6 ms·

Rent seeking can't and won't last. You don't need to go very far - just read http://reason.com/archives/2013/04/14/the-end-of-power http://reason.com/archives/2

by guylhem 14y ago

Rent seeking can't and won't last. You don't need to go very far - just read http://reason.com/archives/2013/04/14/the-end-of-power http://reason.com/archives/2013/04/14/the-end-of-power on the frontpage today (the comments suck however - they basically try to deny the fact that for humanity as a species, the last century has been the best ever) The basic idea stands - too many people have more comfort, want too many things, and are harder to control - and now more than ever. The solution to rent seeking is basic capitalism, as in the use of reason. Ayn Rand style capitalists do worry about the letter and the spirit of the laws and of a contract, because they know it is in their best interest. They are not into rent seeking because they know the end results. She said that beautifully : "I am not primarily an advocate of capitalism, but of egoism; and I am not primarily an advocate of egoism, but of reason. If one recognizes the supremacy of reason and applies it consistently, all the rest follows." Ayn Rand theory and work can be seen as one implementation of John Rawl theory of justice. He added a 2nd part about equality, but he also deconstructed the opposition between freedom and equality. Basically, you only need a good premise, then you can work on it. The premise here is reason. The only real "competition" could be from a belief not based on reason, such as racism or a kind of religious fondamentalism - but not any kind as explained by John Rawls, just the kind incompatible with democracy. I'll put islamism in that bag (the basic idea of stoning to death women who had sexual relation outside of marriage in this day and age is not very palatable to me). Anyway, the remedy is the same for both diseases - science (and the occasional readings of libertarian books) If you have ideological problems with Ayn Rand, read at least about John Rawls veil of ignorance on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Theory_of_Justice http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Theory_of_Justice

OGinparadise 14y ago
>> (the comments suck however - they basically try to deny the fact that for humanity as a species, the last century has been the best ever) Part of me says that the added stresses from never being happy, always want more, do rain on that parade. Maybe being "a dumb peasant" somewhere with a full stomach but otherwise no larger goals is best. >> The basic idea stands - too many people have more comfort, want too many things, and are harder to control - and now than ever. Yeah but they are not organized, at least not in USA. Those making bank are kicking back to the politicians that decide what system /laws us suckers have to follow. The greatest investment ever is in the political process, a million dollar donation can easily yield billions.
- guylhem 14y ago
  Try buddhism or stoicism (I read Seneca) and you'll be happy my friend, even with less :-) You'll even be happier to see everyone in the human race is getting more. It even beats being dumb with a full stomach, because how good is happiness if it is based on ignorance?
  - chii 14y ago
    but it is this unhappiness that drives progress - if people are content, there would be no new innovation to try and improve the status quo. If there is no selfishness, there would be no incentive and desire to outdo your neighbour (or competitor).
    - OGinparadise 14y ago
      On the macro level I totally agree. But on a personal level it may be different, even though we're all benefiting from inventions of those that went nuts and lost many years of sleep
    - orasis 14y ago
      So? Why should progress be a goal in and of itself? Shouldn't progress be in the service of something else? If that something else is solving unhappiness, then why do you have a problem if unhappiness is solved through other means and progress becomes obsolete? Perhaps you are just addicted to progress and future-oriented thinking and thus cannot stay happy for long.
      - chii 14y ago
        so you assume that "solving unhappiness" is the end goal - to which i m arguing that its not. Unhappiness is but a symptom of some problem (currently, its the lack of wealth and material for 90% of the population). If for some reason, everyone managed to get converted into buhdism and not feel any of the unhappiness that they'd otherwise have felt, did the situation really improve? Aren't they just tricking themselves into thinking they are in a state of enlightenment?
sliverstorm 14y ago
Maybe I'm just thick as a board tonight, but while you wrote a lot, you don't really seem to have explained "the solution to rent seeking" as you see it. Can you expound?
- guylhem 14y ago
  Reason says rent seeking is improductive and self destructive behaviour. One will engage in such activities only if the expected returns outweights the costs, which include the destruction of the system. A rational person will not come to this conclusion under a system where such inefficiency is discouraged - pure and perfect competition, capitalism. Many people wonder whether capitalism is a good thing. Bring them reason, science, let them work it out and make their own basic decision. Let them fight the bad reasoning themselves, come out of their local optimas if you prefer a math analogy. Racism and religious extremism must have some value, or such behaviours would not have because so widespread. But they seem to be local optimas, or even destructive in the end, just like rent-seeking. Here is another way to look at this - look at the immigration net flows: it seems that more people want to immigrate in capitalist countries than emigrate out of them. If it is reasonable to doubt my deductions, is it reasonable to doubt so many people may have made the same conclusions independently ? Read about how immigrants affiliate politically, which belief system they adhere to. Apparently a lot of them want to be paid for the fruit of their labour, and not for pure idleness, want to be left alone - and many other libertarian values. I'm sorry if that is not a valid explain for you. It is for me.
  - bob13579 14y ago
    How do you explain government rent-seeking, where there is no competition? Take government pensions or teacher unions for example.
  - sliverstorm 14y ago
    To make sure we are on the same page, let me try to summarize: you are essentially saying that so long as people take into account negative externalities, rent seeking behavior goes away? I don't disagree with your premise, but I do disagree that this will result in rent seeking behavior going away. One of the classic problems with capitalism is literally exactly this- negative externalities are not properly accounted for.
pyre 14y ago
| I'll put islamism in that bag (the basic idea | of stoning to death women who had sexual relation | outside of marriage in this day and age is not | very palatable to me). It's my understanding that rules like that (e.g. stoning) are not in the Qur'an, but are 'old' rules thought up by different sects of Islam. 1. This is like decrying Christianity as a cult because of David Koresh. Or getting angry at all Christians because the Catholic church tried to cover up the whole paedophile priest thing. 2. Even people that are part of these sects don't necessarily follow all of the rules. E.g. I've known Jewish people that ate ham.
- guylhem 14y ago
  I'm not for or against any religion. It's all a matter of proportion. How many Koresh are there? Enough to put beheading/stoning/etc. videos on youtube ? Islam seems to have the #1 "bad spot" at the time. I feel very sorry about that, because as the human race it's like trying to advance without the help of a whole third of world population - and the worst thing is we do not let the people who refuse such belief system immigrate easily in democratic countries. Just look at the way muslims (and apostates) emigrating from north africa to europe are treated. At the moment we are wasting a lot of human potential, and that's sad. Hopefully things will change [even if I'm not sure about it when I see the "antilibertarian" downvotes posts, without even taking a minute to express why they think it does not contribute to the discussion. I guess I should know better about liberals and their so called values :-/] EDIT: I was talking about the 1st post, about reaon, which took multiple downvotes but not a single dissenting reply in about 2 minutes. Prove me wrong, give me arguments to challenge my position - I'm begging for them. But no, nothing at all. And my attitude is the problem ?? It's like watching a reddit gang in operation, sorry
  - pyre 14y ago
    | I guess I should know better about | liberals and their so called values I'd say that the downvotes are more aimed at your attitude ("People downvoting me? It's those damn Liberals!"). It's like you're taking cues from Rush Limbaugh.
    - 14y ago
zeteo 14y ago
>Rent seeking can't and won't last [because] too many people have more comfort, want too many things, and are harder to control - and now more than ever. That's a rather pie-in-the-sky argument. People pursue rent-seeking because it gives them comfort, material goods, and freedom. The businessman who lobbies for monopolistic benefits, the politician who takes his campaign contributions, the copywriter who creates attack ads: they all follow egotistic interests. Wild, unregulated, snake-oil-and-corporate-trusts capitalism is no solution to these problems.
- waps 14y ago
  > In the modern world, natural resources are the limiting factor of production. It takes only a tiny percentage of the population to farm the arable land, mine iron ore, cut down and process the timber, and extract the oil. A somewhat larger percent converts those resources into the necessities of life – bread, vehicles, homes, roads, bridges, clothing, furniture, stocked grocery aisles, appliances, etc. The worker entering the economy has a problem. They must find a source of income so they can access resources and manufactured goods. But there are no unexploited resources and no surplus jobs to be had processing those resources. They need a job, but their labor is surplus and unnecessary. This is the real problem. Everyone but a tiny percentage of the population is ... well ... not needed at all.
yarrel 14y ago
"Ayn Rand style capitalists do worry about the letter and the spirit of the laws and of a contract" And Tolkein-style hobbits have hairy feet.
Nursie 14y ago
"She said that beautifully : "I am not primarily an advocate of capitalism, but of egoism; and I am not primarily an advocate of egoism, but of reason. If one recognizes the supremacy of reason and applies it consistently, all the rest follows." Such a shame she let faulty premises and emotion cloud her writing and her philosophy then really.

by guylhem 14y ago

OGinparadise 14y ago

>> (the comments suck however - they basically try to deny the fact that for humanity as a species, the last century has been the best ever) Part of me says that the added stresses from never being happy, always want more, do rain on that parade. Maybe being "a dumb peasant" somewhere with a full stomach but otherwise no larger goals is best. >> The basic idea stands - too many people have more comfort, want too many things, and are harder to control - and now than ever. Yeah but they are not organized, at least not in USA. Those making bank are kicking back to the politicians that decide what system /laws us suckers have to follow. The greatest investment ever is in the political process, a million dollar donation can easily yield billions.

guylhem 14y ago
Try buddhism or stoicism (I read Seneca) and you'll be happy my friend, even with less :-) You'll even be happier to see everyone in the human race is getting more. It even beats being dumb with a full stomach, because how good is happiness if it is based on ignorance?
- chii 14y ago
  but it is this unhappiness that drives progress - if people are content, there would be no new innovation to try and improve the status quo. If there is no selfishness, there would be no incentive and desire to outdo your neighbour (or competitor).
  - OGinparadise 14y ago
    On the macro level I totally agree. But on a personal level it may be different, even though we're all benefiting from inventions of those that went nuts and lost many years of sleep
  - orasis 14y ago
    So? Why should progress be a goal in and of itself? Shouldn't progress be in the service of something else? If that something else is solving unhappiness, then why do you have a problem if unhappiness is solved through other means and progress becomes obsolete? Perhaps you are just addicted to progress and future-oriented thinking and thus cannot stay happy for long.
    - chii 14y ago
      so you assume that "solving unhappiness" is the end goal - to which i m arguing that its not. Unhappiness is but a symptom of some problem (currently, its the lack of wealth and material for 90% of the population). If for some reason, everyone managed to get converted into buhdism and not feel any of the unhappiness that they'd otherwise have felt, did the situation really improve? Aren't they just tricking themselves into thinking they are in a state of enlightenment?

sliverstorm 14y ago

Maybe I'm just thick as a board tonight, but while you wrote a lot, you don't really seem to have explained "the solution to rent seeking" as you see it. Can you expound?

guylhem 14y ago
Reason says rent seeking is improductive and self destructive behaviour. One will engage in such activities only if the expected returns outweights the costs, which include the destruction of the system. A rational person will not come to this conclusion under a system where such inefficiency is discouraged - pure and perfect competition, capitalism. Many people wonder whether capitalism is a good thing. Bring them reason, science, let them work it out and make their own basic decision. Let them fight the bad reasoning themselves, come out of their local optimas if you prefer a math analogy. Racism and religious extremism must have some value, or such behaviours would not have because so widespread. But they seem to be local optimas, or even destructive in the end, just like rent-seeking. Here is another way to look at this - look at the immigration net flows: it seems that more people want to immigrate in capitalist countries than emigrate out of them. If it is reasonable to doubt my deductions, is it reasonable to doubt so many people may have made the same conclusions independently ? Read about how immigrants affiliate politically, which belief system they adhere to. Apparently a lot of them want to be paid for the fruit of their labour, and not for pure idleness, want to be left alone - and many other libertarian values. I'm sorry if that is not a valid explain for you. It is for me.
- bob13579 14y ago
  How do you explain government rent-seeking, where there is no competition? Take government pensions or teacher unions for example.
- sliverstorm 14y ago
  To make sure we are on the same page, let me try to summarize: you are essentially saying that so long as people take into account negative externalities, rent seeking behavior goes away? I don't disagree with your premise, but I do disagree that this will result in rent seeking behavior going away. One of the classic problems with capitalism is literally exactly this- negative externalities are not properly accounted for.

pyre 14y ago

| I'll put islamism in that bag (the basic idea | of stoning to death women who had sexual relation | outside of marriage in this day and age is not | very palatable to me). It's my understanding that rules like that (e.g. stoning) are not in the Qur'an, but are 'old' rules thought up by different sects of Islam. 1. This is like decrying Christianity as a cult because of David Koresh. Or getting angry at all Christians because the Catholic church tried to cover up the whole paedophile priest thing. 2. Even people that are part of these sects don't necessarily follow all of the rules. E.g. I've known Jewish people that ate ham.

guylhem 14y ago
I'm not for or against any religion. It's all a matter of proportion. How many Koresh are there? Enough to put beheading/stoning/etc. videos on youtube ? Islam seems to have the #1 "bad spot" at the time. I feel very sorry about that, because as the human race it's like trying to advance without the help of a whole third of world population - and the worst thing is we do not let the people who refuse such belief system immigrate easily in democratic countries. Just look at the way muslims (and apostates) emigrating from north africa to europe are treated. At the moment we are wasting a lot of human potential, and that's sad. Hopefully things will change [even if I'm not sure about it when I see the "antilibertarian" downvotes posts, without even taking a minute to express why they think it does not contribute to the discussion. I guess I should know better about liberals and their so called values :-/] EDIT: I was talking about the 1st post, about reaon, which took multiple downvotes but not a single dissenting reply in about 2 minutes. Prove me wrong, give me arguments to challenge my position - I'm begging for them. But no, nothing at all. And my attitude is the problem ?? It's like watching a reddit gang in operation, sorry
- pyre 14y ago
  | I guess I should know better about | liberals and their so called values I'd say that the downvotes are more aimed at your attitude ("People downvoting me? It's those damn Liberals!"). It's like you're taking cues from Rush Limbaugh.
  - 14y ago

zeteo 14y ago

>Rent seeking can't and won't last [because] too many people have more comfort, want too many things, and are harder to control - and now more than ever. That's a rather pie-in-the-sky argument. People pursue rent-seeking because it gives them comfort, material goods, and freedom. The businessman who lobbies for monopolistic benefits, the politician who takes his campaign contributions, the copywriter who creates attack ads: they all follow egotistic interests. Wild, unregulated, snake-oil-and-corporate-trusts capitalism is no solution to these problems.

waps 14y ago
> In the modern world, natural resources are the limiting factor of production. It takes only a tiny percentage of the population to farm the arable land, mine iron ore, cut down and process the timber, and extract the oil. A somewhat larger percent converts those resources into the necessities of life – bread, vehicles, homes, roads, bridges, clothing, furniture, stocked grocery aisles, appliances, etc. The worker entering the economy has a problem. They must find a source of income so they can access resources and manufactured goods. But there are no unexploited resources and no surplus jobs to be had processing those resources. They need a job, but their labor is surplus and unnecessary. This is the real problem. Everyone but a tiny percentage of the population is ... well ... not needed at all.

yarrel 14y ago

"Ayn Rand style capitalists do worry about the letter and the spirit of the laws and of a contract" And Tolkein-style hobbits have hairy feet.

Nursie 14y ago

"She said that beautifully : "I am not primarily an advocate of capitalism, but of egoism; and I am not primarily an advocate of egoism, but of reason. If one recognizes the supremacy of reason and applies it consistently, all the rest follows." Such a shame she let faulty premises and emotion cloud her writing and her philosophy then really.