7 ms·

Um, why was someone's perfectly reasonable take downvoted to oblivion? Too much of a newcomer? Too many Welch devotees here? As far as I'm concerned, Welch tur

Um, why was someone's perfectly reasonable take downvoted to oblivion? Too much of a newcomer? Too many Welch devotees here? As far as I'm concerned, Welch turned GE from an industrial behemoth that more than lived up to its name, to a pale shadow of itself that has sold off almost everything. "Outsource Everything" has been an absolute disaster for our economy that will take decades to dig out of, if we even have the will to try.

fidotron 1y ago
> Um, why was someone's perfectly reasonable take downvoted to oblivion? Too much of a newcomer? Too many Welch devotees here? At the risk of a serious tangent, the bots here have become so out of control that there is also a major anti-bot pattern that downvotes anything that remotely looks like a bot. I know we aren't supposed to ever say HN is in decline, but LLMs really do look like they've killed it.
- flyinghamster 1y ago
  At the rate things are going, LLMs are going to kill the entire web. I'm starting to think that's by design.
  - tuesdaynight 1y ago
    The rate is what is scaring me, honestly. I was expecting that the web would move even more to closed silos because of bots, but I was not expecting it to happen so soon. Maybe I'm too old for the rate of change of internet trends.
bit1993 1y ago
It is easy to look at Globalization in retrospect and conclude that it was a failure but you will miss all the advances it brought with it. Globalization has its place and time, it was the logical next step after the USA industrialization peaked the next step to squeeze out even more from the economy.
- camillomiller 1y ago
  We could have had exactly the same and possibly more if it weren’t for people like Welch. They were a hindrance to how globalization could have brought a lot more of shared wealth and less inequality
  - bit1993 1y ago
    > They were a hindrance to how globalization could have brought a lot more of shared wealth and less inequality That is not how capitalism works.
    - camillomiller 1y ago
      Yeah, which is my other point: Welch was just better than others at capitalism, bringing its fundamental and unethical tenets to the extreme.
    - pyrale 1y ago
      Says who?
      - bit1993 1y ago
        Capitalism is a zero sum game.
        totallykvothe 1y ago
        No
        QuadmasterXLII 1y ago
        How on earth do you justify this claim?
        xoralkindi 1y ago
        The US Federal Reserve data indicates that the top 10% of households own about 67% of the nation's wealth, while the bottom 50% hold less than 4% Also let us not forget other tools that have significantly helped capitalist nations: Slavery, Colonialism, Imperialism, Sanctions, Wars, Coup d'etat's... these have all contributed to what capitalism is today. So yes Capitalism in the grand scheme of things is entirely zero sum.
palmfacehn 1y ago
In that regard, Welch optimized for short-term metrics. Most of the diehard adherents to laissez-faire ideology speak at length about time preference. Willingness to forgo present consumption is the underlying source of investment gains. If we accept the premise that Welch sold the goose that laid the golden egg for short-term "number go up" and immediate shareholder satisfaction, another question arises. Are there other non-market forces (such as easy money policies from the central bank, or an unfriendly domestic regulatory environment) which created this equilibrium? If so, then laying blame at the feet of "capitalist greed" or the trope of monocled Monopoly men in stovepipe hats, may be misplaced. That said, I'm not sure that, "Jack Welch, the Man Who Optimized For the Corporatist Mixed-Economy" would resonate as well with audiences.
- p_l 1y ago
  The title resonates well with mainstream dogma of capitalism being objectively good, ignoring that it was just one aspect of what made "the good years" and was in fact quite limited by both physical and legal constraints, and sometimes pure ideological bent of some behemoths of industry (i.e. messrs Hewlett and Packard, impact of US military spending, etc). Welch exploited a combination of events when a lot of those limitations (especially legal) ended, acting in extremely capitalist ways.
  - palmfacehn 1y ago
    >mainstream dogma of capitalism being objectively good Is that what you perceive the mainstream dogma to be? When I observe use of the word "capitalism", it is usually in regards to rationalizations for interventions or other socialist policies. Whereas proponents generally use specific language, like market, market-based or laissez-faire. Opponents are can be observed using language like, neoliberal, deregulation, greed and capitalism. The Sad Decline Of The Word "Capitalism" https://www.forbes.com/sites/alejandrochafuen/2013/05/01/the-sad-decline-of-the-word-capitalism/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/alejandrochafuen/2013/05/01/the... >Although Karl Marx did not create the word, it was after his work “Das Kapital” (1867) when the term “capitalism” began to be widely used to describe an economic system based on private property as the means of production. Marx remains the great labeler: “capital,” “the capitalist” and “the capitalist system of production” appear repeatedly in his writings. ... >Should we care if we lose the term capitalism? Assessing its popularity, or lack thereof, I recently reviewed the mission of 25 leading market oriented think tanks around the globe. I could not find a single one using the term. “Free enterprise,” “free-markets” “free-economy” and better yet “free society” will continue to crowd out “capitalism,” if not as a system, at least as a word. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=capitalism&sort=byDate&type=all https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... Looking over HN comments, I observe that uses of the term generally contain anti-market critiques. https://hn.algolia.com/?q=capitalism https://hn.algolia.com/?q=capitalism Popular stories also seem to use it in a generally negative way, or with a modifier to "improve" it. I'm not convinced that the mainstream dogma is positive. To the contrary, I would regard use of the word as symptomatic of anti-market sentiment.
code_for_monkey 1y ago
the culture on this site is a combination of reddit tech bro and linkedIn ceo-poster. Everyone here thinks they are the next great founder. You will toe the line of capital expansion over all or get downvoted.
- kevin_thibedeau 1y ago
  I remember being downvoted for pointing out Musk's narcissism years ago when he was a saint on this site. The HN hive mind has it's own panoply of topics that are taboo to the tribe. On the plus side, I have noticed fewer unfair downvotes in the past few years. I rarely have to vouch for someone who makes a reasoned statement that offends the local snowflakes.
  - code_for_monkey 1y ago
    I get downvoted every time I point out that generative AI is at this point mostly a bad faith tech used by scammers and over confident CEO's desperate to lay people off.
    - meansob 1y ago
      [dead]

fidotron 1y ago

> Um, why was someone's perfectly reasonable take downvoted to oblivion? Too much of a newcomer? Too many Welch devotees here? At the risk of a serious tangent, the bots here have become so out of control that there is also a major anti-bot pattern that downvotes anything that remotely looks like a bot. I know we aren't supposed to ever say HN is in decline, but LLMs really do look like they've killed it.

flyinghamster 1y ago
At the rate things are going, LLMs are going to kill the entire web. I'm starting to think that's by design.
- tuesdaynight 1y ago
  The rate is what is scaring me, honestly. I was expecting that the web would move even more to closed silos because of bots, but I was not expecting it to happen so soon. Maybe I'm too old for the rate of change of internet trends.

bit1993 1y ago

It is easy to look at Globalization in retrospect and conclude that it was a failure but you will miss all the advances it brought with it. Globalization has its place and time, it was the logical next step after the USA industrialization peaked the next step to squeeze out even more from the economy.

camillomiller 1y ago
We could have had exactly the same and possibly more if it weren’t for people like Welch. They were a hindrance to how globalization could have brought a lot more of shared wealth and less inequality
- bit1993 1y ago
  > They were a hindrance to how globalization could have brought a lot more of shared wealth and less inequality That is not how capitalism works.
  - camillomiller 1y ago
    Yeah, which is my other point: Welch was just better than others at capitalism, bringing its fundamental and unethical tenets to the extreme.
  - pyrale 1y ago
    Says who?
    - bit1993 1y ago
      Capitalism is a zero sum game.
      - totallykvothe 1y ago
        No
      - QuadmasterXLII 1y ago
        How on earth do you justify this claim?
        xoralkindi 1y ago
        The US Federal Reserve data indicates that the top 10% of households own about 67% of the nation's wealth, while the bottom 50% hold less than 4% Also let us not forget other tools that have significantly helped capitalist nations: Slavery, Colonialism, Imperialism, Sanctions, Wars, Coup d'etat's... these have all contributed to what capitalism is today. So yes Capitalism in the grand scheme of things is entirely zero sum.

palmfacehn 1y ago

In that regard, Welch optimized for short-term metrics. Most of the diehard adherents to laissez-faire ideology speak at length about time preference. Willingness to forgo present consumption is the underlying source of investment gains. If we accept the premise that Welch sold the goose that laid the golden egg for short-term "number go up" and immediate shareholder satisfaction, another question arises. Are there other non-market forces (such as easy money policies from the central bank, or an unfriendly domestic regulatory environment) which created this equilibrium? If so, then laying blame at the feet of "capitalist greed" or the trope of monocled Monopoly men in stovepipe hats, may be misplaced. That said, I'm not sure that, "Jack Welch, the Man Who Optimized For the Corporatist Mixed-Economy" would resonate as well with audiences.

p_l 1y ago
The title resonates well with mainstream dogma of capitalism being objectively good, ignoring that it was just one aspect of what made "the good years" and was in fact quite limited by both physical and legal constraints, and sometimes pure ideological bent of some behemoths of industry (i.e. messrs Hewlett and Packard, impact of US military spending, etc). Welch exploited a combination of events when a lot of those limitations (especially legal) ended, acting in extremely capitalist ways.
- palmfacehn 1y ago
  >mainstream dogma of capitalism being objectively good Is that what you perceive the mainstream dogma to be? When I observe use of the word "capitalism", it is usually in regards to rationalizations for interventions or other socialist policies. Whereas proponents generally use specific language, like market, market-based or laissez-faire. Opponents are can be observed using language like, neoliberal, deregulation, greed and capitalism. The Sad Decline Of The Word "Capitalism" https://www.forbes.com/sites/alejandrochafuen/2013/05/01/the-sad-decline-of-the-word-capitalism/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/alejandrochafuen/2013/05/01/the... >Although Karl Marx did not create the word, it was after his work “Das Kapital” (1867) when the term “capitalism” began to be widely used to describe an economic system based on private property as the means of production. Marx remains the great labeler: “capital,” “the capitalist” and “the capitalist system of production” appear repeatedly in his writings. ... >Should we care if we lose the term capitalism? Assessing its popularity, or lack thereof, I recently reviewed the mission of 25 leading market oriented think tanks around the globe. I could not find a single one using the term. “Free enterprise,” “free-markets” “free-economy” and better yet “free society” will continue to crowd out “capitalism,” if not as a system, at least as a word. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=capitalism&sort=byDate&type=all https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... Looking over HN comments, I observe that uses of the term generally contain anti-market critiques. https://hn.algolia.com/?q=capitalism https://hn.algolia.com/?q=capitalism Popular stories also seem to use it in a generally negative way, or with a modifier to "improve" it. I'm not convinced that the mainstream dogma is positive. To the contrary, I would regard use of the word as symptomatic of anti-market sentiment.

code_for_monkey 1y ago

the culture on this site is a combination of reddit tech bro and linkedIn ceo-poster. Everyone here thinks they are the next great founder. You will toe the line of capital expansion over all or get downvoted.

kevin_thibedeau 1y ago
I remember being downvoted for pointing out Musk's narcissism years ago when he was a saint on this site. The HN hive mind has it's own panoply of topics that are taboo to the tribe. On the plus side, I have noticed fewer unfair downvotes in the past few years. I rarely have to vouch for someone who makes a reasoned statement that offends the local snowflakes.
- code_for_monkey 1y ago
  I get downvoted every time I point out that generative AI is at this point mostly a bad faith tech used by scammers and over confident CEO's desperate to lay people off.
  - meansob 1y ago
    [dead]