As soon as the hot water and internet goes out everyone will immediately abandoned their desire for glorious violent upheaval.

Patents are insufficient to protect certain industry specific knowledge, client lists, and other things that companies spend a lot to develop.

Violence has been enormously useful in taking out various tyrants and genocidal maniacs.

As far as human beings are concerned, the world is fantastically better off than it was 200 years ago.

Ideas are cheap. Execution is time consuming, risky, expensive, and extremely likely to fail. Even a “cheap labor force to get it done” costs a shitload.

Specialized industry knowledge or contacts that you have paid someone to develop are arguably a form of IP.

Yeah, all ZERO of them throughout human history. Of course, human history is REPLETE with examples of why wealth and income/economic/social inequality (depending on how far back in history you want to go) is a toxic, society-rotting cancer.

Some people have them as boilerplate hiring documents. It’s extremely unlikely that they’d attempt to enforce the noncompete unless they had good reason to do so.

Economics are complicated, and there are a number of variables driving CA’s growth. I agree that non-competes are generally speaking pointless, and overused, but almost never enforced outside of the conditions in which they are actually harmful.

The oligarchs introduced capitalist incentives, and pretty much overnight the entire country improved.

Business fail constantly and fortunes fade. The incentive to create is what matters. Every country that ever tried to do it your way has been a miserable failure.

Do you think that we owe Pfizer or GlaxoSmithKline and indefinite amount of money because they have patents on medicine that people need, even though their R&D cost is an easily defined cost?

Tons of companies train people.

Hand cleanliness is not one of those things that inspire businesses to sign noncompetes. You sign noncompetes to prevent someone from immediately turning around and destroying you.

It’s not about who owes what, it’s about what you invest in.

It’s part of the point, but unless there are certain protections no one wants to go into certain businesses. Not unlike patents. Why spend a billion developing some miracle drug if everyone can steal it? Why train an employee or buy out a partner who can turn around and drive you out of existence?

Non-competes are really only relevant in specific situations, not unlike patents. No one would invest in certain types of IP if they could be immediately ripped off either.

First point:

You can’t have enterprise without someone working...

Literally the most common, dumbest, and laziest comment in the whole of Splinter and a perfect example of the effect itself.