Who deems what is "productive"? I've seen plenty of apps that were really great get turned into shit because they were monetized or put under new leadership.
See Snapchat, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Reddit.
See Snapchat, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Reddit.
I agree that I wish that not every app was designed to be VC style - grow to be huge, with large revenue and expenses. I do think there are plenty of examples of smaller, not VC growth type companies... they just, by definition, aren't as big and popular as the high growth, large audience, ones.
Pretty loaded caveat there. I can't think of a market economy that's actually existed where we've adequately internalized externalities and protected the commons.
In some ways, the tyranny and 'sub-optimal' allocation of central planning seems preferable.
I'm more on the mandatory cooperative enterprise boat. But like I said, I don't have a good solution.
All systems are going to have powerful people who work the system for their own gain... mitigating that is the primary problem of government design.
I mean, that's my point. That abusive leaders who do not take care of their citizens in an economy centrally planned to not destroy the Earth is preferable to a "free" one that does.
It's a false dichotomy. The capitalist world has included horrible authoritarian governments that have perpetuated the same atrocities against humans as your "abusive leaders", just like these centrally planned economies haven't exactly been environmental stewards.
All else equal, I'm saying that I'd prefer a sub-optimal centrally planned economy that guaranteed strong environmental protections.
The people paying for it. If nobody is willing to pay for your product/service, you have a hobby, not a business. Hobbies that cost billions of dollars a year don't usually last, unless the hobbyist is a Gates or Bezos.