3 ms·

> (government is bad at solving most problems) I reject the implication, that corporations are always better at solving most problems. > and to seek ways to s

• jdasdf 2y ago
  >I reject the implication, that corporations are always better at solving most problems. The only person mentioning corporations was you.
  • StefanBatory 2y ago
    There is no alternative. Governement, or corporations. Choose one.
    • lupusreal 2y ago
      There in fact are many forms of community organization which are neither government nor corporation.
      • Joker_vD 2y ago
        Those forms cannot really compete with the neighbouring (or even overseas) nation-states. Look no further than the history of the North America and Australia after the Europeans discovered those continents.
        • lupusreal 2y ago
          I'm not suggesting that we have charity run aircraft carriers, nor a corporate Navy either for that matter. There are nonetheless many functions of government which can be performed by community organizations, particularly at the local level, where the problems are the most tractable and where people are most likely to perceive a sense of responsibility and get involved. I'll give a concrete example: I don't think the government needs to be in the business of organizing youth football. Many sports get by just fine with sports teams organized, funded and run by volunteers. Youth baseball is usually this way; organized by dads and perhaps partially funded by local pizza shops (too corporate? Essentially harmless.) Football though is organized through school districts, funded by property owners paying their taxes. This isn't necessary.
• userbinator 2y ago
  [flagged]
• godelski 2y ago
  > I reject the implication, that corporations are always better at solving most problems. If anything, businesses just turn into entities indistinguishable from governments as they grow. It would be weird if anything different happened. They're long living entities with massive populations. Should be unsurprising that they converge to similar solutions. But I think the key difference is corporations have fewer incentives to care about the general public (take what you will about government incentives to care about the public but certainly corporations have less incentives. It's much rarer for public to storm into a corporate headquarters with the intent to take it over)
  • djmips 2y ago
    Yeah, aren't most businesses kind of like dictatorships, perhaps oligarchies but employees don't have a vote anyway. It's no surprise that if Trump and Musk want to run the USA as a business it kind of looks like that.
    • godelski 2y ago
      Certainly most businesses do not work like democracies (even representative democracies). More so, it isn't like many CEOs are afraid to admit that they run their businesses like a dictatorship or in an authoritarian manner.[0] This is why it has always scared me when people have said "run the government like a business." I don't want to live in a monarchy/dictatorship/oligarcy/plutocracy/etc. I don't want government decisions to be based on "shareholders" views. That just sounds like Plutocracy. I want a government to be representative, to care not just for the rich and powerful, but the weakest. If we judge a man by how he treats those he has nothing to gain from then we judge a government by how it treats its poorest and worst off citizens. I don't care about a ceiling inasmuch as I care about a floor. [0] I also don't quite understand why people are so hostile to employee owned organizations or even organizations where there is still a clear hierarchy but shares are distributed more liberally or any such systems are employed that allow for employees to more directly participate. There's a wide range of solutions between total dictatorship and complete socialist style equality.
  • silexia 2y ago
• potato3732842 2y ago
  The fact that your knee jerk response was to put words in his mouth, specifically the ones you chose, and then claim you stand for liberty really casts a lot of doubt on that second part. Nowhere did he say corporations would be doing everything. There were a whole plethora of organizations and institutions (social clubs, religious adjacent institutions, etc) that used do do a lot of the public good type stuff and have fallen by the wayside or become indistinguishable from government contractors over the past 100yr as high touch western governments have usurped and stuck their noses in their functions.
  • lovich 2y ago
    Yea but see, I have the benefit of having had this conversation with someone making the same argument a million times times in the past. If you want to claim he’s going down a different path you or they could make that argument, and I am going to tell you that if you want to make a claim using the beginning of a well worn argument and not include information on why your position is materially different, then you don’t get to be upset when people make assumptions
• redeeman 2y ago
  > if the government is the one keeping my liberty maximized yeah.... but its not :)
  • lovich 2y ago
    Yea but it is. My bosses would have treated me significantly worse for the majority of my working life if not for government intervention. I know this because they paid me the legal minimum and only provided workplace safety as much as they felt compelled to by the government. The corporate boot tastes no better than the federal one
    • redeeman 2y ago
      you do know that you are free to not work there, right?
      • lovich 2y ago
        I was free to not work for an employer who would treat me that way in the same way the the rich and poor are both equally barred from sleeping under bridges
• testing22321 2y ago
  The US gives us the perfect sandpit to test this theory. Their healthcare provided by corporations is vastly more expensive and has much worse outcomes than healthcare provided to billions of people by governments. Same for higher education.
  • dragonwriter 2y ago
    But US healthcare is also vastly more expensive and has worse outcomes than healthcare provided privately in much of the developed world; most of the developed world doesn't use sole government provision, and much doesn't use sole government funding; lots of places have private providers and private insurance with a government backstop (conceptually like the US system, but without the holes.)
• dennis_jeeves2 2y ago
  >I reject the implication, that corporations are always better at solving most problems (s)he did not imply corporations.