6 ms·

Small government implies big corporations, and somehow this eludes many.

by copperx 2y ago

robertlagrant 2y ago
Do you think the US has small government now, that's created these big corporations?
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  They can both be big if the government isn't doing its job. But you need a certain amount of government if you want a healthy regulation system with enforcement.
  - Ekaros 2y ago
    Even if government is doing the job they can still both be big. Look at China, big government biggish companies. Both by design of the government. Difference is that government makes sense of not giving the power away, unlike other governments do...
    - ossobuco 2y ago
      > Difference is that government makes sense of not giving the power away, unlike other governments do... That is the most important point and tells you who's really ruling a country.
- euroderf 2y ago
  It seems that in practice, co-optation reduces effective size.
- esalman 2y ago
  While it may be debatable if US is small government now, the recent overturning of Chevron by the Supreme Court leaves little doubt as to which direction it is going.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    Okay, but the large corporations already exist, no? Large government also equals large corporations?
    - esalman 2y ago
      US government is not large compared to most other countries. A lot of the infrastructure that are controlled by government in other countries, are under private control, or under state control in the US at best. If the government is shrunk, the already large corporations will grow even larger.
      - robertlagrant 2y ago
        Can you cite this, please? What infrastructure do you mean?
- n4r9 2y ago
  Relatively speaking, it has low corporation tax, is lax on market consolidation, and is less inclined to regulate for stuff like data privacy.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    Until 2018 it had 35% corporation tax, which was high, and giant corporations happened anyway. It's now down to 21%, which is the EU average. > is lax on market consolidation Maybe? That doesn't seem to be particularly small government, though. It has anticompetition powers, and just hasn't used them. > less inclined to regulate for stuff like data privacy I don't know what the this stuff is, but the government's size wouldn't really change if they did this more. Some states already do it, and there are huge numbers of regulations to follow already. That's why drugs take years to hit the market; the FDA process is long.
    - n4r9 2y ago
      All good points. I guess I was trying to isolate which aspects of US government have potentially led to powerful giants like Amazon, which can get away with some pretty horrific user experiences.
      - robertlagrant 2y ago
        As a non-US person I have the opposite perspective. The US is almost the only place where companies can spring up and just be better than thousands of other companies, and bring me more value. Obviously that brings issues, but fundamentally for me at least I use Amazon because it's the best, even though I wish a local alternative would be better.
        n4r9 2y ago
        I'm also not from the US, and I agree that it has good startup potential. But the country seems to have issues with antitrust and multiple sectors becoming overly consolidated. Sometimes this is because one or a few companies genuinely have an outstanding product. I would say that used to be true of Amazon. But often it's because those companies have anti-competitive behaviours that help it to maintain market dominance without benefit to consumers. For example, Amazon effectively penalises sellers for offering cheaper prices elsewhere, which is the target of anti-trust cases both in the US and the EU.
- arp242 2y ago
  I think it's probably more accurate to say "small regulation implies big corporations". Although that has less of a ring to it. And of course it also matters which regulations, how its enforced, etc. Tons of nuance of course. However, there's this notion that "less regulation == more freedom == better for everyone", and that's clearly just bollocks, usually to the benefit of corporations.
- ossobuco 2y ago
  The free market competition inevitably has winners, that's what created big corporations. Once they're powerful enough, they can bend (lobby) the government to do what they want. In fact any presidential candidate will need to have the approval of the richest people in the country to get anywhere, even just to pay for the campaign expenses.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    That doesn't seem to be affected by the size of government.
- martopix 2y ago
  Small government => big corporations (claim of the previous comment) is not the same thing as Big corporations => small goverment (the argument you're trying to disprove)
lupusreal 2y ago
If only OP lived in the EU, this might all have been avoided.
spacebanana7 2y ago
Big corporations are ideally suited to the operating conditions of big government. They have the lawyers to understand the rules, the capital to withstand delays/penalties, and the lobbying power to influence regulation.
- meetingthrower 2y ago
  Lol. Tell that to insurance companies, which are regulated by the states. they LOVE it, as they have the scale to deal with a 50 state bureaucracy. Small government favors huge business.
- ossobuco 2y ago
  Yes, as it is now regulations are just another tool in the hands of corporations, since they are the only ones to have the resources to work around them it further centralizes power in their hands. The thing is without regulations you will still have a few huge actors emerge from the free market competition and then basically rule undisputed, while giving up a lot of the advantages of regulations. So how do you solve it? Stop offloading vital services to the private sector. Allow it to innovate, but always with the possibility that the innovation they bring to the table will be incorporated as a public service. And let's drop the notion that only profit-hungry individuals can innovate, the state should be as capable as any corporation to innovate. It's just a matter of misallocated incentives.
ekianjo 2y ago
yeah its well known that the USA has a super small state in which big corps have a lot of power /s

Small government implies big corporations, and somehow this eludes many.

robertlagrant 2y ago

Do you think the US has small government now, that's created these big corporations?

Dylan16807 2y ago
They can both be big if the government isn't doing its job. But you need a certain amount of government if you want a healthy regulation system with enforcement.
- Ekaros 2y ago
  Even if government is doing the job they can still both be big. Look at China, big government biggish companies. Both by design of the government. Difference is that government makes sense of not giving the power away, unlike other governments do...
  - ossobuco 2y ago
    > Difference is that government makes sense of not giving the power away, unlike other governments do... That is the most important point and tells you who's really ruling a country.
euroderf 2y ago
It seems that in practice, co-optation reduces effective size.
esalman 2y ago
While it may be debatable if US is small government now, the recent overturning of Chevron by the Supreme Court leaves little doubt as to which direction it is going.
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  Okay, but the large corporations already exist, no? Large government also equals large corporations?
  - esalman 2y ago
    US government is not large compared to most other countries. A lot of the infrastructure that are controlled by government in other countries, are under private control, or under state control in the US at best. If the government is shrunk, the already large corporations will grow even larger.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      Can you cite this, please? What infrastructure do you mean?
n4r9 2y ago
Relatively speaking, it has low corporation tax, is lax on market consolidation, and is less inclined to regulate for stuff like data privacy.
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  Until 2018 it had 35% corporation tax, which was high, and giant corporations happened anyway. It's now down to 21%, which is the EU average. > is lax on market consolidation Maybe? That doesn't seem to be particularly small government, though. It has anticompetition powers, and just hasn't used them. > less inclined to regulate for stuff like data privacy I don't know what the this stuff is, but the government's size wouldn't really change if they did this more. Some states already do it, and there are huge numbers of regulations to follow already. That's why drugs take years to hit the market; the FDA process is long.
  - n4r9 2y ago
    All good points. I guess I was trying to isolate which aspects of US government have potentially led to powerful giants like Amazon, which can get away with some pretty horrific user experiences.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      As a non-US person I have the opposite perspective. The US is almost the only place where companies can spring up and just be better than thousands of other companies, and bring me more value. Obviously that brings issues, but fundamentally for me at least I use Amazon because it's the best, even though I wish a local alternative would be better.
      - n4r9 2y ago
        I'm also not from the US, and I agree that it has good startup potential. But the country seems to have issues with antitrust and multiple sectors becoming overly consolidated. Sometimes this is because one or a few companies genuinely have an outstanding product. I would say that used to be true of Amazon. But often it's because those companies have anti-competitive behaviours that help it to maintain market dominance without benefit to consumers. For example, Amazon effectively penalises sellers for offering cheaper prices elsewhere, which is the target of anti-trust cases both in the US and the EU.
arp242 2y ago
I think it's probably more accurate to say "small regulation implies big corporations". Although that has less of a ring to it. And of course it also matters which regulations, how its enforced, etc. Tons of nuance of course. However, there's this notion that "less regulation == more freedom == better for everyone", and that's clearly just bollocks, usually to the benefit of corporations.
ossobuco 2y ago
The free market competition inevitably has winners, that's what created big corporations. Once they're powerful enough, they can bend (lobby) the government to do what they want. In fact any presidential candidate will need to have the approval of the richest people in the country to get anywhere, even just to pay for the campaign expenses.
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  That doesn't seem to be affected by the size of government.
martopix 2y ago
Small government => big corporations (claim of the previous comment) is not the same thing as Big corporations => small goverment (the argument you're trying to disprove)

lupusreal 2y ago

If only OP lived in the EU, this might all have been avoided.

spacebanana7 2y ago

Big corporations are ideally suited to the operating conditions of big government. They have the lawyers to understand the rules, the capital to withstand delays/penalties, and the lobbying power to influence regulation.

meetingthrower 2y ago
Lol. Tell that to insurance companies, which are regulated by the states. they LOVE it, as they have the scale to deal with a 50 state bureaucracy. Small government favors huge business.
ossobuco 2y ago
Yes, as it is now regulations are just another tool in the hands of corporations, since they are the only ones to have the resources to work around them it further centralizes power in their hands. The thing is without regulations you will still have a few huge actors emerge from the free market competition and then basically rule undisputed, while giving up a lot of the advantages of regulations. So how do you solve it? Stop offloading vital services to the private sector. Allow it to innovate, but always with the possibility that the innovation they bring to the table will be incorporated as a public service. And let's drop the notion that only profit-hungry individuals can innovate, the state should be as capable as any corporation to innovate. It's just a matter of misallocated incentives.

ekianjo 2y ago

yeah its well known that the USA has a super small state in which big corps have a lot of power /s