4 ms·

Instead of repeating my response I'll link to our previous exchange: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10793258 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10793258

by firasd 11y ago

Instead of repeating my response I'll link to our previous exchange: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10793258 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10793258 (edit: updated the link) Meanwhile I'll point out that this sort of disdain coupled with a demand that India accept a Faustian bargain ("Who could possibly be against this?", as Zuck says) is exactly what prompts people to think of this perspective as a variation of the "White Man's Burden". I reject the idea that if someone comes up with a plan for a country, upon turning it down the country has to provide an immediate substitute. If I say highly-polluting cars are affordable and will give more people mobility, it doesn't mean opponents have to immediately provide less-polluting cars at the same price.

marcoperaza 11y ago
You've linked one level too deep into the conversation. My arguments about the power of the free market are not limited to India or any particular country. I preach the same for America. The American government is incompetent and is holding back growth.
- chris_wot 11y ago
  The number of dreadful services produced in the free market is amazingly high also. Many organisations do a MUCH worse job than government.
  - roarkjs 11y ago
    But they can and should go out of business
    - TeMPOraL 11y ago
      Except they often don't. Being horrible and abusing people is very profitable. Democratic governments can also be voted "out of business", and the result is more-less the same as with companies: good and evil thrive, what disappears is people and organizations too stupid or too inhibited to game the system.
      - m52go 11y ago
        Evil business is often sustained by some form of government subsidies. Examples abound in education, healthcare, finance, etc.
        TeMPOraL 11y ago
        True, but so are good ones. Subsidies are orthogonal to business morality.
        marcoperaza 11y ago
        One of the great things about business is that they don't have to follow much morality besides their own self-interest to be useful to society. Subsidies preserve broken business models at great cost to not just taxpayers, but economic efficiency and quality of service. They create and perpetuate structural deficiencies in the economy. They reward political rent-seeking instead of creating real value for people. As they pile up, the cumulative effect becomes worse and the ability of society to change its mind erodes. At an extreme, when subsidies drive a huge portion of economic activity, returning to a free market requires years of painful readjustment.
        TeMPOraL 11y ago
        They also support business models that do good when doing good is not profitable. Or basic research, which is pretty much by definition something the market won't touch with a ten-foot pole. Or ventures that could be the milestones to fixing something big about the world (see: Tesla Motors). The great thing about business is also one of the worst things about it. Profit drive is a very powerful optimization force, and we owe to it most of the wealth around us. It's great when it kind of follows along the lines society wants it to. But, as you said, it has essentially no reason to keep doing that, and so when being horrible and evil is more profitable, the business turns horrible and evil and that's where we need the government - an agent that does not follow the same incentive gradient - to step in and force that business to behave. The market is like a great river. It's simple - it flows downhill. Put an obstacle on its way, and the river shall destroy it or route around it. But just as majestic and life-giving it is, it can equally easily take lives away. It will flood villages and cities without stopping. Governments are like people tasked with landscaping. They don't have the power of the river. But they can put things on its path to redirect it - whether away from settlements in danger, or towards a barren land, or straight into a power plant that will help feed millions. We need both.

by firasd 11y ago

marcoperaza 11y ago

You've linked one level too deep into the conversation. My arguments about the power of the free market are not limited to India or any particular country. I preach the same for America. The American government is incompetent and is holding back growth.

chris_wot 11y ago
The number of dreadful services produced in the free market is amazingly high also. Many organisations do a MUCH worse job than government.
- roarkjs 11y ago
  But they can and should go out of business
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    Except they often don't. Being horrible and abusing people is very profitable. Democratic governments can also be voted "out of business", and the result is more-less the same as with companies: good and evil thrive, what disappears is people and organizations too stupid or too inhibited to game the system.
    - m52go 11y ago
      Evil business is often sustained by some form of government subsidies. Examples abound in education, healthcare, finance, etc.
      - TeMPOraL 11y ago
        True, but so are good ones. Subsidies are orthogonal to business morality.
        marcoperaza 11y ago
        One of the great things about business is that they don't have to follow much morality besides their own self-interest to be useful to society. Subsidies preserve broken business models at great cost to not just taxpayers, but economic efficiency and quality of service. They create and perpetuate structural deficiencies in the economy. They reward political rent-seeking instead of creating real value for people. As they pile up, the cumulative effect becomes worse and the ability of society to change its mind erodes. At an extreme, when subsidies drive a huge portion of economic activity, returning to a free market requires years of painful readjustment.
        TeMPOraL 11y ago
        They also support business models that do good when doing good is not profitable. Or basic research, which is pretty much by definition something the market won't touch with a ten-foot pole. Or ventures that could be the milestones to fixing something big about the world (see: Tesla Motors). The great thing about business is also one of the worst things about it. Profit drive is a very powerful optimization force, and we owe to it most of the wealth around us. It's great when it kind of follows along the lines society wants it to. But, as you said, it has essentially no reason to keep doing that, and so when being horrible and evil is more profitable, the business turns horrible and evil and that's where we need the government - an agent that does not follow the same incentive gradient - to step in and force that business to behave. The market is like a great river. It's simple - it flows downhill. Put an obstacle on its way, and the river shall destroy it or route around it. But just as majestic and life-giving it is, it can equally easily take lives away. It will flood villages and cities without stopping. Governments are like people tasked with landscaping. They don't have the power of the river. But they can put things on its path to redirect it - whether away from settlements in danger, or towards a barren land, or straight into a power plant that will help feed millions. We need both.