3 ms·

I think Animats' argument is that capitalism isn't getting those tweaks because there's no competition. Capitalism as a system has a near-monopoly. Back when it

by tlb 7y ago

Ididntdothis 7y ago
I guess we will have to learn how to live without a competitor that brings people together. Otherwise where can we get a replacement for the Soviet Union that scares people enough? China?
- yifanl 7y ago
  To me, China looks more like the logical conclusion of capitalism than some competing economic system.
  - Animats 7y ago
    Too early to say. The "Asian tigers", Korea, Singapore, Japan, etc. had a similar trajectory. If you believe Pikkety, that type of growth levels off at the level of developed countries once catch-up is achieved. Which is not a bad place to end up. There are then stagnation problems. Japan hit that first. The countries that have hit stagnation, other than the US, tend to build good public infrastructure. This pumps money into the economy, but not through the banks.
Animats 7y ago
I think Animats' argument is that capitalism isn't getting those tweaks because there's no competition. Capitalism as a system has a near-monopoly. Back when it had serious competition from the Soviet Union, people tried much harder to make it work better. Exactly. This led to much government regulation to keep big business from getting too heavy-handed. See the previous price discussion on insulin pricing for a modern example. Although drug prices have not been regulated, until recently there was an assumption that blatant overcharging would lead to government action. It didn't. Unions used to have much more power in the US. They had money and votes. Business only had money, and couldn't use it directly without being accused of bribery. Many little, and not so little, restrictions that used to keep businesses from getting too greedy have been removed in recent decades. Glass-Stegall, which kept banks and brokerages separate. Far fewer restrictions on banks. The removal of the restriction on "gambling" in stock markets, which limited derivatives. Allowing interstate branch banking. Repeal of the Utility Company Holding Act. The NYSE allowing multiple classes of stock (like Facebook, Google, etc.). Weakened telecom regulation. Weakened labor law enforcement. Unregistered hedge funds. Pension funds being allowed to invest in hedge funds. The Interstate Commerce Commission. The Civil Aeronautics Board. The list goes on.

by tlb 7y ago

Ididntdothis 7y ago

I guess we will have to learn how to live without a competitor that brings people together. Otherwise where can we get a replacement for the Soviet Union that scares people enough? China?

yifanl 7y ago
To me, China looks more like the logical conclusion of capitalism than some competing economic system.
- Animats 7y ago
  Too early to say. The "Asian tigers", Korea, Singapore, Japan, etc. had a similar trajectory. If you believe Pikkety, that type of growth levels off at the level of developed countries once catch-up is achieved. Which is not a bad place to end up. There are then stagnation problems. Japan hit that first. The countries that have hit stagnation, other than the US, tend to build good public infrastructure. This pumps money into the economy, but not through the banks.

Animats 7y ago

I think Animats' argument is that capitalism isn't getting those tweaks because there's no competition. Capitalism as a system has a near-monopoly. Back when it had serious competition from the Soviet Union, people tried much harder to make it work better. Exactly. This led to much government regulation to keep big business from getting too heavy-handed. See the previous price discussion on insulin pricing for a modern example. Although drug prices have not been regulated, until recently there was an assumption that blatant overcharging would lead to government action. It didn't. Unions used to have much more power in the US. They had money and votes. Business only had money, and couldn't use it directly without being accused of bribery. Many little, and not so little, restrictions that used to keep businesses from getting too greedy have been removed in recent decades. Glass-Stegall, which kept banks and brokerages separate. Far fewer restrictions on banks. The removal of the restriction on "gambling" in stock markets, which limited derivatives. Allowing interstate branch banking. Repeal of the Utility Company Holding Act. The NYSE allowing multiple classes of stock (like Facebook, Google, etc.). Weakened telecom regulation. Weakened labor law enforcement. Unregistered hedge funds. Pension funds being allowed to invest in hedge funds. The Interstate Commerce Commission. The Civil Aeronautics Board. The list goes on.