I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

Re:I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page by lone_haxx0r on Wednesday May 15, 2019 @03:29PM (#19922862)

You're right, at least in the case of highly regulated markets and when the state creates artificial monopolies (e.g. electricity).

I'll correct my original comment then:

At least private companies that compete in a relatively free market are losing their own earned money when they're inefficient, not someone else's.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page by lazyasciiart on Wednesday May 15, 2019 @07:05PM (#19924659)

That claim assumes a free market with perfect information, which is more than even Adam Smith was willing to do.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page by TheSpiceIsLife on Wednesday May 15, 2019 @04:21PM (#19923340)

It’s still not right.

Private companies are losing money on behalf of their owners or shareholders.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page by lone_haxx0r on Wednesday May 15, 2019 @04:59PM (#19923711)

You could say that the owners/shareholders are losing it themselves, because they voluntarily invested in the company, as opposed to the state, which takes your money even if you don't want it to.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page by moate on Wednesday May 15, 2019 @04:52PM (#19923661)

I think most VCs would have some thoughts on the idea that a start up they just pumped millions into has lost "the start-ups money" in some stupid experiment and not theirs.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page by leetcrew on Wednesday May 15, 2019 @04:44PM (#19923577)

a key difference is that the largest shareholders are proportionally affected by the waste, and have a proportionately large amount of power to do something about it.

[ Parent | on HN ]