5 ms·

And what is your solution? You can say something is flawed, but compared to what, and how would you improve it?

by asow92 5y ago

depaya 5y ago
It's ok to express frustration with something without having a solution to it.
- asow92 5y ago
  How about you? What's your solution?
- VoodooJuJu 5y ago
  I guess it's "okay" (what isn't "okay" in this context?). But it's certainly not useful. So you've restated the problem - great. This is a good way to lead into a solution, which is the the more useful thing to discuss. So let's hear the solution.
  - depaya 5y ago
    I don't have a solution. I don't have much knowledge of such extremely complex systems and I have no hope of coming up with a solution myself. I can see that my car is sputtering black smoke when I drive it and correctly identify that it's a problem, but I bring it to an expert for a suggestion to fix it since I don't have much knowledge in this topic either.
    - asow92 5y ago
      Fine, don't contribute to the discussion in a constructive way, but our peer are in the thread above is: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29876728 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29876728
- zepto 5y ago
  Frustration with something is not the same as being ‘against’ that thing. If you are against it and you don’t have a solution then you are simply destructive.
usrbinbash 5y ago
The solution already exists and is used, to varying degrees, by many western industrializted countries, especially in Europe. 1. Regulated Capitalism 2. State Funded Infrastructure. ad 1) Capitalism isn't a bad system per-se, but needs to be kept in check. States need to ensure that un-competitive behavior is kept in check, that too-large monopolies are reigned in, that consumers are protected, that fair taxes are paid and that private wealth has no undue influence on politics. ad 2) Structural systems required for a society to function properly have to be, at least partially, state funded, state controlled, or even state owned, thus ensuring the availability and baseline quality of structural services to as many citizens as possible, with regard for revenue generation being a secondary concern.
- hnuser847 5y ago
  > 1. Regulated Capitalism This is why we have cronyism in the first place. Who do you think is writing the regulations? Who's funding the think tanks and the "grassroots" organizations? Who's paying for the campaigns?
  - simonh 5y ago
    Here in the UK we have pretty strict campaign finance limits and lobbying is also heavily regulated. In most European democracies the comment was referring to this is really not a serious problem. It's always a problem to _some_ extent, but the US is an extreme outlier on this one.
- asow92 5y ago
  These sound like reasonable improvements, and maybe not without their own potential vectors for cronyism. I am genuinely interested to read more.
  - usrbinbash 5y ago
    Of course they create vectors for cronyism, massively. All these improvements require constant vigil by regulatory bodies, the justice system and the public itself. They also rely heavily on the public being educated enough, interested enough and participatory enough to reflect bad behavior in their voting decisions. None of this however is an argument for less regulation. It is an argument for education and political participation.

And what is your solution? You can say something is flawed, but compared to what, and how would you improve it?

by asow92 5y ago

And what is your solution? You can say something is flawed, but compared to what, and how would you improve it?

depaya 5y ago

It's ok to express frustration with something without having a solution to it.

asow92 5y ago
How about you? What's your solution?
VoodooJuJu 5y ago
I guess it's "okay" (what isn't "okay" in this context?). But it's certainly not useful. So you've restated the problem - great. This is a good way to lead into a solution, which is the the more useful thing to discuss. So let's hear the solution.
- depaya 5y ago
  I don't have a solution. I don't have much knowledge of such extremely complex systems and I have no hope of coming up with a solution myself. I can see that my car is sputtering black smoke when I drive it and correctly identify that it's a problem, but I bring it to an expert for a suggestion to fix it since I don't have much knowledge in this topic either.
  - asow92 5y ago
    Fine, don't contribute to the discussion in a constructive way, but our peer are in the thread above is: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29876728 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29876728
zepto 5y ago
Frustration with something is not the same as being ‘against’ that thing. If you are against it and you don’t have a solution then you are simply destructive.

usrbinbash 5y ago

The solution already exists and is used, to varying degrees, by many western industrializted countries, especially in Europe. 1. Regulated Capitalism 2. State Funded Infrastructure. ad 1) Capitalism isn't a bad system per-se, but needs to be kept in check. States need to ensure that un-competitive behavior is kept in check, that too-large monopolies are reigned in, that consumers are protected, that fair taxes are paid and that private wealth has no undue influence on politics. ad 2) Structural systems required for a society to function properly have to be, at least partially, state funded, state controlled, or even state owned, thus ensuring the availability and baseline quality of structural services to as many citizens as possible, with regard for revenue generation being a secondary concern.

hnuser847 5y ago
> 1. Regulated Capitalism This is why we have cronyism in the first place. Who do you think is writing the regulations? Who's funding the think tanks and the "grassroots" organizations? Who's paying for the campaigns?
- simonh 5y ago
  Here in the UK we have pretty strict campaign finance limits and lobbying is also heavily regulated. In most European democracies the comment was referring to this is really not a serious problem. It's always a problem to _some_ extent, but the US is an extreme outlier on this one.
asow92 5y ago
These sound like reasonable improvements, and maybe not without their own potential vectors for cronyism. I am genuinely interested to read more.
- usrbinbash 5y ago
  Of course they create vectors for cronyism, massively. All these improvements require constant vigil by regulatory bodies, the justice system and the public itself. They also rely heavily on the public being educated enough, interested enough and participatory enough to reflect bad behavior in their voting decisions. None of this however is an argument for less regulation. It is an argument for education and political participation.