3 ms·

Regulations did nothing about wealth concentration though, lobbying made sure of that

robertlagrant 3y ago
> Regulations did nothing about wealth concentration though Wealth concentration implies that someone doing something valuable over there is making what I do less valuable. It's the wrong thing to think about, IMO. A valid question might be: could we have higher quality lives if we made it easier for people to create competitors? Another one might be: how do I have a much better life than a monarch of my country from only 200 years ago? > lobbying made sure of that Lobbying does nothing. People who write and enforce regulations are the ones doing it.
- fzeroracer 3y ago
  You seemed to take the wrong argument from my stance so I'll need to be clear: The rising costs of business isn't due to regulation but rather wealth concentration and depressed wages. Business costs went up with inflation, but actual wages have not kept up. Ergo, someone could start a business on an average salary in the 80s but now cannot afford to do so. For example I as a software engineer do not have enough money to start my own business despite having worked for around a decade. This is because the salary I earn and the amount I've saved is not enough to keep me afloat and start a business. > Another one might be: how do I have a much better life than a monarch of my country from only 200 years ago? Most of those gains are from socialized benefits, or due to the regulations we've created due to our experiences with rampant corruption or issues with societal growth.
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    > Business costs went up with inflation, but actual wages have not kept up Inflation comes from: policies making things more expensive to do; taxes making foundational things more expensive (e.g. fuel, which affects most goods); minimum wage laws, which bumps up costs of goods and services; inflating the currency, which taxes your savings; ever-more tax and trading laws, that require businesses to employ more people to keep on top of them, and pay auditors to make sure they're following them. Inflation isn't out of nowhere. Businesses try and get prices down, so they beat their competition so you choose them and not someone else. But they are fighting all those forces, and more, all the time. Wealth isn't the same as money. Having a majority stake in a valuable company is wealth, but it doesn't affect your wages at all. The idea of wealth concentration is built on the false premise that "net worth" is in any way to do with money, instead of mostly just being silly headline fuel. > Most of those gains are from socialized benefits No, they're from inventions. Most things that look like societal benefits are downstream of technology and enterprise. I can take painkillers if I have a headache, wear glasses if my eyes are imperfect (or now, contacts, or laser eye surgery), have healthy teeth my whole life, not worry about Polio or the Measles, and for an extremely low sum due to continuous improvement, innovation, and competition.

> Regulations did nothing about wealth concentration though Wealth concentration implies that someone doing something valuable over there is making what I do less valuable. It's the wrong thing to think about, IMO. A valid question might be: could we have higher quality lives if we made it easier for people to create competitors? Another one might be: how do I have a much better life than a monarch of my country from only 200 years ago? > lobbying made sure of that Lobbying does nothing. People who write and enforce regulations are the ones doing it.

fzeroracer 3y ago
You seemed to take the wrong argument from my stance so I'll need to be clear: The rising costs of business isn't due to regulation but rather wealth concentration and depressed wages. Business costs went up with inflation, but actual wages have not kept up. Ergo, someone could start a business on an average salary in the 80s but now cannot afford to do so. For example I as a software engineer do not have enough money to start my own business despite having worked for around a decade. This is because the salary I earn and the amount I've saved is not enough to keep me afloat and start a business. > Another one might be: how do I have a much better life than a monarch of my country from only 200 years ago? Most of those gains are from socialized benefits, or due to the regulations we've created due to our experiences with rampant corruption or issues with societal growth.
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  > Business costs went up with inflation, but actual wages have not kept up Inflation comes from: policies making things more expensive to do; taxes making foundational things more expensive (e.g. fuel, which affects most goods); minimum wage laws, which bumps up costs of goods and services; inflating the currency, which taxes your savings; ever-more tax and trading laws, that require businesses to employ more people to keep on top of them, and pay auditors to make sure they're following them. Inflation isn't out of nowhere. Businesses try and get prices down, so they beat their competition so you choose them and not someone else. But they are fighting all those forces, and more, all the time. Wealth isn't the same as money. Having a majority stake in a valuable company is wealth, but it doesn't affect your wages at all. The idea of wealth concentration is built on the false premise that "net worth" is in any way to do with money, instead of mostly just being silly headline fuel. > Most of those gains are from socialized benefits No, they're from inventions. Most things that look like societal benefits are downstream of technology and enterprise. I can take painkillers if I have a headache, wear glasses if my eyes are imperfect (or now, contacts, or laser eye surgery), have healthy teeth my whole life, not worry about Polio or the Measles, and for an extremely low sum due to continuous improvement, innovation, and competition.