What's the Least Impactful Way to Spend $300,000,000?

Re:What's the Least Impactful Way to Spend $300,000,000? by carschno on Friday April 14, 2023 @04:59AM (#35567163)

I think your argument is missing GP's point entirely. The point was that a functioning market economy would evolve so that companies that sell products or services at a self-sustaining price survive, whereas companies that lose money continuously die. However, this is clearly not the case, given that companies like Uber, as you mention, do survive without being profitable at all. Competitors that are not backed by near-infinite money cannot survive this competition, regardless of their product or efficiency.

Whether or not a functioning market economy could ever exist in reality if of course another question.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What's the Least Impactful Way to Spend $300,000,000? by sokoloff on Friday April 14, 2023 @09:00AM (#35569080)

I don't know that Uber turning a mere 14 years old is proof that the market economy isn't functioning. In a time of incredibly low interest rates and the resulting free-flowing money sloshing around looking for any possible return, I'd expect a lot of companies to reach their teens without that being proof that they can continue indefinitely without showing profits and returns to investors.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What's the Least Impactful Way to Spend $300,000,000? by carschno on Friday April 14, 2023 @11:04AM (#35570347)

You are certainly right that Uber alone is not a proof; the underlying causes are complex and include the factors you mention.

Anyway, the promise of a market economy is that it selects the "best" by competition. The fact that companies like Uber survive for decades while making losses and destroying potential competitors shows that this promise of the market economy does not stand in reality.

[ Parent | on HN ]