3 ms·

> The author blames McKinsey for gaming the system . But what is the system - it is just a list of laws and regulations written by Congress . If Congress finds

> The author blames McKinsey for gaming the system . But what is the system - it is just a list of laws and regulations written by Congress . If Congress finds any kind of gamification-it should change the laws accordingly. I support this view but I've had a lot of difficulty arguing it. It's similar to tax loopholes- accountants find legal, even if unintended ways to avoid or reduce tax. Government can either close the loophole or let it stand, but the point is that accountants are economically incentivized to find flaws in regulations that can be identified and corrected, so the laws get better. It's a form of arbitrage, and is a feature of a well functioning regulatory system. Another example is what all the electricity companies were doing in California when deregulation happened. All the Enron tactics of sending power out of state and back in, or bringing down generators to game the prices (this is distinct from the accounting fraud the company was known for, was generally legal, and done by all energy players). The root cause was poor regulation, and energy companies were identifying and demonstrating these flaws in a way that could only happen when there is money to be made. The government response should have been to quickly close the loopholes, but from what I remember, there was a lot of blaming the companies. It's the same here. People would rather blame an evil company because they are a convenient scapegoat than actually understand the root of the problem.

ayngg 5y ago
I agree too, for me it sort of boils down to don't hate the player, hate the game, and congress are the ones that make the game's rules. The game right now rewards unscrupulous behavior, so it makes sense that successful companies "get away" with doing it. As demonstrated, simply player hating doesn't do much.
wpietri 5y ago
Nah. Was regulation inadequate to keep up with Enron's level of sociopathy? Sure. Should we have had better regulation? Also yes. Does that in any way excuse Enron's behavior? Not at all, I say. But let's see if you're sincere in your principles. If I can find a way to get away with murdering you, is that ok? What if I turn a profit doing it by, say, taking all your assets? After all, it's kinda ridiculous how fragile the human body is. I'm practically doing you (and your next of kin) a favor by demonstrating how dangerous it is to have major arteries and veins so exposed. And I could also surface issues with the legal system; we know that the homicide clearance rate is only 55%, [1] so by your logic I'm helping the laws get better by giving lawmakers more data to work with. I of course wouldn't do this, because I think one shouldn't do harmful things just because one can get away with it. But if you truly believe in this, just post your name and address, and I'm sure some public-spirited person will take you up on your offer of a little bit of for-profit, blame-free murder. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/194213/crime-clearance-rate-by-type-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/194213/crime-clearance-r...

ayngg 5y ago

I agree too, for me it sort of boils down to don't hate the player, hate the game, and congress are the ones that make the game's rules. The game right now rewards unscrupulous behavior, so it makes sense that successful companies "get away" with doing it. As demonstrated, simply player hating doesn't do much.

wpietri 5y ago

Nah. Was regulation inadequate to keep up with Enron's level of sociopathy? Sure. Should we have had better regulation? Also yes. Does that in any way excuse Enron's behavior? Not at all, I say. But let's see if you're sincere in your principles. If I can find a way to get away with murdering you, is that ok? What if I turn a profit doing it by, say, taking all your assets? After all, it's kinda ridiculous how fragile the human body is. I'm practically doing you (and your next of kin) a favor by demonstrating how dangerous it is to have major arteries and veins so exposed. And I could also surface issues with the legal system; we know that the homicide clearance rate is only 55%, [1] so by your logic I'm helping the laws get better by giving lawmakers more data to work with. I of course wouldn't do this, because I think one shouldn't do harmful things just because one can get away with it. But if you truly believe in this, just post your name and address, and I'm sure some public-spirited person will take you up on your offer of a little bit of for-profit, blame-free murder. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/194213/crime-clearance-rate-by-type-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/194213/crime-clearance-r...