2 ms·
> (there’s no particular reason to believe Intel and the US government are very similar) Large monopolies with limited market pressure to innovate?
by ethbr1 2y ago
> (there’s no particular reason to believe Intel and the US government are very similar)
Large monopolies with limited market pressure to innovate?
- gessha 2y agoHow are the concepts of a state and a business the same?
- bee_rider 2y agoNot really, no. Governments aren’t businesses. There isn’t much of a market for governance, people mostly become citizens by birth instead of by shopping around. Governments have natural “monopoly” over their territory (if there is competition for governing inside a territory, you have a civil war going on). Or, there is no monopoly, since you can “shop around” by moving to other countries. It depends on how you want to line up the analogy. (There’s room to line up the analogy in multiple ways because it is an analogy, and not a description of what countries actually are). Governments don’t innovate much on governance. They might enable innovation in other sectors. But the process of governance itself should generally be pretty slow-and-steady because the stakes are higher than an individual business. The goal of a government is not to create new and interesting governance-products and then sell those products, but to rule over an area in a way that doesn’t annoy the populace too much.
- heavymetalpoizn 2y ago[dead]
- brookst 2y agoAlso they both own real estate? Not all things that share some attributes are similar in general.
- freejazz 2y agoMy shirt today is red. Do you know what else is red? Those buses in London!
- bee_rider 2y agoHah. Not even, though. Redness is a characteristic that means the same thing in the context of your shirt and a bus. Because there isn’t generally a competitive market for the service of “being governed” monopoly doesn’t even make sense there. It is more like saying strawberries and ethyl methylphenylglycidate are both red tasting.