Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> What can startups do to increase prosperity for everyone?

I think it might be best to create a different thread since this is a separate and important question than the "Basic Income" debate that is also interesting and happening in the same comments. Either way, here are my thoughts:

You can take that question a few of different ways. What can all startups do within their current processes/products? What is a startup idea that will increase prosperity for everyone? What can startups do in addition to their current product to help prosperity for everyone?

I'm also taking the view that raising the prosperity for the lowest individuals will in turn increase the prosperity for everyone else. I think having productive people in our society who do not need to worry about the basic needs will increase the success of our society. If you don't agree with me on that, then everything below is probably not what you are looking for.

I think that setting aside funding regularly to donate to non-affiliated non-profits would be a great start. Most startups don't have the capacity (or desire) to reinvent themselves as charitable organizations. Creating a curated list of non-profits across different factors that contribute to prosperity (education, housing, jobs) and encouraging companies to commit to donating would help. I taught a relationship skills class with my wife for people on public assistance for the past 5 years until our federal grant ended last fall. I honestly believe helping those couples be in a better relationship helps them be better parents which gives the kids a greater chance to succeed. However, when the grant ended we had to close up shop and shut down the whole organization. Funding for these types of programs is so hard to come by that adding anything to the pool would be a great first step.

As far as what sort of startups can be developed to help increase prosperity I think you can segment it again into two views: The long view or the short view. The long view is done by helping ensure the future generation's increased prosperity. Things like increased quality of education and training, family life, and access to technology.

The short view ones are things that would improve access to a basic level of housing, food, healthcare and education. Worrying about those things (and probably more) are going to make it harder for people to be successful. It isn't impossible, just more difficult. I think that gathering and analyzing data would be a great start for a startup. There is a ton of information out there. The grant I mentioned above collected surveys from thousands of couples nationwide over a period of years. I'm sure there are grants funding programs that are delivering information on all types of topics. Utilizing that information to help prioritize what is effective or whatever you can glean from it would be an interesting startup. Using that information to develop a wishlist of product ideas to fund would be interesting for a VC.

(This isn't my best writing/thinking. It is just sort of a brain dump to hopefully fuel some comments by someone.)



>I'm also taking the view that raising the prosperity for the lowest individuals will in turn increase the prosperity for everyone else.

This is an aside, and I don't particularly want to evaluate it as good or bad, but this statement is striking compared to the neoliberal idea of 'a rising tide lifts all boats' - i.e. increasing general prosperty raises prosperity for the lowest individuals.


Thanks for responding. I never really thought about how that might be a controversial opinion but it does ring true the more I think about it. My self-described "libertarian" friends don't believe in the same social policies I do and don't believe in the same correlations between social policies and economic success.

I'm sure you already knew this but I figured I'd share it anyways: After thinking about it last night I decided I believed in a "trickle up effect" and then went to google it, thinking it a nice take on the "trickle down effect," only to find that "trickle up effect" was the original and "trickle down" was apparently the clever take down... Sigh. Guess I should have paid more attention in Economics.

Anyways, like most economic theories I'm sure there are a myriad of reasons why it might not work or be the most effective (which you graciously decided to not go into.)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: