Multiheaded comments on Politics Discussion Thread September 2012 - Less Wrong

-1 Post author: Multiheaded 05 September 2012 11:27AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (195)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Multiheaded 10 September 2012 08:40:44PM *  0 points [-]

Are you claiming that corporations like Microsoft don't have huge rent-seeking elements that have little to do with "government" regulation? Or that those rent-seeking elements (i.e. elements that optimize away the production of utility for society in lieu of utility for themselves) don't include top executives, huge PR/advertising departments and such?

If e.g. a global supermarket chain reached an agreement with its several "competitors" (and I use the word loosely) to "set industry standards of team-building" (use a unified strategy of emotional manipulation towards personnel, like paternalism and engendering status competition), "share information on human resources" (spy on potential troublemakers' conversations, blogs, etc), "work closely and productively with unions" (keep local union leadership on a short leash to avoid dangerous examples while throwing bones like "gender awareness") and "maintain a healthy relationship with the media" (no explanation needed) -

-would it really need a large government lobby to cover its ass while doing all that, even in today's America? Indeed, I believe that they're already doing much of this all over the world.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 12 September 2012 03:32:18AM 2 points [-]

Your scenario presumes that said cartel covers all the corporations in the industry, otherwise employees would go to places with better working conditions, unless the the places with worse working conditions paid more to compensate.

That was my attempt to describe what is essentially a 3-dimensional labor supply function in words, hope it wasn't to confusing.