4 ms·

I rarely see articles as stupid and poorly thought out as this one. Much as I've detested the VCs I've personally met, are we supposed to replace new business f

I rarely see articles as stupid and poorly thought out as this one. Much as I've detested the VCs I've personally met, are we supposed to replace new business funding with GOSPLAN?

toomanyrichies 3y ago
For those who (like me) were wondering what GOSPLAN is: “ The State Planning Committee, commonly known as Gosplan,… was the agency responsible for central economic planning in the Soviet Union.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosplan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosplan
cratermoon 3y ago
> GOSPLAN Mentioning the Soviet Union's economic planning commission has the whiff of red-baiting. What's a real objection?
- brigadier132 3y ago
  The objection is that this is a country that guarantees freedom for individuals. Freedom encompasses economic freedom, you can't have a free nation without economic freedom.
  - cratermoon 3y ago
    > this is a country that guarantees freedom for individuals It does a piss-poor job of that for the majority of individuals > Freedom encompasses economic freedom That's a relatively recent, capitalistic, construction. See, e.g. The Big Myth: How American Business Taught Us to Loathe Government and Love the Free Market, by Erik M. Conway and Naomi Oreskes
  - standardUser 3y ago
    Every nation in the world, including the US, has a vast public sector, some form of industrial policy, and several libraries worth of economic regulations.
  - notacoward 3y ago
    Would you say that most people in the US have economic freedom, or has its limitation just been outsourced from the official government to the shadow government of cronies?
- pinewurst 3y ago
  It was shorthand, albeit probably too obscure, for failed state central planning as an alternative to VC. As for red-baiting, please feel free to fill in the destructive authoritarian stasis of your choice.
  - cratermoon 3y ago
    > the destructive authoritarian stasis of your choice. Three words: Florida under Ron DeSantis
  - pyrale 3y ago
    > please feel free to fill in the destructive authoritarian stasis of your choice. Can we fill in VC-funded authoritarian companies like Palantir? Can we ask which share of 3-letter agencies' data come from VC-funded companies? I mean, your point would have made sense 25 years ago, but VC-funded companies have made stasi look like amateurs in recent times.
brigadier132 3y ago
I've also had the same reaction to the venture capitalists I've met. It's surprising how universally terrible my impression of them has been. But I also agree with you, this article is just absurd. > Why should we trust them with so much power over the economy? "We" didn't entrust them with anything. It was entrusted to them by individuals. These closet authoritarians really just want to control every decision everyone makes.
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
New businesses don't need to be funded this way and can instead grow more organically. It would be nice to see more room for smaller local businesses not to be "out-competed" by someone with VC-funding who can afford to operate at a loss until they need to fuck over the consumer.
- akhosravian 3y ago
  Is it better to be “out-competed” by someone who is wealthy from some previous source? Maybe it’s another business, but maybe it’s wealth from their family.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
gumballindie 3y ago
Corporations are gosplan. There’s so much centralisation that they basically control the economy and society. Venture capital is great but large entities are not.
- blululu 3y ago
  Not sure about the downvotes. In a very real way most corporations act as a localized command economy with a full range of central planners. Workers are consistently asked to think about the good of the company instead of their own interests. The crucial difference is that there are frequently a lot of similar competing firms, so there are obvious points of reference to evaluate performance, people can bail from a failing or oppressive company and a company can stop existing if it’s planners consistently blow it. The issue isn’t central planning or collective enterprise per se, the issue is that there was no feedback to correct failures when there is only one firm doing all the planning.
Spivak 3y ago
I mean the gold standard of business funding is state funding, a state's department of economic development is incentivized/mandated to create large sustainable businesses that bring in outside income and provide lots of jobs, they come with very few strings, they have an extremely long horizon, they have connections to state universities if you need r&d, and the loans are usually "no recourse." There's a reason the line for these loans is a mile long. A middle grounds between anarchy and centrally planned economy does exist.
pyrale 3y ago
Imagine starting a small company, and having it grow at a slower, but sustainable pace. The idea you develop makes sense, and so you start being noticed. You are offered funding opportunities to grow faster. Now you're facing a choice: either take the money, and start answering to VCs, or don't take the money, and face the risk that someone copies your idea, gets lavish funding and buries you by, litterally, selling at a huge loss for years. The scenario of VC-funded companies doing price-dumping for years isn't outlandish, it's what Uber did for instance. To answer your question, what's supposed to replace the VC model is the people that took the second option and didn't make it, and those that would have, had it been a viable option. More sustainable companies that take the time to build a real product that they grow over time with their customers' money. And for companies that need heavy funding to start, well, they can still secure loans, find industrial partners, get grants, etc. Many companies started like that and do fine to this day.
- indus 3y ago
  Not everything needs venture capital. That was the idea to find outliers and invest in world impacting outcomes. Probably the best meritocratic allocation of capital.
tivert 3y ago
> I rarely see articles as stupid and poorly thought out as this one. Much as I've detested the VCs I've personally met, are we supposed to replace new business funding with GOSPLAN? You're presenting a false choice: it's not some binary between VC and central planning. You can still have capitalism and growth without huge pools of money investing with an unicorn-or-bust mentality.

I rarely see articles as stupid and poorly thought out as this one. Much as I've detested the VCs I've personally met, are we supposed to replace new business funding with GOSPLAN?

toomanyrichies 3y ago

For those who (like me) were wondering what GOSPLAN is: “ The State Planning Committee, commonly known as Gosplan,… was the agency responsible for central economic planning in the Soviet Union.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosplan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosplan

cratermoon 3y ago

> GOSPLAN Mentioning the Soviet Union's economic planning commission has the whiff of red-baiting. What's a real objection?

brigadier132 3y ago
The objection is that this is a country that guarantees freedom for individuals. Freedom encompasses economic freedom, you can't have a free nation without economic freedom.
- cratermoon 3y ago
  > this is a country that guarantees freedom for individuals It does a piss-poor job of that for the majority of individuals > Freedom encompasses economic freedom That's a relatively recent, capitalistic, construction. See, e.g. The Big Myth: How American Business Taught Us to Loathe Government and Love the Free Market, by Erik M. Conway and Naomi Oreskes
- standardUser 3y ago
  Every nation in the world, including the US, has a vast public sector, some form of industrial policy, and several libraries worth of economic regulations.
- notacoward 3y ago
  Would you say that most people in the US have economic freedom, or has its limitation just been outsourced from the official government to the shadow government of cronies?
pinewurst 3y ago
It was shorthand, albeit probably too obscure, for failed state central planning as an alternative to VC. As for red-baiting, please feel free to fill in the destructive authoritarian stasis of your choice.
- cratermoon 3y ago
  > the destructive authoritarian stasis of your choice. Three words: Florida under Ron DeSantis
- pyrale 3y ago
  > please feel free to fill in the destructive authoritarian stasis of your choice. Can we fill in VC-funded authoritarian companies like Palantir? Can we ask which share of 3-letter agencies' data come from VC-funded companies? I mean, your point would have made sense 25 years ago, but VC-funded companies have made stasi look like amateurs in recent times.

brigadier132 3y ago

I've also had the same reaction to the venture capitalists I've met. It's surprising how universally terrible my impression of them has been. But I also agree with you, this article is just absurd. > Why should we trust them with so much power over the economy? "We" didn't entrust them with anything. It was entrusted to them by individuals. These closet authoritarians really just want to control every decision everyone makes.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago

New businesses don't need to be funded this way and can instead grow more organically. It would be nice to see more room for smaller local businesses not to be "out-competed" by someone with VC-funding who can afford to operate at a loss until they need to fuck over the consumer.

akhosravian 3y ago
Is it better to be “out-competed” by someone who is wealthy from some previous source? Maybe it’s another business, but maybe it’s wealth from their family.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

gumballindie 3y ago

Corporations are gosplan. There’s so much centralisation that they basically control the economy and society. Venture capital is great but large entities are not.

blululu 3y ago
Not sure about the downvotes. In a very real way most corporations act as a localized command economy with a full range of central planners. Workers are consistently asked to think about the good of the company instead of their own interests. The crucial difference is that there are frequently a lot of similar competing firms, so there are obvious points of reference to evaluate performance, people can bail from a failing or oppressive company and a company can stop existing if it’s planners consistently blow it. The issue isn’t central planning or collective enterprise per se, the issue is that there was no feedback to correct failures when there is only one firm doing all the planning.

Spivak 3y ago

I mean the gold standard of business funding is state funding, a state's department of economic development is incentivized/mandated to create large sustainable businesses that bring in outside income and provide lots of jobs, they come with very few strings, they have an extremely long horizon, they have connections to state universities if you need r&d, and the loans are usually "no recourse." There's a reason the line for these loans is a mile long. A middle grounds between anarchy and centrally planned economy does exist.

pyrale 3y ago

Imagine starting a small company, and having it grow at a slower, but sustainable pace. The idea you develop makes sense, and so you start being noticed. You are offered funding opportunities to grow faster. Now you're facing a choice: either take the money, and start answering to VCs, or don't take the money, and face the risk that someone copies your idea, gets lavish funding and buries you by, litterally, selling at a huge loss for years. The scenario of VC-funded companies doing price-dumping for years isn't outlandish, it's what Uber did for instance. To answer your question, what's supposed to replace the VC model is the people that took the second option and didn't make it, and those that would have, had it been a viable option. More sustainable companies that take the time to build a real product that they grow over time with their customers' money. And for companies that need heavy funding to start, well, they can still secure loans, find industrial partners, get grants, etc. Many companies started like that and do fine to this day.

indus 3y ago
Not everything needs venture capital. That was the idea to find outliers and invest in world impacting outcomes. Probably the best meritocratic allocation of capital.

tivert 3y ago

> I rarely see articles as stupid and poorly thought out as this one. Much as I've detested the VCs I've personally met, are we supposed to replace new business funding with GOSPLAN? You're presenting a false choice: it's not some binary between VC and central planning. You can still have capitalism and growth without huge pools of money investing with an unicorn-or-bust mentality.