4 ms·
> probably be left to the free market. Ah yes, the mythical free market that no one ever questions, the unassailable arbiter of value in this world. This under
by titzer 3y ago
> probably be left to the free market.
Ah yes, the mythical free market that no one ever questions, the unassailable arbiter of value in this world. This underpinning assumption needs to be pointed out. Clearly, the free market is not infallible. The question is how do mixed economies make best use of markets, regulation, taxation, and have a functioning justice system so that we don't shovel raw human souls into the profit machine.
Most people recognize a role for regulation in matters that concern everyone, particularly when there are large negative externalities that markets can't price in appropriately. I know HN conversations are necessarily curtailed for brevity, but generally, no, wasting vast amounts of energy for temporary profit doesn't seem like the kind of thing that should go unregulated when such waste produces large-scale environmental consequences for us all.
- tgv 3y agoIndeed, many people seem to think the market solves all problems. In a sense it does, but only in a very specific sense. Like, if we there was some loophole in the law that allowed killing people with a pistol, the market would respond by making bullet-proof vests expensive, and by producing cheap, but bad protection vests. And guns, of course. It wouldn't solve the killing, but it would solve the question "how much can you spend to protect your life"? Perhaps it would make food cheaper. The market is a sick joke. In this case, the free market can solve the problem: how high can the electricity price go, or how many power outages can there be, until people are sick and tired of this Bitcoin bullshit?
- titzer 3y agoI have found that HN sentiment (not just in the case of my comment above) does not suffer criticism of markets well.