Hacker News Reader

Comment by deciplex | Hacker News Reader

> Profit is not just "extra money for owners", its also the part that provides income security in tough times, that buys new machines, that covers over the slow seasons, that secures cheaper supply lines and a million other things.

This seems like an old-fashioned view on the nature of business. It may have been true 50 or 60 years ago (at least) but I think it's the exception rather than the rule today. Cutting loose your employees is what provides income security in tough times (for the employees not cut loose). Loans buy new machines. If you have a couple slow seasons you'll simply be bought by some private equity firm, loaded up with debt, then driven into the dirt along with any pension obligations etc., the firm may have had.

View on HN

I see your viewpoint posted a lot. There's certainly a cynicism that comes from following the news, or seeing listed-company-news as applying to all companies.

Your view is likely biased towards the US though - most countries don't have a PE industry. Also most businesses aren't attractive to PE in the first place.

You need to look past the headlines, past the news. As you drive consider each building you pass. That mom-and-pop store. That corner franchise. That Indian take-aways.

Most businesses aren't Apple or Google. Those are the exceptions, and despite their vast numbers they are a drop in the bucket of the n billion people employed world-wide.

Yes it's an old fashioned view on the nature of business. But it's also the reality for millions of small businesses today.

Late stage capitalism is eating the heart of the US yes, but fortunately it hasn't spread to most places yet. And even in the US good businesses do well, if you care to see them.

My view is biased toward to the US because that's where I live, yes, but also I think as the epicenter of global capitalism it sets the pace for the other, lesser, capitalisms around the world.

You're right that, by the numbers, there are a lot more small companies than large companies. But it's the large companies that steer our political and economic institutions. And, in many or most cases those smaller companies will have to compete with the larger ones, and certainly rely on at least some of them for their operations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com