18 ms·
The irony is the best side of HN. It seems you ignored the parent's main argument, but you've found their admittedly weakest paragraph. "This is a reductive and
by kubanczyk 3y ago
The irony is the best side of HN. It seems you ignored the parent's main argument, but you've found their admittedly weakest paragraph. "This is a reductive and ridiculous take" is the literal phrase that you've used at that point.
> Are non-profits not “companies”? Are there no small businesses that opt against expansion?
The law makes such businesses slightly less likely to survive. There are ideas and ideals that are the source of that law.
- jmye 3y agoWhat on earth are you talking about? The entire comment was a slap against “capitalism”, with regards to its treatment of workers and how “capitalist” companies act. I picked a specific bit to question GP on while also commenting on the whole post. Do you think that’s unfair? Do you think suggesting that capitalism is just about enriching shareholders today is not reductive? Whether the law makes small businesses less likely to survive (citation needed) is immaterial to the question.