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

Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

staradvertiser.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 195 posts

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#181

Post by sulam »

meanduck wrote: post #136
sulam wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cop who pulls me over on the highway has more power over me than my mayor does, or even my governor. Looking at the policies Trump talks about that I can actually analyze ("Make America Great Again" doesn't count), none of them will affect me to the tune of more than $1K / year at best/worst. I am, of course, ignoring the prospect of truly insane shit like starting a nuclear war with Russia. That would affect me…

And thats for a country in Top 10 Ease of doing business [1]. In others politicians/bureaucrats are truly someone to be afraid of. Case in point: The Current Income Tax Raid Raj in India [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ease_of_doing_business_index [2] https://qz.com/860230/here-a-raid-there-a-raid-everywhere-a-...

Fair. The context of your comments made me think it was safe to assume we are talking about the US.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#182

Post by ryandrake »

refurb wrote: post #180
cooper12 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the article I linked? That's how I know.

The article is an opinion piece. You know, someone's opinion, not fact. I didn't see anything in that article that was definitive proof that blue collar workers are voting against their own interests. If you give a tax break to the rich, how is that against your own interests? You still have the same money you did before.

> If you give a tax break to the rich, how is that against your own interests? You still have the same money you did before.

If everyone around me gets wealthier and I stay the same, I'm worse off economically, because all that new wealth affects the price of everything. Look at what happens to prices when an area becomes gentrified.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#183

Post by explainthisth »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #89
explainthisth wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While we're being condescending, it seems like some people have Zuckerberg derangement syndrome. Guess Aaron Sorkin's quasi-fictional biopic was effective. I don't see how anyone who reads this article will think Zuckerberg is hurting anybody. A bunch of people who previously owned useless fractional shares are going to get some cash.

It's a perfectly rational thing for Zuckerberg to do. It is also absolutely a case of an ultra elite (basically a "king" of today) white man is availing himself of state (ultimately, military) support to force native Hawaiian people off their lands. You made an error in your comment. You said their shares were useless. Clearly, they have a use to the individuals in question - both the natives and Zuckerberg.

>support to force native Hawaiian people off their lands.

In what way are the native Hawaiian people in question on these lands?

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#184

Post by ryandrake »

meanduck wrote: post #120
sulam wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Erm, not to be all factual and shit, but politicians generally aren't in the 1% until after they're out of office. There are exceptions of course (the Clintons, because of the sheer length of service and variety of positions they've each held) but being a politician doesn't actually pay that well. There are perks, but you won't get into the 1% on perks. The 1% is primarily made up of people who have enough money that…

You missed the point. The 1% is not about wealth its about power over 99%. Even your random low level bureaucrat has more power than the 5% (wealth-wise).

Wealth and power are readily and frictionlessly converted to and from each other. They are like mass and energy--ultimately measuring the same thing.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#185

Post by dragonwriter »

sulam wrote: post #127
meanduck wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the point. The 1% is not about wealth its about power over 99%. Even your random low level bureaucrat has more power than the 5% (wealth-wise).

The cop who pulls me over on the highway has more power over me than my mayor does, or even my governor. Looking at the policies Trump talks about that I can actually analyze ("Make America Great Again" doesn't count), none of them will affect me to the tune of more than $1K / year at best/worst. I am, of course, ignoring the prospect of truly insane shit like starting a nuclear war with Russia. That would affect me…

> The cop who pulls me over on the highway has more power over me than my mayor does, or even my governor.

In an immediate and direct sense, perhaps. Of course that cop and many, many others are just one of many means by which the governor excercises power over you.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#186

Post by shenanigoat »

ci5er wrote: post #66
shenanigoat wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, please.

Assuming you aren't joking, why would you trust the members of the tribunal? I have yet to see any evidence that humans have found a way to overcome the principal-agent problem in governing bodies.

Elected == accountable...generally speaking. Of course there would be corruption and errors. I would trust it over a hegemonic oligopoly though. Have to google the principal-agent problem though. I'm not familiar with that term.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#188

Post by andrei_says_ »

Hondor wrote: post #149
andrei_says_ wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, wealthy people are not evil. But maybe it just happens that in order to become wealthy, people more often than not have to repeatedly choose wealth over generosity, exploit other people, take advantage of resources that less privileged ones pay for without explicit consent. Also, it often happens that people who are already wealthy and possess more than what they and their children would need for comfortab…

The idea that rich people got rich because they screwed other people over is quite common but also a made up generalization. It's an excuse that people who worry about their own socioeconomic status make to feel better about themselves. "I'm poor but at least I'm not evil like those rich people.". Instead of searching for reasons why rich people are evil, why not just be happy with your own life? You don't need to be…

Capitalism exists on exploitation and maximizing profit by squeezing as much as possible from people serving it. In this environment it is only logical that the ones standing on top are standing at the top of pyramids of both wealth and suffering of all who were exploited in the process.

Of course there are companies that choose to limit their profit in exchange for better conditions for the ones exploited.

As for your statements implying that I am somehow conflating good/evil with the excuse of the poor(/lazy) or that I am somehow dissatisfied with my own status, I don't hold either of these views.

I am dissatisfied with privileged people like me blaming less privileged for their lack of privilege as if that was a function of choice. Being poor is caused by being born that way more often than by anything else.

I am well aware that the conservative view conflates wealth with virtue. Yet somehow, with 62 people owning roughly as much as half the world's population, I have my doubts. That'd be a lot of virtue!

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#189

Post by drivingmenuts »

abtinf wrote: post #50

It is clear that almost no one commenting here has actually read past the first few paragraphs of the article (if that). It is very well written and explain that this is an extremely complex issue. Property rights are the foundation of civil society. Due to variety of factors, Hawaii has destroyed property rights on some parcels due to degenerate laws and legal customs. Just consider one point raised by the article:…

If the land was going for a public use, I might be a bit more sympathetic. However, it's being bought for a private use by a person who can well afford to pay for it and the number of owners of a piece of land isn't the problem.

Zuck's using lawyers to force a sale is a huge problem. What specifically entitles him to have a special case for purchasing without going thru all the motions?

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#190

Post by ci5er »

shenanigoat wrote: post #186
ci5er wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming you aren't joking, why would you trust the members of the tribunal? I have yet to see any evidence that humans have found a way to overcome the principal-agent problem in governing bodies.

Elected == accountable...generally speaking. Of course there would be corruption and errors. I would trust it over a hegemonic oligopoly though. Have to google the principal-agent problem though. I'm not familiar with that term.

> Elected == accountable...generally speaking.

How so? It's clear that voters don't know how (in aggregate) to make rational choices.

Given the (for a single example) well-known strong-arm get-out-the-vote collusion between Chicago's elected city officials and Chicago's regional street gangs, I'm not sure that I would trust a hegemonic oligopoly any less.

The book that this is based on is pretty interesting:

  - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs
Post reply on HN