1/I feel the need to quibble with this @fmanjoo post: nytimes.com/2018/06/20/tec…
I think it deals with many important topics, but conflates them instead of differentiating them as they deserve.
I think it deals with many important topics, but conflates them instead of differentiating them as they deserve.
2/One issue Farhad has with tech companies' interaction with cities is the problem of local business incentives, which can spark a "race to the bottom". 
3/A second, very different problem he raises is the problem of differential use of infrastructure.
This is a public goods problem - the well-known problem of heterogeneous utility. It's very different from the game-theory problem of local business incentives.
This is a public goods problem - the well-known problem of heterogeneous utility. It's very different from the game-theory problem of local business incentives.
4/A third problem he raises is private provision of public goods.
5/In fact, I just wrote a post about that myself: bloomberg.com/view/articles/…
6/Farhad links all of these local governance problems by pointing out that they all involve tech companies (though Domino's, weirdly, is not a tech company).
7/But while conflating these problems as all being aspects of a "dystopian technocapitalist hellscape" might be good for harnessing anti-tech sentiment, it blurs crucial distinctions between local governance problems that have very different solutions.
8/Local business incentive competition can be addressed by state or federal govt. limiting incentives.
Heterogeneous use of public goods should be solved at the city level.
And private provision of public goods isn't itself a problem - it's just a sign that big problems exist.
Heterogeneous use of public goods should be solved at the city level.
And private provision of public goods isn't itself a problem - it's just a sign that big problems exist.
9/As a result of this conflation, the post ends up reading as an anti-tech-company gestalt piece, while burying the actual key point - that we need more government provision of public goods - at the end. 👇
10/In sum, I think tech-industry-bashing often distracts us from the fact that what we really need is just a more functional government.
Making people angry at tech companies won't bring back responsible, efficient government provision of public goods.
(end)
Making people angry at tech companies won't bring back responsible, efficient government provision of public goods.
(end)
