6 ms·

> people could move to places with higher wages (e.g., cities), no? ...well, often times, when you have a family and real estate in a region, it might be inopp

by gyulai 1mo ago

> people could move to places with higher wages (e.g., cities), no? ...well, often times, when you have a family and real estate in a region, it might be inopportune to do that, and my contention is that some employers capitalize on that immobility by offering worse terms. > Being in a place where you could help shape local politics seems like a good move, no? Sure. If you want to buy a forest, have your buddy the mayor re-zone it as industrial, and build a logistics hub there, it's a good move. Not so good, if you're the company from out of town that wants to move in and do the same thing, to compete with the incumbent (and you aren't friends with the mayor). Not so good, if you kind of liked the forest. > What is the issue with "excellence in craft" as keeping "out the competion"? Why would anyone not want to beat the competion? You can beat the competition by being a plumber who offers better plumbing at lower prices. Or the better plumbing and lower prices might be from the plumber who just moved here from Turkey. And then you can beat that would-be competition through regulatory capture by having your buddies in politics pass a law to assert that the craftsmanship of the Turkish feller is somehow inferior to yours and they aren't allowed to work as a plumber.

RandomLensman 1mo ago
Not wanting to move might have costs. Yes, local integration has value, but also means you had to stick around to get there - comes with a cost. And local people show plenty ability to protect things/stop building etc. The regulations on Handwerk are so old, not sure how you could put that on the Mittelstand.
- gyulai 1mo ago
  > The regulations on Handwerk are so old, not sure how you could put that on the Mittelstand. Exactly. These regulations stem from the same chapter of history as when kings used to grant monopolies (to the East India company, and similar) in their respective industries. It didn't cost the king anything and it did a political favour to those companies, which might then reciprocate. Or the monopoly might have been the king's quid-pro-quo for some favour that the company had done him. Monopolies are now widely recognized as bad. The monopoly didn't cost the king anything, but the cost was born by all consumers. In the centuries that passed, some countries with a more libertarian bend got rid of the guilds and their privileges, or never started them in the first place. In other countries (notably the "old world"), these constituencies have remained politically strong enough over all those centuries to still be around now. So, this romanticizing about the "proud old tradition" is completely the wrong reaction. There are many things with an "old tradition" where it would seem quite odd if a given country hadn't gotten rid of it (like collective punishment, or whatever; the examples are easy to think of). So something being old is neither here nor there. > Yes, local integration has value, but also means you had to stick around to get there - comes with a cost. Not sure if you're implying that regulatory capture of local government is some kind of just reward for "sticking around." If so, I disagree.
  - RandomLensman 1mo ago
    Societies get to decide on their "traditions" and they need not be efficient - the "new world" has oddities there, too. (Not sure how guilds in cities relate to kings if we are talking about Handwerk, though.) If people were dead set against things like Meisterzwang in some areas it would not exist (and it has indeed been removed in some areas). It isn't regulatory capture of local government: local governments want business to stick around and having demonstrated sticking around is a signal there. What you don't want is someone coming in, collecting subsidies in varies ways to then leave quickly again.
    - gyulai 1mo ago
      > If people were dead set against things like Meisterzwang in some areas it would not exist I'll give you an example: When I went to a copy shop in Austria to have my thesis bound, the attendant said they were only allowed to do it up to 200 pages. Since my thesis had 210 pages it didn't fall under some exemption, and I had to go to a master bookbinder. The result is: Disgruntled consumer forced by law to pay more. Your "in a democratic society, if it wasn't wanted, it wouldn't exist" is a bit reductionist. It's a very technical / niche kind of law making and is rarely the subject of public debate or decisive in an election. So it's easier for the CDU (in Germany) or the ÖVP (in Austria), to just give these people what they ask for and collect donations from them, than to stop and think about what's good for the economy and for consumers. All the while these same sectors that enjoy Meisterzwang (the need to be a master craftsman, to practice self-employed) are the ones shouting Fachkräftemangel, Fachkräftemangel (labour shortage, labour shortage) into every microphone that anyone ever puts in their face. And that's another attempt to co-opt the government for their cause, which is to bend the supply-demand balance in their favour, specifically as it regards to the job market for people who will accept low wages, while keeping out anyone who might compete with them on a self-employed basis thus safeguarding their respective local monopoly/oligopoly/cartel. The net result is: no plumber, when you need one. I'm a mid-career professional, researching opportunities to make a career change right now, in my forties. In Germany, bookbinding is one of the very few things I might actually be allowed to do. In Austria, it would mean I'd have to apprentice for next-to-no salary for 3 years with a master bookbinder, before I get to set up shop, which, at age 42 and with a family to take care of, I'm just not going to do. Anyone who actually cares about preserving bookbinding as a craft in Austria should be opposed to this nonsense, because it's making it impossible/uneconomical for most people who might like to practice the craft to actually do so. The net result is: the craft of bookbinding dies. ...and yet the spin in PBS or ARTE style romanticized documentaries is: "look at these people and their proud traditions! ...shouldn't that be the envy of all of us office dwellers." > collecting subsidies In Germany, except for the very largest cities, municipalities don't do subsidies. Their political currency is not money but re-zoning, parking spots, favourable placements of kids in those public schools which happen to be marginally better than the other ones, that kind of thing. It's precisely the kind of currency that doesn't allow for the kind of opportunism you suggest.
- modo_mario 1mo ago
  >Not wanting to move might have costs. Sure and extreme liberty to move opens us up to the lowest common denominator dictating the opportunities.

by gyulai 1mo ago

RandomLensman 1mo ago

Not wanting to move might have costs. Yes, local integration has value, but also means you had to stick around to get there - comes with a cost. And local people show plenty ability to protect things/stop building etc. The regulations on Handwerk are so old, not sure how you could put that on the Mittelstand.

gyulai 1mo ago
> The regulations on Handwerk are so old, not sure how you could put that on the Mittelstand. Exactly. These regulations stem from the same chapter of history as when kings used to grant monopolies (to the East India company, and similar) in their respective industries. It didn't cost the king anything and it did a political favour to those companies, which might then reciprocate. Or the monopoly might have been the king's quid-pro-quo for some favour that the company had done him. Monopolies are now widely recognized as bad. The monopoly didn't cost the king anything, but the cost was born by all consumers. In the centuries that passed, some countries with a more libertarian bend got rid of the guilds and their privileges, or never started them in the first place. In other countries (notably the "old world"), these constituencies have remained politically strong enough over all those centuries to still be around now. So, this romanticizing about the "proud old tradition" is completely the wrong reaction. There are many things with an "old tradition" where it would seem quite odd if a given country hadn't gotten rid of it (like collective punishment, or whatever; the examples are easy to think of). So something being old is neither here nor there. > Yes, local integration has value, but also means you had to stick around to get there - comes with a cost. Not sure if you're implying that regulatory capture of local government is some kind of just reward for "sticking around." If so, I disagree.
- RandomLensman 1mo ago
  Societies get to decide on their "traditions" and they need not be efficient - the "new world" has oddities there, too. (Not sure how guilds in cities relate to kings if we are talking about Handwerk, though.) If people were dead set against things like Meisterzwang in some areas it would not exist (and it has indeed been removed in some areas). It isn't regulatory capture of local government: local governments want business to stick around and having demonstrated sticking around is a signal there. What you don't want is someone coming in, collecting subsidies in varies ways to then leave quickly again.
  - gyulai 1mo ago
    > If people were dead set against things like Meisterzwang in some areas it would not exist I'll give you an example: When I went to a copy shop in Austria to have my thesis bound, the attendant said they were only allowed to do it up to 200 pages. Since my thesis had 210 pages it didn't fall under some exemption, and I had to go to a master bookbinder. The result is: Disgruntled consumer forced by law to pay more. Your "in a democratic society, if it wasn't wanted, it wouldn't exist" is a bit reductionist. It's a very technical / niche kind of law making and is rarely the subject of public debate or decisive in an election. So it's easier for the CDU (in Germany) or the ÖVP (in Austria), to just give these people what they ask for and collect donations from them, than to stop and think about what's good for the economy and for consumers. All the while these same sectors that enjoy Meisterzwang (the need to be a master craftsman, to practice self-employed) are the ones shouting Fachkräftemangel, Fachkräftemangel (labour shortage, labour shortage) into every microphone that anyone ever puts in their face. And that's another attempt to co-opt the government for their cause, which is to bend the supply-demand balance in their favour, specifically as it regards to the job market for people who will accept low wages, while keeping out anyone who might compete with them on a self-employed basis thus safeguarding their respective local monopoly/oligopoly/cartel. The net result is: no plumber, when you need one. I'm a mid-career professional, researching opportunities to make a career change right now, in my forties. In Germany, bookbinding is one of the very few things I might actually be allowed to do. In Austria, it would mean I'd have to apprentice for next-to-no salary for 3 years with a master bookbinder, before I get to set up shop, which, at age 42 and with a family to take care of, I'm just not going to do. Anyone who actually cares about preserving bookbinding as a craft in Austria should be opposed to this nonsense, because it's making it impossible/uneconomical for most people who might like to practice the craft to actually do so. The net result is: the craft of bookbinding dies. ...and yet the spin in PBS or ARTE style romanticized documentaries is: "look at these people and their proud traditions! ...shouldn't that be the envy of all of us office dwellers." > collecting subsidies In Germany, except for the very largest cities, municipalities don't do subsidies. Their political currency is not money but re-zoning, parking spots, favourable placements of kids in those public schools which happen to be marginally better than the other ones, that kind of thing. It's precisely the kind of currency that doesn't allow for the kind of opportunism you suggest.
modo_mario 1mo ago
>Not wanting to move might have costs. Sure and extreme liberty to move opens us up to the lowest common denominator dictating the opportunities.