Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

OK. Your job is from now is dung transport. Because you inherited it, whether you like it or not.

Sure, you are allowed to start a new business. But where would you get money? You can't sell your dung transport business, and you don't have enough money of your own to just start a new business from scratch.

 help



It's crazy what some people will come up with just to have something to criticize instead of the actual contents of the thing they're replying to. Nobody said continuing an inherited business is mandatory, least of all me.

I am all for serious discussion about shortcomings of my idea. But this isn't it.


No, I'm just describing the dystopia that will be the result of your idea.

You basically want to reinvent the feudalism with its nobility and peasants.


The dystopia you're describing has nothing in common whatsoever with my idea. Now please stop misrepresenting my words.

Yes. It absolutely does, because your system heavily favors inherited capital that HAS to stay within the family. It also heavily discourages capital mobility, risk-taking, and entrepreneurship.

Say "hello" to dynastic marriages, noble lineages, etc. The _best_ case is the system of medieval guilds.


They can't sell "Xirdus's Dung Service", but they can still sell their assets like the dung cart, shovel, dung pit, etc.

Sell it to whom? Who is going to be buying the assets? And what about employees?

(never mind that "selling assets" is just a workaround for "selling business")


It makes it impossible to share part of a business, including stocks. It also massively increases the friction of takeover by killing all employee, vendor, and client contracts, so the buyer cannot benefit from any of these without arranging for it separately. It also invalidates the strategy of leveraged buyout. But yes, it can be done in principle. Which is especially important in the "who will take over the local dentist's office" scenario - this system would heavily favor small business owners who want to do the business personally over holding corporations and PE funds.

Nope. It will result in a large company moving in and buying all the assets (still allowed), and forcing the employees to work for less money. Because why not?

It already does literally just that. You're basically saying nothing would change.

Yes. So your system not only fails to solve the issue in question, but also makes everything worse.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: