3 ms·

In theory that's true, but in practice the people at the top deciding what's profitable aren't working for maximising public good, so it doesn't work anymore

lotsofpulp 4y ago
Who are the people at the top? How do they “decide” revenue minus expenses? Are you claiming there is widespread fraud in SEC filings? If you are referring to many industries becoming controlled by a handful of large organizations, then people working in trading and finance have nothing to do with that. That is in the political arena.
- QuarterReptile 4y ago
  I presume he's talking about Congress, and by 'deciding' he's talking about them making regulations that effectively have the US government underwrite long tail risks while leaving profits privatized for larger financial institutions.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    I understood mcv’s comment about “stock manipulation” being part of the highest paying jobs to refer to people working in finance, such as HFTs.
    - mcv 4y ago
      HFTs are definitely what I was thinking about. I remember reading about "quants", brilliant engineers working for investment banks to optimise their HFT algorithms, because that pays more than using their skills to invent or build things that are actually useful to society. But the same is true for many other professions. I also remember reading that the highest paid engineers are working for Google and Facebook to optimise ad placement. CEOs get paid a lot even if their company does things that harm society. There's an entire industry just to help large companies avoid paying tax.
- uVacCXNiiJCTnYB 4y ago
  I'm not talking about specific people, just in general. People making decisions in companies are looking for revenue, and what brings money isn't necessarily aligned with public good. A lot of things that would be good for people/society have no good way of really being profitable (unless lawmakers do something to rebalance the game to somehow help them). And a lot of things that are profitable are objectively bad for society.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    I agree, but I did not get that context because it seems unrelated to my response to mcv.
- alistairSH 4y ago
  Not the OP, but "the people at the top" fall into a few categories in my mind... - Career politicians who are more interested in maintaining office than working for the public good. - Corporate executives who prioritize profit/stock price over the common good. The Sackler family comes to mind. - Financiers (of various types) who accumulate personal wealth to the detriment of the common good. It's possible to be a good politician or a good executive and not be "evil", but there are enough notable examples of the worst of both that both careers are somewhat sullied in the public eye. And of course, it's all shades of gray.

lotsofpulp 4y ago

Who are the people at the top? How do they “decide” revenue minus expenses? Are you claiming there is widespread fraud in SEC filings? If you are referring to many industries becoming controlled by a handful of large organizations, then people working in trading and finance have nothing to do with that. That is in the political arena.

QuarterReptile 4y ago
I presume he's talking about Congress, and by 'deciding' he's talking about them making regulations that effectively have the US government underwrite long tail risks while leaving profits privatized for larger financial institutions.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  I understood mcv’s comment about “stock manipulation” being part of the highest paying jobs to refer to people working in finance, such as HFTs.
  - mcv 4y ago
    HFTs are definitely what I was thinking about. I remember reading about "quants", brilliant engineers working for investment banks to optimise their HFT algorithms, because that pays more than using their skills to invent or build things that are actually useful to society. But the same is true for many other professions. I also remember reading that the highest paid engineers are working for Google and Facebook to optimise ad placement. CEOs get paid a lot even if their company does things that harm society. There's an entire industry just to help large companies avoid paying tax.
uVacCXNiiJCTnYB 4y ago
I'm not talking about specific people, just in general. People making decisions in companies are looking for revenue, and what brings money isn't necessarily aligned with public good. A lot of things that would be good for people/society have no good way of really being profitable (unless lawmakers do something to rebalance the game to somehow help them). And a lot of things that are profitable are objectively bad for society.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  I agree, but I did not get that context because it seems unrelated to my response to mcv.
alistairSH 4y ago
Not the OP, but "the people at the top" fall into a few categories in my mind... - Career politicians who are more interested in maintaining office than working for the public good. - Corporate executives who prioritize profit/stock price over the common good. The Sackler family comes to mind. - Financiers (of various types) who accumulate personal wealth to the detriment of the common good. It's possible to be a good politician or a good executive and not be "evil", but there are enough notable examples of the worst of both that both careers are somewhat sullied in the public eye. And of course, it's all shades of gray.