexibility is one of the reasons why Europe is so poor compared to other first world countries. Except it is not. I chose to live in the EU when I had the option to move to the US, and it is fine. Unless your measurement of "being poor" is that you can't exploit people in a get rich quick scheme and make destructive amounts of money but being acquired or dumping your…

We are talking here about businesses with say 10 employees that go through dire straits and can’t fire people to survive. The only solution is to close down and lay EVERYONE off. IPO? Get rich quick scheme? Why is hyperbole the only response to this actual issue?

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#116

Post by naldb »

surgical_fire wrote: post #104
naldb wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know at the time of hiring that months or years down the road the business won’t go well?

If you are a business owner, the business doing well is your fucking job. If you can't do your job you should fail. What you want is the freedom to be shitty at running your company, and offload your incompetence by exploiting the workers under you.

It’s not “you” failing. If your business fails, everybody gets fired. Why is everybody getting fired better than firing a few people?

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#117

Post by jimbo808 »

jstummbillig wrote: post #20
knowledge-clay wrote: post #10

I'd rather live in a society with strong labor protections than one that is "more innovative", whatever that means.

Do you really? Or do you actually want to sustain your standard of living as safely as you can? Because then the question arises: What if the current way of handling labor protection in the EU (as one of many components) leads to destroying yours and everyone elses standard of living, simply because it's unaffordable? Would you still argue that this is the way to go? Everyone going down with the ship together? I don'…

I don't see a lot of Europeans trying to claw their way into the US, if that's any indication

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#118

Post by surgical_fire »

naldb wrote: post #116
surgical_fire wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are a business owner, the business doing well is your fucking job. If you can't do your job you should fail. What you want is the freedom to be shitty at running your company, and offload your incompetence by exploiting the workers under you.

It’s not “you” failing. If your business fails, everybody gets fired. Why is everybody getting fired better than firing a few people?

If the business fails, the owners will have to use their assets to adequately compensate the employees according to what they are owed, and the employees are free to find another job.

Let's not mince words here - if the business fails it was because of the incompetence of those managing it, and it would fail whether or not it was treating employees unfairly. I won't accept this as an excuse to erode labor rights.

Moreover, what weak-ass crybaby rhetoric is that now? I always hear that business owners should earn more because they take risks. Failing is a very real possibility when you take risks. If you don't want to take risks just don't start a business.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#119

Post by surgical_fire »

naldb wrote: post #115
surgical_fire wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Actually it’s everybody’s problem, since job inflexibility is one of the reasons why Europe is so poor compared to other first world countries. Except it is not. I chose to live in the EU when I had the option to move to the US, and it is fine. Unless your measurement of "being poor" is that you can't exploit people in a get rich quick scheme and make destructive amounts of money but being acquired or dumping your…

We are talking here about businesses with say 10 employees that go through dire straits and can’t fire people to survive. The only solution is to close down and lay EVERYONE off. IPO? Get rich quick scheme? Why is hyperbole the only response to this actual issue?

Again, of the business with only 10 employees cannot survive, it was due to the incompetence of those managing it. Part of a healthy economy is allowing businesses to fail, so that others can take its place.

If demand for those services exist, other businesses will take it. If the demand is not there, the business should not exist.

How your reply is related to the previous point of "Europe being poor" is for anyone to guess.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#120

Post by duxup »

>“When firing is costly, as it is in most of Europe, employers are reluctant to invest in risky ventures,”

Is that really the cost of innovation? People protections?

I find that alone hard to believe / is the biggest issue in Europe.

When I think of failed innovation I almost never. think "oh man this product would be better if we could fire people".

Post reply on HN