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

Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality

news.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 262 posts

Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality

#231

Post by boomboomsubban »

timthelion wrote: post #210
kayoone wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree and am pretty sure that at least some of the islamists are people that feel left behind by the west, maybe would like to have a similar live but grow to hate them because they just can't have it and use the religion find likeminded people. And i say that without any elitism. It is similar to trying to understand where all the Trump votes come from when you are more liberal.

The original Al-Qaida (every major member is now dead) which planned 9/11 actually didn't feel left behind at all. They were trying to fight change and westernization. I think that most of the current batch of terrorists, however, are just a bunch of primitive drug addicted machos who want to blow things up (and I'm serious about that, go read the Wikipedia articles on the people who have made attacks in Europe latel…

> The original Al-Qaida (every major member is now dead) which planned 9/11 actually didn't feel left behind at all. They were trying to fight change and westernization.

Go read the Wikipedia article about 9/11, they were fighting against the US attacks on Muslims, their influence on local politics, and their support of Israel. Why do people think it takes more than that?

Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality

#233

Post by croon »

snappyTertle wrote: post #177
colefichter wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taxes should not be a means to redistribute wealth. Isn't that more or less impossible? The whole point of a tax is that you take money from the broader population and spend it on something (a war, a road, libraries, public transit, food stamps, etc) that benefits only a subset of that population. Taxation is, by definition, wealth redistribution. Furthermore, > Why is it ok to tax profitable businesses/people for…

I absolutely agree with you. Taxation is, by definition, wealth redistribution..and theft by people in power! I think the more important question is what are we spending taxes on? and why does it have to be decided by a bureaucratic monopoly that is above the law a.k.a. government? Shouldn't we have a choice in how we allocate our own resources? Is it not our own time and labor that we use to produce? Why does that b…

> I think the more important question is what are we spending taxes on? and why does it have to be decided by a bureaucratic monopoly that is above the law a.k.a. government?

This is what elections are for, but obviously they could be done better, and with more granularity of choice (more than two).

> Shouldn't we have a choice in how we allocate our own resources? Is it not our own time and labor that we use to produce? Why does that belong to anyone else?

The government IS you, and everyone else, and you (and everyone else) build your time and labor on a society and infrastructure built by common funds. Anarcho-liberalism is insanely naive and can never work.

Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality

#234

Post by dang »

legodt wrote: post #52
germinalphrase wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Culturally, Americans have chosen "Nazis" and zombies as default groups on which we can assert violence without questioning our moral values or their expression. While Richard Spencer is even saying in that clip that he isn't a Neo Nazi (before getting punched) - a great deal of the American population don't draw the lines as finely as he might. He's certainly said some things that put him in that world of thought. I…

Are you seriously sympathizing with a man who called for an American ethnic cleansing?

You've done almost nothing but post angry political boilerplate since we asked you to stop using HN primarily for political battle. We ban accounts that do that, regardless of their politics or the correctness of their views, because that's the only way to protect HN from being overrun with flamewars. The purpose of HN is the gratification of intellectual curiosity (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html), not war by other means, so please stop using it for the latter.

Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality

#235

Post by timthelion »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #231
timthelion wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original Al-Qaida (every major member is now dead) which planned 9/11 actually didn't feel left behind at all. They were trying to fight change and westernization. I think that most of the current batch of terrorists, however, are just a bunch of primitive drug addicted machos who want to blow things up (and I'm serious about that, go read the Wikipedia articles on the people who have made attacks in Europe latel…

> The original Al-Qaida (every major member is now dead) which planned 9/11 actually didn't feel left behind at all. They were trying to fight change and westernization. Go read the Wikipedia article about 9/11, they were fighting against the US attacks on Muslims, their influence on local politics, and their support of Israel. Why do people think it takes more than that?

Yes, they didn't like attacks, but "their influence on local politics" goes right into the "change" that I was mentioning that Al-Qaida was fighting against.

Edit: Please try not to tell people to "go read" it comes across as combative. Especially since I have read that article.

Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality

#236

Post by victormours »

anigbrowl wrote: post #178
daemin wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most likely what will happen, and I believe this is the case already in most businesses, that the cleaning functions will be outsourced to a separate company. Therefore the limit won't be the cleaner earning 10k/y, but some office admin person earning 30k/y (just guessing that one). Now then a CEO might want to outsource those jobs as well, so the company would officially only employ the highest income people. Either…

I have really had it with this kind of bullshit gamesmanship. If the people at the top default to exploiting the rules for their own advantage, why should anyone bother to play within the rules when it's so much more profitable to subvert them? In the context of sports, this manifests as using procedural methods to run out the clock or interrupt play by complaining that a foul has taken place, or causing a foul becau…

The whole "wealth management" industry is actually all about this. As long as they keep on operating as they do now, the gaming will continue.

Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality

#237

Post by [deleted] »

anigbrowl wrote: post #178
daemin wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most likely what will happen, and I believe this is the case already in most businesses, that the cleaning functions will be outsourced to a separate company. Therefore the limit won't be the cleaner earning 10k/y, but some office admin person earning 30k/y (just guessing that one). Now then a CEO might want to outsource those jobs as well, so the company would officially only employ the highest income people. Either…

I have really had it with this kind of bullshit gamesmanship. If the people at the top default to exploiting the rules for their own advantage, why should anyone bother to play within the rules when it's so much more profitable to subvert them? In the context of sports, this manifests as using procedural methods to run out the clock or interrupt play by complaining that a foul has taken place, or causing a foul becau…

[deleted]

Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality

#238

Post by edblarney »

timthelion wrote: post #207
edblarney wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Often times it is in the interest of certain capitalists to get our government to engage in imperialism, or destabilize certain regions, which helps lead to the awful conditions for some people in the Middle East, and I think this helps pave the way to religious extremism." This is patently false. The US - and 'capitalists' do not want 'destabilization' - over and above all they want 'stability'. Case and point: Sau…

I think that instability is surprisingly good for capitalists, however, I don't know if they "want" that instability. I live in Prague, and the instability and corruption following the fall of the iron curtain made many people very rich. It also allowed many western capitalists to buy assets in this country for very cheep prices. Right next to my house there used to be a park. Now there is an office building there. T…

"I live in Prague, and the instability and corruption following the fall of the iron curtain made many people very rich."

Prague went from one kind of stability - to a different one.

Without the resulting stability - nobody would have been rich.

Yes - I agree - a 'shock' to a system will create winners and losers, arguably, you could say that there is something to gain for the 'winners'.

That said - the cause of the 'fall of the iron curtain' was not 'capitalists' - their power was not nearly sufficient for this.

There was great sociopolitcal upheaval - and I might add most citizens where 'on the whole' good with it.

Of course there is 'change', and sometimes 'shock' - but on the whole - most businesses want stability, decent governance, baseline growth.

McDonald's would love African regimes to be stable and for their citizens to have $$$.

Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality

#239

Post by boomboomsubban »

timthelion wrote: post #235
boomboomsubban wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The original Al-Qaida (every major member is now dead) which planned 9/11 actually didn't feel left behind at all. They were trying to fight change and westernization. Go read the Wikipedia article about 9/11, they were fighting against the US attacks on Muslims, their influence on local politics, and their support of Israel. Why do people think it takes more than that?

Yes, they didn't like attacks, but "their influence on local politics" goes right into the "change" that I was mentioning that Al-Qaida was fighting against. Edit: Please try not to tell people to "go read" it comes across as combative. Especially since I have read that article.

I was echoing your use of "go read."

Saying that's change is misleading. It's foreign control they're opposed to, and that has been normal for over a century.

Re: Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality

#240

Post by snappyTertle »

Periodic wrote: post #156
snappyTertle wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Higher wages drive prices up, and price out less productive workers. Sure, the people who remain employed are better off. But what about everyone who has to pay higher prices, and workers who are now unable to find a job? Why is it ok to tax profitable businesses/people for the sake of equality? I get it if they don't earn their profits fairly. Why should we steal from top producers and redistribute? Taxes should not…

Why is it stealing? Didn't they earn their riches by taking advantage of a system that was put in place by everyone? When someone makes a fortune in a society they are benefiting from the society's trade laws, justice systems, military protection, financial systems, education systems, workforce laws, available workforce, etc. If the society helps you earn a fortune, shouldn't you proportionally pay back the society f…

A contract that we were born into without consent and no choice to be free of it? Sounds like slavery.

Slaves were given food and shelter for their labor. Sure, they didn't directly enjoy a majority of what they produced, but the marginal gains would benefit everyone else.

Post reply on HN