5 ms·

A couple counterpoints: first, sustainable profit in general happens when you serve your customers well. If you don't satisfy your customers, you don't make mo

A couple counterpoints: first, sustainable profit in general happens when you serve your customers well. If you don't satisfy your customers, you don't make money — at least for long. The perverse incentive structures you mention are largely the result of unwise legislation and regulation. Second, there's a real moral difference between the voluntary association among people in business and the coercive foundation of government. One is built on people wanting to trade value for value, and the other is built on armed military, police, and jailers. I would rather promote the former, even if it sometimes would be more efficient on the surface to force people to cooperate.

jimbokun 7y ago
> If you don't satisfy your customers, you don't make money — at least for long. Unless you have a monopoly or a cartel or capture government regulation of your industry.
tracer4201 7y ago
You can serve your customers and make a profit either way because you have effectively a monopoly. In the example of social media, you see FB now open and even advocating the government regulate social media - because it only makes it that much harder for the new guy to jump through the hoops whereas FB is already at more than critical mass. I think your second point is overly simplifying a lot of complexity. I agree that government has this coercive function... However, it’s also true that unchecked private enterprise ends up influencing that government to meet their own special interests. You want to promote the former, but the former ends up making the large campaign contributions so they can have legislation written in their favor... laws that apply to the common person don’t apply to these big corporations. Hence, we socialize losses but privatize profits. The fat cats go to prisons (if ever) that are potentially comparable to high end hotels, nicer than the homes of many ordinary citizens.
- JasonFruit 7y ago
  I understand your criticism of my second point, but notice that for your criticism to be valid, there needs to be a government involved in forcefully regulating private industry. I reject that sort of government.
  - tracer4201 7y ago
    I’m not sure what your comment is getting at. Government exists because we need courts, cops, enforcement of contracts, some level of infrastructure for society to function - and whether you reject it or not, it does exist. But to concede power to private enterprise without any set of rules to protect the common good has no merit. The obvious examples are monopolies... and that’s only one kind of market failure. As far as some moral conflict is concerned because of the policing powers of the state - that’s why we have something resembling a democracy, even if it’s imperfect.

jimbokun 7y ago

> If you don't satisfy your customers, you don't make money — at least for long. Unless you have a monopoly or a cartel or capture government regulation of your industry.

tracer4201 7y ago

You can serve your customers and make a profit either way because you have effectively a monopoly. In the example of social media, you see FB now open and even advocating the government regulate social media - because it only makes it that much harder for the new guy to jump through the hoops whereas FB is already at more than critical mass. I think your second point is overly simplifying a lot of complexity. I agree that government has this coercive function... However, it’s also true that unchecked private enterprise ends up influencing that government to meet their own special interests. You want to promote the former, but the former ends up making the large campaign contributions so they can have legislation written in their favor... laws that apply to the common person don’t apply to these big corporations. Hence, we socialize losses but privatize profits. The fat cats go to prisons (if ever) that are potentially comparable to high end hotels, nicer than the homes of many ordinary citizens.

JasonFruit 7y ago
I understand your criticism of my second point, but notice that for your criticism to be valid, there needs to be a government involved in forcefully regulating private industry. I reject that sort of government.
- tracer4201 7y ago
  I’m not sure what your comment is getting at. Government exists because we need courts, cops, enforcement of contracts, some level of infrastructure for society to function - and whether you reject it or not, it does exist. But to concede power to private enterprise without any set of rules to protect the common good has no merit. The obvious examples are monopolies... and that’s only one kind of market failure. As far as some moral conflict is concerned because of the policing powers of the state - that’s why we have something resembling a democracy, even if it’s imperfect.