Rent-seeking: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
It comes in many guises: | It comes in many guises: | ||
*'''[[Physical property]]''': you know, ''literal'' rent-seeking | *'''[[Physical property]]''': you know, ''literal'' rent-seeking | ||
*'''[[Intellectual property]]''': Rather than using the fruits of your blood, toil, tears and sweat you use antediluvian<ref>{{author|Lawrence Lessig}}’s {{Br|Code: Version 2.0}} is a compulsory read.</ref> [[intellectual property]] rules to gouge everyone else. In this way [[Mick Jagger]] and [[Keith Richards]] can extract tens of millions over 60 years from 15 minutes of work — in Richards’ case, while, on his own account, he was ''asleep'' — composing ''[[Satisfaction]]''. | *'''[[Intellectual property]]''': Rather than using the fruits of your blood, toil, tears and sweat you use antediluvian<ref>{{author|Lawrence Lessig}}’s {{Br|Code: Version 2.0}} is a compulsory read.</ref> [[intellectual property]] rules to gouge everyone else. In this way [[Mick Jagger]] and [[Keith Richards]] can extract tens of millions over 60 years from [[15 minutes]] of work — in Richards’ case, while, on his own account, he was ''asleep'' — composing ''[[Satisfaction]]''. | ||
*'''[[Franchising]]''': Taking an idea or a business model someone else has invented — McDonald’s is the best example — and paying them a franchise fee to operate it. Here is ''double'' rent-seeking: the franchisee pays the franchisor, and the customer pays the ''franchisee''. | *'''[[Franchising]]''': Taking an idea or a business model someone else has invented — McDonald’s is the best example — and paying them a franchise fee to operate it. Here is ''double'' rent-seeking: the franchisee pays the franchisor, and the customer pays the ''franchisee''. | ||
*'''[[Software as a service]]:''' The simple answer to the question [[why is reg tech so disappointing?]] — is that tech businesses can’t make money if all they get paid for is writing software. This would be like Mick Jagger only getting paid for fifteen minutes’ work — where is the logic, or the justice in that?<ref>Irony alert.</ref> | *'''[[Software as a service]]:''' The simple answer to the question [[why is reg tech so disappointing?]] — is that tech businesses can’t make money if all they get paid for is writing software. This would be like Mick Jagger only getting paid for fifteen minutes’ work — where is the logic, or the justice in that?<ref>Irony alert.</ref> | ||
Revision as of 19:58, 21 November 2020
|
Rent-seeking is the Marxist (ooh! saucy!) term when a fellow (a “rentier”) monopolises access to property (including, for modern readings, intellectual property) and gouging profits out of it.
It comes in many guises:
- Physical property: you know, literal rent-seeking
- Intellectual property: Rather than using the fruits of your blood, toil, tears and sweat you use antediluvian[1] intellectual property rules to gouge everyone else. In this way Mick Jagger and Keith Richards can extract tens of millions over 60 years from 15 minutes of work — in Richards’ case, while, on his own account, he was asleep — composing Satisfaction.
- Franchising: Taking an idea or a business model someone else has invented — McDonald’s is the best example — and paying them a franchise fee to operate it. Here is double rent-seeking: the franchisee pays the franchisor, and the customer pays the franchisee.
- Software as a service: The simple answer to the question why is reg tech so disappointing? — is that tech businesses can’t make money if all they get paid for is writing software. This would be like Mick Jagger only getting paid for fifteen minutes’ work — where is the logic, or the justice in that?[2]
See also
References
- ↑ Lawrence Lessig’s Code: Version 2.0 is a compulsory read.
- ↑ Irony alert.