3 ms·

> The western world desperately needs a way to do resource allocation that is parallel to and augments financial markets. Something like a government that taxe

> The western world desperately needs a way to do resource allocation that is parallel to and augments financial markets. Something like a government that taxes the people and spends the tax revenue on stuff? In the USA, government spending accounts for 37% of GDP [1]. The fact that some individuals can gain control over quantities of capital which are large in absolute terms but small in comparison to the total size of the economy is a crucial feature of this system. [1]: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spendi...

ke88y 3y ago
> In the USA, government spending accounts for 37% of GDP First, and most importantly, this is a critique of all societal institutions. I do not think that the correct solution is necessarily taxation and redistribution. The investors in Stability AI didn't have to choose to misspend their money on an organization structured as a typical 20th century corporate dictatorship run by a big personality; they could have set up a much more effective structure. But they chose that corporate structure and leadership personality type/background because our society is sick on a fundamental level. I would like to think financial markets are capable of breaking out of this insanity, but I'm extraordinarily skeptical. Second, almost none of our alternative to the financial status quo of corporate-big-personality-dictatorship (aka government spending since we have no other alternative) goes to R&D/innovation. The vast bulk of that spending goes to entitlements and defense. The part we do spend on science is barely enough to support basic science and is still embarrassingly small compared to other outlays. For example, we spend twice as much on farm subsidies (not AG total, just subsidies) as we do on the National Science Foundation. Third, of the part that does go toward R&D/innovation, almost none of it is spent on development and innovation. Almost all of our federal spending buckets on R&D is heavy on R, light on D, and "hackathon"/"pre-seed" levels of interest in innovation. We do not spend enough on R&D/innovation, and what we do spend is misallocated (mostly towards the goal of generating IP for Springer) because it is mostly allocated by folks at elite universities who are all friends with one another. The public sector in the west is just as broken as the private, albiet the pathology presents differently. I imagine there are alternatives beyond choosing between two horrendously broken systems.

ke88y 3y ago

> In the USA, government spending accounts for 37% of GDP First, and most importantly, this is a critique of all societal institutions. I do not think that the correct solution is necessarily taxation and redistribution. The investors in Stability AI didn't have to choose to misspend their money on an organization structured as a typical 20th century corporate dictatorship run by a big personality; they could have set up a much more effective structure. But they chose that corporate structure and leadership personality type/background because our society is sick on a fundamental level. I would like to think financial markets are capable of breaking out of this insanity, but I'm extraordinarily skeptical. Second, almost none of our alternative to the financial status quo of corporate-big-personality-dictatorship (aka government spending since we have no other alternative) goes to R&D/innovation. The vast bulk of that spending goes to entitlements and defense. The part we do spend on science is barely enough to support basic science and is still embarrassingly small compared to other outlays. For example, we spend twice as much on farm subsidies (not AG total, just subsidies) as we do on the National Science Foundation. Third, of the part that does go toward R&D/innovation, almost none of it is spent on development and innovation. Almost all of our federal spending buckets on R&D is heavy on R, light on D, and "hackathon"/"pre-seed" levels of interest in innovation. We do not spend enough on R&D/innovation, and what we do spend is misallocated (mostly towards the goal of generating IP for Springer) because it is mostly allocated by folks at elite universities who are all friends with one another. The public sector in the west is just as broken as the private, albiet the pathology presents differently. I imagine there are alternatives beyond choosing between two horrendously broken systems.