Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by analognoise 229 days ago
> The free market could do that without unions.

I suggest doing some reading about labor movements, the Gilded Age, or about current issues - wealth inequality, housing costs, environmental impact, healthcare costs, enshittification.

The free market has failed miserably across multiple dimensions - even Trump has the government owning companies now (Intel). The “free market” has been a failed idea for a long time.

> In tribes in the olden days, when a person got sick/too old, many tribes just left him to die, because they couldn't afford to feed him.

We have archeological evidence that contradicts this directly! What are you even talking about?

This isn’t a good way to structure a society, but your whole point about mixing morality with capitalism is perhaps the worst one.

If you can’t look at the damage to people (and the environment) under our current system and point out how it is broadly immoral, I would suggest taking a closer look at the very least.

3 comments

I've read a lot and I have been in the buisness since I was 21 years old, almost homeless student in a big city that had to postpone my degree to survive so I've had years to think from the both sides of the "inequality" divide and I got a degree in economics.

You assume that if there is a price on it than there is a free market for it. It's not true at all...

Compare the freedom of the markets that are inefficient in your example:

- housing: one of the most regulated and non-transparent markets with zoning laws and NIMBYism blocking new supply to the market

- healthcare: even more regulated market for practitioners (licence to heal), medical supplies (licences for medicines) and a brocken system that incumbents can't enter (check cost+drugs Mark Cuban's post about how shitty the system is and how far away from normal free market)

- enivronmental impact: that's what the taxes are for and to have a good tax base you tax the polutants, but it's not "the market" it's "the people who consume" in any market free or not you'll get the resources used. In non-free markets you will just use more resources, because the encumbents will extract +400$ for 8Gb ram upgrade of your macbook pro or 10000 USD for a broken leg, that could've done much more if it wasn't inefficiently extorted.

- enshittification: this happens only in the "ecosystems" with no markets inside.

If you go to the freeer markets you'll see that the prices got down, not up. (check the price of computers, electronics and clothes for example).

There are some areas where the market is not the answer, but there humanity hasn't found a better way to optimize resources and ensure freedom unless the people have the ability to change their goods freely without restriction of the third party.

Read about how the Japanese left their old in a practice called 姨捨 (Ubasute) .

You miss the point of the argument, that when there isn't enough food, then this happens.

Do you really want to cite Trump as a rational decision maker?
No, he’s the opposite of that.

But next time people say “we could just seize it”, we have precedent. From a Republican, no less!