> I call it Avería – which is a Spanish word related to the root of the word ‘average’. It actually means mechanical breakdown or damage. This seemed curiously fitting, and I was assured by a Spanish friend-of-a-friend that “Avería is an incredibly beautiful word regardless of its meaning”. So that's nice.
No way it's solved. try to make OCR over a magazine with creative layouts. Not possible. I have a collection of vintage computer magazines and from time to time I try to OCR them whith the state of the art mechanisms. All of them requiere a lot of human intervention
>A smarter approach is to cherry pick the best elements from every model and redesign the parts that don't serve us
There is a reason why Gesell only suggested the three core policies free money, free land and free trade. Once you have that you can cherry pick whatever you want, without any contradictions.
If you want austerity and low unemployment, high wages, low inequality and so on, the system is set up to support that.
How is that possible? Because most important thing realization of Gesell was that the system is not in equilibrium. You have to bring it into equilibrium through equilibrium encouraging policies.
The standard neoclassical framework treats the economy as if it was always in equilibrium and governments are the ones ruining equilibrium, which means you can abuse the economy and hack it and destroy it as much as you want and it will still work anyway. If anything, a neoclassical economist will even think that it will work better when it is in shambles.
So in a way, the policies that bring about equilibrium will appear as if they are a panacea. They do impossible things that people who are living in the old way of mandatory contradictions would never believe, when in reality all they did was reduce the obvious dysfunction staring down on them.
Doing Capitalism better means preventing market failures and accepting more state intervention... which i suppose the trump / republican government is doing.
Free market Capitalism is dead in the USA, winners are getting picked. Coal over solar. Who knows, perhaps it's right, but I suspect not.
In all seriousness, and I'm sure I'm going to get a lot of flak for this, but at this point the Chinese do capitalism better than the US:
- Lots of small and mid-sized firms.
- Lots of cutthroat competition with resulting price pressure.
- Virtually all firms are subsidized by direct government investment to some extent, but the government doesn't pick winners.
- Red tape and barriers to entry are generally low, regulation mostly affects larger firms. (The CCP doesn't want companies getting too big for their britches, but there are too many small firms to harass, and the government doesn't want people unemployed.)
- Civil legal liability is anywhere from 10x to 1000x less of an issue. I'm not exaggerating. The courts are fast, decisions are usually reasonable, and "access to justice" costs very little.
In the US you have this scheme where barriers to entry are insanely high thanks to regulatory capture, and the courts are a weapon that large firms use against small ones, almost exclusively, as smaller companies can't afford the costs associated with litigation. This is without even getting into "winners getting picked," which is obviously a problem.
And it's not some law of reality or the goodness of the CCP or some raced based bullshit that underpins is. The US was like this too, 75yr ago.
But for several generations we've been throwing more power behind both public and private institutions that reduce the tempo of economic activity and it sure fucking shows.
I tried to contribute in the past and the owner was an unprofessional jerk. Instead of replying the PR rejection with arguments, he posted memes and shit
I don't think that's appropriate language for HN. We should strive for high quality content but the very least civilized discussions, ideally without sarcasm or one liners that spirals into low quality posts.
I can see your point of view and have concerns, but truly the job does not belong to the person doing it. It belongs to the employer. We are just keeping the seat warm for when someone better is available. (Capitalism)
A lot of people think that money should not be simply given to people, and you have to work a job to get it. A lot of jobs are being replaced by AI. You need money to survive. I am in favour of people being able to work their jobs
