5 ms·

Reducing end user prices is the claimed outcome explicitly made by conservative groups. Much like the claim that "reducing taxes" will reduce prices.

by olliej 5y ago

thomascgalvin 5y ago
Yeah, those are called "lies".
- weq 5y ago
  [flagged]
- refurb 5y ago
  It’s amazing to see comments like this on a technology focused website - an industry that has moved leaps and bounds due to competition and free markets. I assume these commenters are either too young to have much life experience or young and idealistic without seeing how the world really works.
  - p_l 5y ago
    Or maybe some of us are aware of huge amounts of public grants that went into building up the foundations of that industry till it could operate without induced demand. And many of us also are aware of different constraints impacting monopoly creation and how capital intensive areas behave differently.
    - refurb 5y ago
      Sure, the military bootstrapped the semi-conductor industry, but we’re a long fucking way from the 8088 processor - thanks to capitalism. I mean for $1,000 I can have effectively a 1990’s supercomputer in my pocket. The government didn’t do that, greedy capitalists did.
      - MomoXenosaga 5y ago
        Greedy capitalists use the roads, power, water, education system and political stability that government creates.
      - Jasper_ 5y ago
        One of the most important things for a modern cell phone is the GPS receiver. Most couldn't function without it. GPS was and continues to be a system funded by the US government. In fact, the opening of GPS civilian use in 1999 directly corresponds with the global rollout of cell phones in general.
        cesarb 5y ago
        A modern cell phone can function perfectly fine without a GPS receiver; only things like map functionality would be lost without it. What needs a GPS receiver (or other timing synchronization source; GPS is a simple and inexpensive one) are AFAIK the cell phone base stations.
      - p_l 5y ago
        If you think government push ended with 8088, I fear you don't have any idea of history. Even in early 1990s, some companies pushing the edge only had customers because DARPA bankrolled it pretty much directly, a lot of success for many foundational tech in modern devices happened thanks to not just government grants for research, but grants for things like MOSIS. Took some serious decades and big money to switch from government having outsized impact on demand.
      - acdha 5y ago
        > I mean for $1,000 I can have effectively a 1990’s supercomputer in my pocket. The government didn’t do that, greedy capitalists did. Heavily reliant on research funded by the government, ambitious funding for things the internet, the financial stability and access to markets supported by the government, etc. Neither side of this is doing it on their own — it’s like trying to decide whether the wheel or chain deserves credit for making your bicycle work.
        5y ago
  - CJefferson 5y ago
    The problem is, in most countries, electricity sales aren't a free market full of competition. No-one here is arguing if the free market helped improve CPUs, but I think it's an entirely different question if things like free electricity + gas markets are useful (the evidence from Texas exactly seems to suggest "no").
  - lucian1900 5y ago
    Our industry developed due to the labour put in by so many and central planning and funding by several governments, not due to free markets. It's a literal idealist position to insist that free markets cause development, when the vast majority of material evidence across the world points to the contrary.
  - EliRivers 5y ago
    How much life experience do young people need to understand that they're being screwed over and that the society in which they live is becoming ever more tilted towards the benefit of the rich? Your constant amazement indicates that either you don't understand something, or the rest of the world are idiots can't see what's so self-apparent to you.
  - sangnoir 5y ago
    The "free" market gets too much credit: the best tech came from monopolies[1] Android is more "free market" than iOS: network providers and OEMs can extend the source code to their requirements and "compete" to consumers detriment. The consensus on HN seems to be that the centralized planning/walled garden approach of iOS is superior. 1. I'm being intentionally provocative,but hear me out: Unix, the IBM PC, Angular, React, CUDA
- dang 5y ago
  Please don't take HN threads further into ideological flamewar hell. It's just what we don't want here. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
sliken 5y ago
Yes, a common story from big businesses. Like the T-mobile+sprint merger (and various other mergers). More jobs! Better Service! Help compete with the other big telcos! The reality was layoffs, higher rates, and more profit.
dang 5y ago
Please don't take HN threads into ideological flamewar hell. It's just what we don't want here. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30267282 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30267282.

Reducing end user prices is the claimed outcome explicitly made by conservative groups. Much like the claim that "reducing taxes" will reduce prices.

by olliej 5y ago

Reducing end user prices is the claimed outcome explicitly made by conservative groups. Much like the claim that "reducing taxes" will reduce prices.

thomascgalvin 5y ago

Yeah, those are called "lies".

weq 5y ago
[flagged]
refurb 5y ago
It’s amazing to see comments like this on a technology focused website - an industry that has moved leaps and bounds due to competition and free markets. I assume these commenters are either too young to have much life experience or young and idealistic without seeing how the world really works.
- p_l 5y ago
  Or maybe some of us are aware of huge amounts of public grants that went into building up the foundations of that industry till it could operate without induced demand. And many of us also are aware of different constraints impacting monopoly creation and how capital intensive areas behave differently.
  - refurb 5y ago
    Sure, the military bootstrapped the semi-conductor industry, but we’re a long fucking way from the 8088 processor - thanks to capitalism. I mean for $1,000 I can have effectively a 1990’s supercomputer in my pocket. The government didn’t do that, greedy capitalists did.
    - MomoXenosaga 5y ago
      Greedy capitalists use the roads, power, water, education system and political stability that government creates.
    - Jasper_ 5y ago
      One of the most important things for a modern cell phone is the GPS receiver. Most couldn't function without it. GPS was and continues to be a system funded by the US government. In fact, the opening of GPS civilian use in 1999 directly corresponds with the global rollout of cell phones in general.
      - cesarb 5y ago
        A modern cell phone can function perfectly fine without a GPS receiver; only things like map functionality would be lost without it. What needs a GPS receiver (or other timing synchronization source; GPS is a simple and inexpensive one) are AFAIK the cell phone base stations.
    - p_l 5y ago
      If you think government push ended with 8088, I fear you don't have any idea of history. Even in early 1990s, some companies pushing the edge only had customers because DARPA bankrolled it pretty much directly, a lot of success for many foundational tech in modern devices happened thanks to not just government grants for research, but grants for things like MOSIS. Took some serious decades and big money to switch from government having outsized impact on demand.
    - acdha 5y ago
      > I mean for $1,000 I can have effectively a 1990’s supercomputer in my pocket. The government didn’t do that, greedy capitalists did. Heavily reliant on research funded by the government, ambitious funding for things the internet, the financial stability and access to markets supported by the government, etc. Neither side of this is doing it on their own — it’s like trying to decide whether the wheel or chain deserves credit for making your bicycle work.
      - 5y ago
- CJefferson 5y ago
  The problem is, in most countries, electricity sales aren't a free market full of competition. No-one here is arguing if the free market helped improve CPUs, but I think it's an entirely different question if things like free electricity + gas markets are useful (the evidence from Texas exactly seems to suggest "no").
- lucian1900 5y ago
  Our industry developed due to the labour put in by so many and central planning and funding by several governments, not due to free markets. It's a literal idealist position to insist that free markets cause development, when the vast majority of material evidence across the world points to the contrary.
- EliRivers 5y ago
  How much life experience do young people need to understand that they're being screwed over and that the society in which they live is becoming ever more tilted towards the benefit of the rich? Your constant amazement indicates that either you don't understand something, or the rest of the world are idiots can't see what's so self-apparent to you.
- sangnoir 5y ago
  The "free" market gets too much credit: the best tech came from monopolies[1] Android is more "free market" than iOS: network providers and OEMs can extend the source code to their requirements and "compete" to consumers detriment. The consensus on HN seems to be that the centralized planning/walled garden approach of iOS is superior. 1. I'm being intentionally provocative,but hear me out: Unix, the IBM PC, Angular, React, CUDA
dang 5y ago
Please don't take HN threads further into ideological flamewar hell. It's just what we don't want here. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

sliken 5y ago

Yes, a common story from big businesses. Like the T-mobile+sprint merger (and various other mergers). More jobs! Better Service! Help compete with the other big telcos! The reality was layoffs, higher rates, and more profit.

dang 5y ago

Please don't take HN threads into ideological flamewar hell. It's just what we don't want here. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30267282 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30267282.