Thread

1. ocd · 1790861971 · focus · HN ↗

   I'm not a business guy, but I think I would be very worried if I created any opening (even on the very long term) for competition to justify itself being built up to meet demand (or national security requirements of other countries) on an industry I mostly control, because I prioritized extremely high prices for a few years that might have the effect of changing the arithmetic for potential competitors that wouldn't have done it before.

   It makes me consider whether there would be retaliation in later years against the US intellectual property system in countries other than China. While RAM is a tangible product, the areas it serves aren't really.

   1. pllbnk · 1790862558 · focus · HN ↗

      I think neither CEOs nor boards of the public companies care. They want to maximize their paychecks and bonuses in the short term before they leave to other companies.

      1. __MatrixMan__ · 1790862614 · focus · HN ↗

         Like termites, moving on to the next tree. One day we'll figure out how to be rid of these parasites, then we'll have healthier trees.

         1. r14c · 1790864562 · focus · HN ↗

            [dead]

            1. thenewnewguy · 1790864939 · focus · HN ↗

               Which is what? Because if your solution is "get rid of all C-suite executives", obviously some new person (or some new group) has to be given the final say on decisions in the company and what's to stop them from becoming corrupt or otherwise problematic?

               1. Balinares · 1790867380 · focus · HN ↗

                  100% wealth tax rate past e.g. $999M -- capping wealth like a Zelda wallet -- would address a certain number of issues around the many externalities of unbounded, bottomless greed.

                  Mind you, I don't think that's ever happening, considering that one such issue is there's currently nothing to keep a dishonest actor who ended up beyond that threshold from spending mountains of cash (still a small fraction of the total there) toward convincing those susceptible to such that a system which permits such dishonest actors is good akshyually.

                  1. __MatrixMan__ · 1790872003 · focus · HN ↗

                     Not sure why you're being downvoted. This is a very reasonable proposal. Once you're beyond a certain level of rich, you should be constrained by whether the people around you consent to your behavior, not how much money you have.
                  2. Yoric · 1790932125 · focus · HN ↗

                     Worth investigating, but I suspect that it's more complicated: as far as I understand, many billionaires are billionaires in valuation, but own relatively little currency.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.