3 ms·
It's VERY hard to demonstrate net negatives on second and third order effects, especially so as to convince a proponent of the first order effect. You're lookin
by ghein 8y ago
It's VERY hard to demonstrate net negatives on second and third order effects, especially so as to convince a proponent of the first order effect. You're looking at businesses not created, features not developed, strengthening of colossal businesses (celebrated upthread), and adverse changes that aren't superficially related. The most comprehensive evidence comes from decades long comparisons of countries or differences in regulatory regimes (before and after airline and trucking deregulation in the US) and you still have epic arguments over results and effects.
The other issue is philosophical. You seem to want proof that a company should exist and require extraordinary evidence against a law. I want proof that a law should exist and require extraordinary evidence against a company. As a shorthand its France vs America. You'll note that we're not using Minitel bur rather a board hosted by a VC operation who shares a mindset with the founding team of Uber.
- throwaway37585 8y agoAs Frédéric Bastiat said, there is that which is (easily) seen and that which is not (easily) seen. Hazlitt: “The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.”