Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hawking: We need to rethink our attitude towards wealth

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 93 posts

Re: Hawking: We need to rethink our attitude towards wealth

#81

Post by [deleted] »

greggyb wrote: post #78
roymurdock wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I won't buy socialism in any possible form and any interpretation even from world famous scientist This is a pretty ridiculous statement. Do you believe in taxation? Do you believe there are some things that a collective organization of people can do better than an individual - be that organization a family, village, private company, or a federal government? OK, then you buy into and support the premise of socialis…

> Socialism/capitalism isn't binary. This is correct. > Moving towards "socialism" by increasing taxation on the ultra-wealthy This is not a move toward socialism. Socialism is defined by communal ownership of the means of production and exchange. Capitalism is defined by private ownership of the same. These terms are specific in meaning, as they are jargon in the field of economics. I'm not particularly interested i…

[deleted]

Re: Hawking: We need to rethink our attitude towards wealth

#82

Post by brucefancher »

roymurdock wrote: post #57
hal9000xp wrote: post #26

I actually don't understand why Brexit should necessary be bad for UK. Switzerland is doing very well outside of EU despite it's literally surrounded by EU members. Of course, there is a risk that UK won't do as good as Switzerland does but it's only risk, it's not established fact yet. Regarding article itself ... well, it's The Guardian so it's very predictable what they will write about wealth. Regarding author, i…

> I won't buy socialism in any possible form and any interpretation even from world famous scientist This is a pretty ridiculous statement. Do you believe in taxation? Do you believe there are some things that a collective organization of people can do better than an individual - be that organization a family, village, private company, or a federal government? OK, then you buy into and support the premise of socialis…

Good point. That capitalism has consistently resulted in unimaginable prosperity for ordinary people, while communism has consistently resulted in poverty and oppression, including the violent deaths of over 100 million people in the last century, certainly shouldn't lead you to draw any conclusions about either any more than the failure of astrology to predict the future should lead you write off astrology.

Re: Hawking: We need to rethink our attitude towards wealth

#83

Post by ende »

roymurdock wrote: post #57
hal9000xp wrote: post #26

I actually don't understand why Brexit should necessary be bad for UK. Switzerland is doing very well outside of EU despite it's literally surrounded by EU members. Of course, there is a risk that UK won't do as good as Switzerland does but it's only risk, it's not established fact yet. Regarding article itself ... well, it's The Guardian so it's very predictable what they will write about wealth. Regarding author, i…

> I won't buy socialism in any possible form and any interpretation even from world famous scientist This is a pretty ridiculous statement. Do you believe in taxation? Do you believe there are some things that a collective organization of people can do better than an individual - be that organization a family, village, private company, or a federal government? OK, then you buy into and support the premise of socialis…

>Moving towards "socialism" by increasing taxation on the ultra-wealthy is a move to restore balance and guide us away from one extreme which has gained in popularity in the past 30 years.

What you just described is not socialism, or even approaching socialism. It could be best described as social-democracy, which is a completely unrelated concept. Socialism would be banning private enterprise in favor of direct state ownership of the economy.

That's why people have an aversion to the word, because it's an awful concept. Not because of some irrational fear.

Re: Hawking: We need to rethink our attitude towards wealth

#84

Post by sevenless »

therealjumbo wrote: post #75
sevenless wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that objective fact and truth is equivalent to a dictatorship? Are anti-vaxxers living in a dictatorship because we don't give their claims equal weight to those of doctors and scientists?

Are you implying that a vote for Brexit is equivalent to being an anti-vaxxer?

Not equivalent but comparable in certain ways. The claim I am responding to is that the entire concept of "expertise" is equivalent to a dictatorship.

Re: Hawking: We need to rethink our attitude towards wealth

#85

Post by kybernetikos »

hal9000xp wrote: post #26

I actually don't understand why Brexit should necessary be bad for UK. Switzerland is doing very well outside of EU despite it's literally surrounded by EU members. Of course, there is a risk that UK won't do as good as Switzerland does but it's only risk, it's not established fact yet. Regarding article itself ... well, it's The Guardian so it's very predictable what they will write about wealth. Regarding author, i…

> Switzerland is doing very well outside of EU despite it's literally surrounded by EU members

It also has a lot of agreements with the EU that include accepting restrictions on what immigration limits they can impose. Those are exactly the sort of restrictions that the Brexit campaign were complaining about, so if the UK went for a deal like the one Switzerland has, it would make a lot of the brexiteers angry.

Even in the best foreseeable case (where very little changes), the UK will go from having a say in the way the EU develops and the rules it abides by to gain access to the EU market to not having a say, but having to follow those rules anyway.

Re: Hawking: We need to rethink our attitude towards wealth

#86

Post by lastyearman »

ende wrote: post #83
roymurdock wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I won't buy socialism in any possible form and any interpretation even from world famous scientist This is a pretty ridiculous statement. Do you believe in taxation? Do you believe there are some things that a collective organization of people can do better than an individual - be that organization a family, village, private company, or a federal government? OK, then you buy into and support the premise of socialis…

>Moving towards "socialism" by increasing taxation on the ultra-wealthy is a move to restore balance and guide us away from one extreme which has gained in popularity in the past 30 years. What you just described is not socialism, or even approaching socialism. It could be best described as social-democracy, which is a completely unrelated concept. Socialism would be banning private enterprise in favor of direct stat…

I may be completely wrong on this one but isn't social-democracy a sort of compromise between socialism and capitalism? So I wouldn't call it entirely unrelated.

Re: Hawking: We need to rethink our attitude towards wealth

#87

Post by zo1 »

sevenless wrote: post #29
zo1 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>" If the mob is well-informed, it can go well. When the mob is not, it can go very badly. " That only applies if you have some sort of arbiter to decide whether or not the "mob" is informed. And if you do that, you might as well have a dictatorship, as the arbiter can decide which side s/he thinks is well informed. Or rather, they could decide that groups X,Y and Z are not informed, therefore they aren't allowed to…

Are you saying that objective fact and truth is equivalent to a dictatorship? Are anti-vaxxers living in a dictatorship because we don't give their claims equal weight to those of doctors and scientists?

You mentioned that the decision made is a good one if the mob is well informed, and bad if they are not. Or, rather you said something along the lines that it is "Not True Democracy" if the majority are not well-informed.

Making a statement such as "this was not democracy because the voters were not informed" carries a lot of implications. If it wasn't democracy, then the result isn't valid. If the result isn't valid, then you have to concede that you want to disregard certain peoples' vote based on the fact that they were not well-informed.

You then have to deconstruct that as to what it means to be informed, and who get's to decide that. Ultimately, someone/something has to make the call about who gets to vote, or whether that vote counts.

As much as I dislike/disagree with Democracy, one person = one vote is a line that is clearly drawn in most circumstances. It removes ambiguity, arbitration and interpretation. As soon as you open up the can of worms regarding "voting based on how informed" one is, then you have a huge slew of problems that I believe will very quickly lead to the realization that either you accept tyranny by the few, or the informed; or that democracy is not a moral and fair system.

Re: Hawking: We need to rethink our attitude towards wealth

#88

Post by jcbeard »

Will be very interesting to see if the UK economy can actually recover at all with all of the acquisitions. There's a fire sale of sorts at the moment on UK's most valuable companies. The promises of the current prime minister to prevent the few big employers in the UK from being purchased have pretty much evaporated...such is the way of the snake oil salesman. The free flow of super smart labor in the schengen zone was a net positive for most UK companies, and for the foreign labor that contributed to the UK economy. The trick, as Hawking says is to ensure the fruits of the globalized economy is shared by all. In the US we have a huge issue with churn. Industries like coal will never return, however people like Trump promise that they will. What we need is a cheaper university system that provides a means for the children of those former coal miners to move onto something else (or even the miners themselves). Right now, if you're an out of work person in an industry that is gone...there's no way to move on. You can take out massive loans, or join the military to get free education. Those are about the only two practical options for most people (I for one took the military option), and that's not good enough. The managed capitalism that we've developed works well, we just have to remember that the government's role is to manage the economy...not to run the economy. Government should foster an environment for everyone to succeed, not just those who have a more favorable starting place in life (like Trump). Right now people are upset, mad, and often without hope. While I (and just about any other person with critical thinking skills) can punch holes in just about every one of Trumps lightweight arguments, these holes are ignored by the masses because they want to believe that there is a magic cure to what ails them. Unfortunately, like the magic pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, Trump's magical cure doesn't exist...just as the pot of gold that sold brexit will never be found.

Re: Hawking: We need to rethink our attitude towards wealth

#89

Post by greggyb »

lastyearman wrote: post #86
ende wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Moving towards "socialism" by increasing taxation on the ultra-wealthy is a move to restore balance and guide us away from one extreme which has gained in popularity in the past 30 years. What you just described is not socialism, or even approaching socialism. It could be best described as social-democracy, which is a completely unrelated concept. Socialism would be banning private enterprise in favor of direct stat…

I may be completely wrong on this one but isn't social-democracy a sort of compromise between socialism and capitalism? So I wouldn't call it entirely unrelated.

Whether it is a compromise does not alter the defining characteristics of capitalism and socialism, those being private ownership and communal ownership, respectively, of the means of production and exchange.

These terms are not used as in the vernacular but are precisely defined pieces of economic jargon.

Re: Hawking: We need to rethink our attitude towards wealth

#90

Post by fit2rule »

sevenless wrote: post #17
rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't imagine why you were downvoted for this. You're spot on to read very old books; my godfather - a historian - insisted on reading books only written by dead people. He may have been a salty old man for the time that I knew him, but he was never unhappy. I have recently begun listening to a LOT of classical music. Every time I casually new-tab over to YouTube and load up a Tchaikovsky playlist, I think to myself:…

Probably because it came across as pretentious. Recommendations on good history books?

>Recommendations on good history books?

Any and all.

Post reply on HN