| ▲ | epsteingpt 3 days ago | |||||||
What are you arguing then? That a growing asset class that increases prices, destroys communities because of lack of ties, and shifts wealth from builders to owners that doesn't outperform public markets in aggregate is a good thing? Hard to argue this is 'good for society!' > VC returns as an asset class (outside of a handful of firms) have underperformed in the past 20 years. I don't even count it here. > PE as an exit for small builders Agree. But again, it's the builders who have built over multiple decades who profit (great!) one time. The employees - typically - don't. Search can help this (because searchers are usually more dependent on employees) so this is a good example of "micro-PE" being generically better than larger scale PE. | ||||||||
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 2 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||
> That a growing asset class that increases prices, destroys communities because of lack of ties, and shifts wealth from builders to owners that doesn't outperform public markets in aggregate is a good thing? You added a bunch of stuff in front which isn’t substantiated as being an effect of private equity or unique to it. Most complaints about PE tend to boil down to complaints about, in the extreme, private ownership, and in the specific, leverage or non-local control. Those are legitimate complaints that attach to PE. But not necessarily. And in some cases, not in most cases. > it's the builders who have built over multiple decades who profit (great!) one time Sure. They get the multiple. They can now build more. | ||||||||
| ||||||||