2 ms·
I think capitalism as a way of assigning price is ok. But opportunity cost and externalities are currently being ignored, largely due to special interests that
by zackmorris 9y ago
I think capitalism as a way of assigning price is ok. But opportunity cost and externalities are currently being ignored, largely due to special interests that now decide things like US tax policy in order to favor corporations and wealthy individuals.
So for example I think everyone reading Hacker News has a side project they would like to make that would take something like 6 months to implement. It might even go as far as automating their job, or disrupting entire industries like Stripe or Square did.
Instead, most of us are barely making rent. So we spend the entirety of our time doing evolutionary (rather than revolutionary) work. This is largely by design, because profit comes from an imbalance in skills. We pay more when we need something. If we fix all the problems in the world by way of disruptive 6 month startup projects, there won't be anybody to buy the stuff that they can't make themselves. That's why I look at wealth inequality as a means rather than an end. The less time/wealth we have, the more time/wealth they have.
As for externalities, well, those are handled through tax policy since governments are the only entities large enough to counter the private sector. The general trend now is to gut all science and environmental agencies. The current era reminds me very much of growing up in the 80s. Tremendous potential being squandered for short term gain.