3 ms·

I'm afraid that this will simply move the problem (remove some problem and create new problems). How do you define big, etc. Another problem is that creating a

by chmike 10y ago

I'm afraid that this will simply move the problem (remove some problem and create new problems). How do you define big, etc. Another problem is that creating a glass cieling may cut motivation which was the biggest defect of communism. My impression is that something relating to the goal needs to be fixed. For many people capitalism boils down to make as much money as possible regardless of the impact on other humans and the world. This is what needs to be fixed. Otherwise capitalism allowing and providing incentive and reward for individual (or collective) initiative to make this world a better place is good. Limitation and repression is the first idea that comes to mind to fix a problem. Education is underated because it needs more time to see the benefit. Considering the demonstration made by terrorists that it is possible to lead someone to commit suicide and mass murdering just for ideas induced by education, my conclusion is that there is a huge leverage in education that has been ignored and wasted. This is the track I would favor. However not as was done in China many decades ago.

mantas 10y ago
I totally agree that capped capitalism would have it's own set of issues. Being from ex-ussr state I'm well aware of communism.. shortcomings. Communism was killing innovation at very low level. Small business? Fuck you. Self-employed? Fuck you. Artist who don't recite gov position? Fuck you. Work in BigCo and have some interesting ideas? Fuck you. Innovation did happen but it was very rare. Well, except military tech etc. The problem with capitalism is that once someone grows big, it's too easy for them to limit innovation. They either buy any innovation that may threaten them (and likely kill and/or damage it like Google) or make sure they have very hard time growing. Education alone won't help there. It may create more attempts to innovate, but the BigCo ceiling would still be there. It'd be great to aim for market where no single player have even double digits of market share. If there were 10 google searches, it'd be much easier to create new google search. Then educated people could push for innovation under their own banner rather than be forced to make their way through google ladder. I've seen somewhat similar development in my country. For example, clothes retailers. Not exactly innovative thing, but hear me out. In 90s, there were a lot of small shops with great (especially after soviet times) variety. In 00s, most of the clothes retail was run by single holding. They have franchises of several well known brands and are biggest renters in most shopping centres. There's not much of variety and pricing is shitty though. Thank god H&M squeezed in. But new small retailers seem to have a hard time. Once some brand/style starts getting popular, the big holding fills that niche too. There seem to be a narrow line between staying afloat and getting bigco interested in your niche.

by chmike 10y ago

mantas 10y ago

I totally agree that capped capitalism would have it's own set of issues. Being from ex-ussr state I'm well aware of communism.. shortcomings. Communism was killing innovation at very low level. Small business? Fuck you. Self-employed? Fuck you. Artist who don't recite gov position? Fuck you. Work in BigCo and have some interesting ideas? Fuck you. Innovation did happen but it was very rare. Well, except military tech etc. The problem with capitalism is that once someone grows big, it's too easy for them to limit innovation. They either buy any innovation that may threaten them (and likely kill and/or damage it like Google) or make sure they have very hard time growing. Education alone won't help there. It may create more attempts to innovate, but the BigCo ceiling would still be there. It'd be great to aim for market where no single player have even double digits of market share. If there were 10 google searches, it'd be much easier to create new google search. Then educated people could push for innovation under their own banner rather than be forced to make their way through google ladder. I've seen somewhat similar development in my country. For example, clothes retailers. Not exactly innovative thing, but hear me out. In 90s, there were a lot of small shops with great (especially after soviet times) variety. In 00s, most of the clothes retail was run by single holding. They have franchises of several well known brands and are biggest renters in most shopping centres. There's not much of variety and pricing is shitty though. Thank god H&M squeezed in. But new small retailers seem to have a hard time. Once some brand/style starts getting popular, the big holding fills that niche too. There seem to be a narrow line between staying afloat and getting bigco interested in your niche.