Is this period of big capitalist boom, lagging legislation, billionaire playground, defined and legitimate enough to be called the Siliconized Age / Gilded Age II?
(I.e. do people consider it to be a real, parallel phenomenon)<p>And should it be curbed with legislation, anti-competition commissions etc.? Or is the common and long term good such that we shouldn't stifle this boom period prematurely?<p>Just an Ask HN to see what opinions are.
Is “it” real? Sure, it’s real. You described reality as I understand it as well, and your definition seems precise enough…but you and I are inside the fishbowl. The best description of this era may end up being “advent of permanent gerontocracy” or some other phenomenon that seems ancillary right now.<p>Should we curb it? HN people are likely to be getting paid to support it (I am) so opinions here are not objective. For me, sure, I got mine already, burn it down. For younger people the choice is surely murkier.<p>My fear about curbing it is that we seem to lack a collective understanding of pernicious root causes, or even a majority viewpoint, in part because the forces you describe have so thoroughly perfected the art of influencing public discourse.
Nothing going on at the moment seems likely to do anything about the concentration of power in the hands of the few.<p>Not a partisan issue. The only thing--and not without risk--that seems likely to affect the collapsing political architecture is <a href="https://conventionofstates.com/" rel="nofollow">https://conventionofstates.com/</a>
We’re seeing exactly that happening with the rise of unions and anti-corporate sentiments. The FTC has been pursuing antitrust actions aggressively too.