3 ms·

One could, but given that such small-scale economies existed within in the modern post-industrial era, it would be disingenuous to do so.

by krapp 2y ago

WalterBright 2y ago
Big business drives the prosperity of the economy. Trying to run an economy with mom and pop businesses means poverty.
- krapp 2y ago
  No it doesn't, because "poverty" is relative to the scale of an economy. See me, living in a small Texas town and paying $500/mo for an apartment someone in Manhattan would kill to rent for ten times as much. Plenty of people have lived in towns and villages which weren't entirely dominated by big businesses and they got along just fine.
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    > because "poverty" is relative to the scale of an economy If you define poverty as being in the lowest 20% of income, then you can never eliminate poverty. > Plenty of people have lived in towns and villages which weren't entirely dominated by big businesses and they got along just fine. You wouldn't have an internet phone without big business. Nor a car. Nor a washing machine. Nor indoor plumbing. Nor oranges in winter. Nor a hospital. Nor air conditioning. Nor electricity. Nor sanitation. Nor fertilizer. In fact, getting rid of business would result in the death of more than 90% of the population. And likely much more.
    - krapp 2y ago
      Again, there is an entire spectrum of human existence between medieval subsistence and modern global industrial capitalism, and you seem to be defining literally every trade since the Industrial Revolution as "big business." Either the economy hasn't grown in any significant way over the last century, or clearly it was possible to purchase cars and washing machines, and transport goods, and have hospitals and air conditioning without "big business" of the scale that the context of this thread is clearly referring to. And the ancient Romans had indoor plumbing.
      - WalterBright 2y ago
        > And the ancient Romans had indoor plumbing. Only a handful of rich Romans. > or clearly it was possible to purchase cars and washing machines, and transport goods, and have hospitals and air conditioning without "big business" of the scale that the context of this thread is clearly referring to. Nope. It took Ford's big business to be able to make cars cheap enough for the masses. Before Ford, it was a luxury item for a handful of wealthy people. Railroads were big business, too. You cannot have much of an economy with just horses.
        krapp 2y ago
        >Only a handful of rich Romans. Yes. And therefore, they didn't need modern industrial capitalism with global corporations to do it. And, just noting the moving goalposts here, your claim wasn't that such amenities weren't affordable without modern capitalism, because even with it, many people struggle to afford them, it was that they were impossible at any scale other than "big business." >It took Ford's big business to be able to make cars cheap enough for the masses. Before Ford, it was a luxury item for a handful of wealthy people. Ford at the time of the Model T wouldn't be considered a "big business" in the modern context. Again, you seem to think any business counts as "big business." Using the same term to refer to Ford in 1910 and, say, Amazon or Wal-Mart today is ridiculous. Obviously Ford would become "big business" but just as obviously Ford is one example of it being possible to manufacture goods at what would be far closer to "mom and pop" scale today.
        WalterBright 2y ago
        Sure, you can make artisan cars and artisan indoor plumbing. This will not be available to the masses, however, without the economies of scale that come with big business. You could also make artisan steel before the big steel industry. About all you could do with it was make swords and a suit of armor at terrific expense. > of it being possible to manufacture goods at what would be far closer to "mom and pop" scale today. Before the industrial revolution, 90% of the population worked on the farm, and famine was still a regular occurrence. There was no available work force to create artisan cars and artisan indoor plumbing for the masses. Nor was there food to feed them. Some years ago, I toured Jefferson's Monticello mansion and estate. In the back yard there was a nailery, where the slaves operated a small forge and hammered out nails, one by one. Today you can just buy a box of nails for a few dollars, thanks to big steel and the nail making machining requiring little additional labor. I don't know how many nails could be made in a day's work by an artisan, but I doubt it is that many, and it's cost you at least $150 for that box of nails. Nails were so valuable in those days people would burn houses down just to get the nails. I had my roof replaced a year ago. After the roofers left, I spent a fair amount of time combing the yard to get all the discarded nails out of it. The nails were so cheap it was not worth anyone's time to pick them up. (I picked them up because I didn't want to step on them. I did anyway, driving the nail nearly through the sole of my shoe.)

One could, but given that such small-scale economies existed within in the modern post-industrial era, it would be disingenuous to do so.

by krapp 2y ago

One could, but given that such small-scale economies existed within in the modern post-industrial era, it would be disingenuous to do so.

WalterBright 2y ago

Big business drives the prosperity of the economy. Trying to run an economy with mom and pop businesses means poverty.

krapp 2y ago
No it doesn't, because "poverty" is relative to the scale of an economy. See me, living in a small Texas town and paying $500/mo for an apartment someone in Manhattan would kill to rent for ten times as much. Plenty of people have lived in towns and villages which weren't entirely dominated by big businesses and they got along just fine.
- WalterBright 2y ago
  > because "poverty" is relative to the scale of an economy If you define poverty as being in the lowest 20% of income, then you can never eliminate poverty. > Plenty of people have lived in towns and villages which weren't entirely dominated by big businesses and they got along just fine. You wouldn't have an internet phone without big business. Nor a car. Nor a washing machine. Nor indoor plumbing. Nor oranges in winter. Nor a hospital. Nor air conditioning. Nor electricity. Nor sanitation. Nor fertilizer. In fact, getting rid of business would result in the death of more than 90% of the population. And likely much more.
  - krapp 2y ago
    Again, there is an entire spectrum of human existence between medieval subsistence and modern global industrial capitalism, and you seem to be defining literally every trade since the Industrial Revolution as "big business." Either the economy hasn't grown in any significant way over the last century, or clearly it was possible to purchase cars and washing machines, and transport goods, and have hospitals and air conditioning without "big business" of the scale that the context of this thread is clearly referring to. And the ancient Romans had indoor plumbing.
    - WalterBright 2y ago
      > And the ancient Romans had indoor plumbing. Only a handful of rich Romans. > or clearly it was possible to purchase cars and washing machines, and transport goods, and have hospitals and air conditioning without "big business" of the scale that the context of this thread is clearly referring to. Nope. It took Ford's big business to be able to make cars cheap enough for the masses. Before Ford, it was a luxury item for a handful of wealthy people. Railroads were big business, too. You cannot have much of an economy with just horses.
      - krapp 2y ago
        >Only a handful of rich Romans. Yes. And therefore, they didn't need modern industrial capitalism with global corporations to do it. And, just noting the moving goalposts here, your claim wasn't that such amenities weren't affordable without modern capitalism, because even with it, many people struggle to afford them, it was that they were impossible at any scale other than "big business." >It took Ford's big business to be able to make cars cheap enough for the masses. Before Ford, it was a luxury item for a handful of wealthy people. Ford at the time of the Model T wouldn't be considered a "big business" in the modern context. Again, you seem to think any business counts as "big business." Using the same term to refer to Ford in 1910 and, say, Amazon or Wal-Mart today is ridiculous. Obviously Ford would become "big business" but just as obviously Ford is one example of it being possible to manufacture goods at what would be far closer to "mom and pop" scale today.
        WalterBright 2y ago
        Sure, you can make artisan cars and artisan indoor plumbing. This will not be available to the masses, however, without the economies of scale that come with big business. You could also make artisan steel before the big steel industry. About all you could do with it was make swords and a suit of armor at terrific expense. > of it being possible to manufacture goods at what would be far closer to "mom and pop" scale today. Before the industrial revolution, 90% of the population worked on the farm, and famine was still a regular occurrence. There was no available work force to create artisan cars and artisan indoor plumbing for the masses. Nor was there food to feed them. Some years ago, I toured Jefferson's Monticello mansion and estate. In the back yard there was a nailery, where the slaves operated a small forge and hammered out nails, one by one. Today you can just buy a box of nails for a few dollars, thanks to big steel and the nail making machining requiring little additional labor. I don't know how many nails could be made in a day's work by an artisan, but I doubt it is that many, and it's cost you at least $150 for that box of nails. Nails were so valuable in those days people would burn houses down just to get the nails. I had my roof replaced a year ago. After the roofers left, I spent a fair amount of time combing the yard to get all the discarded nails out of it. The nails were so cheap it was not worth anyone's time to pick them up. (I picked them up because I didn't want to step on them. I did anyway, driving the nail nearly through the sole of my shoe.)