3 ms·

I have an alternative theory. It's because important real things are heavily regulated. Government sticks its nose into everything. The internet was an exceptio

by snitko 13y ago

I have an alternative theory. It's because important real things are heavily regulated. Government sticks its nose into everything. The internet was an exception, because they didn't realize its potential fast enough (China, on the other hand, had some time to do the homework). Whatever industry is regulated - transportation, healthcare, protection, drugs - you have high prices and a high entry barrier. By pretending to care about consumers, governments simply rob both entrepreneurs and consumers. If they truly cared, they would allow multiple consumer protection agencies on the market each helping consumers navigate the said market, but with no power to prohibit or regulate anything. Right now a government is a monopolist in consumer protection business with an ultimate power to kick anyone out of the market. That can't be good for consumers. And don't tell me people would die if there was no regulations - every day thousands die because it takes years for the FDA to approve an experimental drug, but no one seems to care. As a side note, don't be surprised that tangible businesses with a lot of real assets make less money than some chat application. In airline industry, whose margins do you think are the lowest? Airlines. Whose margins are the highest? IT companies that run ticket reservation systems.

anigbrowl 13y ago
Actually, the federal government passed a law in 1998 for the specific purpose of limiting the taxability of internet services specifically in order to grow the the industry, which kind of negates your whole theory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Tax_Freedom_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Tax_Freedom_Act
- snitko 13y ago
  No, it doesn't. It's a smart move: allow the industry to grow fast, then start taxing it (as far as I remember, some states, California perhaps, recently planned to introduce internet sales tax or something like it and Amazon was outraged, no?).
  - anigbrowl 13y ago
    The ITFA has nothing to do with sales tax. Your original argument was that government didn't get around to regulating it heavily here because it didn't realize the potential of the internet. Now you're saying that they avoided regulating it because they recognized its potential.
    - snitko 13y ago
      Regulation != taxation. Two different things.
      - anigbrowl 13y ago
        You made it about taxation when you said government's ultimate aim was to rob people.
saraid216 13y ago
It's important to remember that theories like the parent's require that the world started about a century ago.
yardie 13y ago
> In airline industry, whose margins do you think are the lowest? Airlines. Funny, airline profits were quite good before deregulation. And even before the internet industry was like this. > consumer protection agencies...with no power to prohibit or regulate anything. I'm sorry, but what purpose would this server exactly? You want a free market health inspector agency without the power to shutdown restaurants violating cooking "best practices"? You mean like Yelp, where recommendations can be gamed?
- snitko 13y ago
  > Funny, airline profits were quite good before deregulation. And even before the internet industry was like this. Of course. And ticket prices where unaffordable to many people before deregulation. Profits were fine though - that's the way monopolies and governments make sweet love to each other at the expense of consumers. >You want a free market health inspector agency without the power to shutdown restaurants violating cooking "best practices"? You mean like Yelp, where recommendations can be gamed? Yes, I want people to decide for themselves whether they want to trust this consumer protection agency or trust another agency, which standards seem closer to them in particular. Also, you can pretty much game the current system too. Even worse, because health inspectors do not directly serve consumers and have no competition, they have more incentives to accept bribes or simply do a sloppy job. If governments did their job, you wouldn't need Yelp, would you? And in all honesty, I would rather trust Yelp than a government agency.
j1z0 13y ago
Don't forget it was the Government that INVENTED the internet. They also heavily funded or helped to invent cellphones technology and micro-chips not to mention the research that brought us touch screens and GPS as well. So perhaps the government isn't all bad and for things like the Hyperloop they should get involved. I think the real issue that is being talked about in the article is that long term, large scale "moon-shot" type projects are extremely difficult to launch in the private market, but history has shown us that the government is actually much better at such long term "moon-shot" things. Sure SpaceX is cool and makes rockets for far cheaper than the government ever did, but with out a few decades of NASA spending a ton of money trying to figure out how to get into space in the first place there would be no SpaceX. So I think what really needs to be looked at for projects like the Hyperloop is Government / Private partnership. Maybe even let the government take a stake in the company and earn revenue in the future to offset / repay all the tax dollars invested. Because unlike private equity, cash-flow is actually quite important to the government and they they are well suited to help out in situations like this.
- snitko 13y ago
  Did a government bureaucrat invent the internet? Or was it a person or persons who were simply financed by said bureaucrats (and not even directly by them, but rather by taxpayers' money those bureaucrats redistributed)? This is an important difference because nothing really stops private individuals finance things that may potentially be unprofitable (think Ubuntu, for instance). When you say "but without government important initial research which is costly and unprofitable can't be done" I want you to think about many brilliant scientists from the 19th and even 20th century who did groundbreaking work entirely on their own or with the help of some private money. And also think that when government finances things, it simply says to other people "give us your money because we know better how to spend them - if you disagree, we're still gonna take your money, so you have no choice". Government doesn't convince and treat people as individuals, it commands and treats them as livestock.
  - dasil003 13y ago
    > I want you to think about many brilliant scientists from the 19th and even 20th century who did groundbreaking work entirely on their own or with the help of some private money. Keep in mind that groundbreaking research took orders of magnitude less resources back then.

by snitko 13y ago

anigbrowl 13y ago

Actually, the federal government passed a law in 1998 for the specific purpose of limiting the taxability of internet services specifically in order to grow the the industry, which kind of negates your whole theory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Tax_Freedom_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Tax_Freedom_Act

snitko 13y ago
No, it doesn't. It's a smart move: allow the industry to grow fast, then start taxing it (as far as I remember, some states, California perhaps, recently planned to introduce internet sales tax or something like it and Amazon was outraged, no?).
- anigbrowl 13y ago
  The ITFA has nothing to do with sales tax. Your original argument was that government didn't get around to regulating it heavily here because it didn't realize the potential of the internet. Now you're saying that they avoided regulating it because they recognized its potential.
  - snitko 13y ago
    Regulation != taxation. Two different things.
    - anigbrowl 13y ago
      You made it about taxation when you said government's ultimate aim was to rob people.

saraid216 13y ago

It's important to remember that theories like the parent's require that the world started about a century ago.

yardie 13y ago

> In airline industry, whose margins do you think are the lowest? Airlines. Funny, airline profits were quite good before deregulation. And even before the internet industry was like this. > consumer protection agencies...with no power to prohibit or regulate anything. I'm sorry, but what purpose would this server exactly? You want a free market health inspector agency without the power to shutdown restaurants violating cooking "best practices"? You mean like Yelp, where recommendations can be gamed?

snitko 13y ago
> Funny, airline profits were quite good before deregulation. And even before the internet industry was like this. Of course. And ticket prices where unaffordable to many people before deregulation. Profits were fine though - that's the way monopolies and governments make sweet love to each other at the expense of consumers. >You want a free market health inspector agency without the power to shutdown restaurants violating cooking "best practices"? You mean like Yelp, where recommendations can be gamed? Yes, I want people to decide for themselves whether they want to trust this consumer protection agency or trust another agency, which standards seem closer to them in particular. Also, you can pretty much game the current system too. Even worse, because health inspectors do not directly serve consumers and have no competition, they have more incentives to accept bribes or simply do a sloppy job. If governments did their job, you wouldn't need Yelp, would you? And in all honesty, I would rather trust Yelp than a government agency.

j1z0 13y ago

Don't forget it was the Government that INVENTED the internet. They also heavily funded or helped to invent cellphones technology and micro-chips not to mention the research that brought us touch screens and GPS as well. So perhaps the government isn't all bad and for things like the Hyperloop they should get involved. I think the real issue that is being talked about in the article is that long term, large scale "moon-shot" type projects are extremely difficult to launch in the private market, but history has shown us that the government is actually much better at such long term "moon-shot" things. Sure SpaceX is cool and makes rockets for far cheaper than the government ever did, but with out a few decades of NASA spending a ton of money trying to figure out how to get into space in the first place there would be no SpaceX. So I think what really needs to be looked at for projects like the Hyperloop is Government / Private partnership. Maybe even let the government take a stake in the company and earn revenue in the future to offset / repay all the tax dollars invested. Because unlike private equity, cash-flow is actually quite important to the government and they they are well suited to help out in situations like this.

snitko 13y ago
Did a government bureaucrat invent the internet? Or was it a person or persons who were simply financed by said bureaucrats (and not even directly by them, but rather by taxpayers' money those bureaucrats redistributed)? This is an important difference because nothing really stops private individuals finance things that may potentially be unprofitable (think Ubuntu, for instance). When you say "but without government important initial research which is costly and unprofitable can't be done" I want you to think about many brilliant scientists from the 19th and even 20th century who did groundbreaking work entirely on their own or with the help of some private money. And also think that when government finances things, it simply says to other people "give us your money because we know better how to spend them - if you disagree, we're still gonna take your money, so you have no choice". Government doesn't convince and treat people as individuals, it commands and treats them as livestock.
- dasil003 13y ago
  > I want you to think about many brilliant scientists from the 19th and even 20th century who did groundbreaking work entirely on their own or with the help of some private money. Keep in mind that groundbreaking research took orders of magnitude less resources back then.