3 ms·
That's a good point. Seems like a bit of a hole in the system though. Why does it have to be so hard for an organization succeed without an existing connection
by Skunkleton 8y ago
That's a good point. Seems like a bit of a hole in the system though. Why does it have to be so hard for an organization succeed without an existing connection to success? If Steve hadn't funded Pixar, then we wouldn't have gotten a bunch of cool stuff. I would guess there are hundreds of Pixars that had no Steve. Of course there is no obvious answer to this problem, and the system we have is way way better than what was available historically.
- simonh 8y agoPixar came out of the Lucasfilm digital arm and didn't really have any existing connection to Steve Jobs. How to link investors up with startups and growth opportunities in businesses is an old problem that ideally needs multiple solutions available. [rant]I think the success of capitalism has partially been the reward mechanism, but it's also been that it allows and encourages multiple mechanisms for capital to link up with investment opportunities. The alternatives have all offered grand ideal, theoretically perfect mechanisms for the distribution and allocation of assets. It's not that those mechanisms are necessarily all useless, I do think a degree of state capitalism and central planning for really big, long term or essential projects have their place, but they can't be the only solution. At it's core capitalism is about individual freedom, and that includes the freedom to own your own small business, or to aggregate together into large group enterprises like banks and corporations, or to vote for governments that fund essential services. These are not natural opposites IMHO, and ideologies on the left or the right that force them into opposition do so only because they themselves are flawed.[/rant]