Hacker News Reader

So the market is an 'invisible hand' but any other form of centralised planning, that you yourself can't name or suggest isn't?

View on HN

By definition the invisible hand metaphor stands opposite to any kind of centralized planning.

But you're nitpicking. The central of my comment is that you absolutely cannot assert that Capitalism is "objectively" better than every other system. Objectively better at what? By whose objective measurements?

It seems to be better in terms of efficiency. After all, it optimizes for profit, costs are a given for every market participant (in a free market), just as profits are bounded, so the most efficient gains more market share at each "time slice". (Sure, sometimes this efficiency is observable only in marketing, lobbying or in other exploitative mechanisms.)

I'm willing to concede it optimizes for profit (of some people, of course). So maybe Capitalism is "more efficient" at this than other competing systems, but does this make Capitalism objectively better as a system? Maybe if profit-making is the main metric. I remain unconvinced.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com