4 ms·
It's a fundamental question wether people should be allowed to take on risks or not. If you are leaning towards the "no they should not" side, then consider th
by kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
It's a fundamental question wether people should be allowed to take on risks or not.
If you are leaning towards the "no they should not" side, then consider that doing a startup is also very risky. So maybe that should be illegal, too? Or at least, there should be government startup specialists that evaluate ideas and decide wether people should be allowed to create such startups?
Or should there be an elite of people who would be allowed to create startups, and the poor people (can't afford the risk) should be restricted to union jobs?
- wpietri 5y agoThat is not a fundamental question. Everybody agrees that people should be generally allowed to take risks. However, we also constrain those risks in all sorts of ways so that we can run a reasonably safe and effective society. The eternal questions are which risks lead to generally positive-sum activity and which tend to be dangerously opaque, negative-sum, or with strong negative externalities. You can see this is almost any serious activity. Not just investment. Think of food, or transport, or construction.
- kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago"Everybody agrees that people should be generally allowed to take risks." Not really, the nanny state is a thing.