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

IT is the cause of rising income and wealth inequality since the 1970s [pdf]

economistsview.typepad.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 199 posts

Re: IT is the cause of rising income and wealth inequality since the 1970s [pdf]

#121

Post by Chaebixi »

11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #112
jrochkind1 wrote: post #105

// Automation replaces men. This of course is nothing new. What is new is that now, unlike most earlier periods, the displaced men have nowhere to go. The farmers displaced by mechanization of the farms in the 20's could go to the cities and man the assembly lines. As for the work animals like the mule, they could just stop growing them. But automation displaces people, and you don't just stop growing people even whe…

Another argument for basic income? The displacement of any worker who drives for a living as at our doorstep.

Or severely limiting automation a la the Dune universe.

Re: IT is the cause of rising income and wealth inequality since the 1970s [pdf]

#122

Post by titzer »

ue_ wrote: post #83
titzer wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally speaking, income inequality leads to social instability. In the limit, that means violent revolution.

I'd rather say that high income inequality leads to people realising class antagonism between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, and the synthesis of this conflict is Socialism.

Violent revolution is manifested throughout human history, before there was even a concept of Socialism. They were called "slave rebellions."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_rebellion

Re: IT is the cause of rising income and wealth inequality since the 1970s [pdf]

#123

Post by lovich »

mmirate wrote: post #101
pdkl95 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mark Blyth (prof. of political economy at Brown) has advice for anyone with this attitude: "The Hamptons is not a defensible position"[1]. What are you going to do when a large fraction of the population starts getting hungry and they decide taking what they need from you (and everyone else with wealth/resources)? Do you really think that the police will simply arrest them? What about when someone starts shooting and…

That speaks more to police being incompetent, understaffed and/or underfunded (and to civilian concealed-weapons-permit-holders being too few and too-far-between) than to anything else. (n.b. incarcerating a criminal costs tens of thousands of dollars per year; whereas the summary execution of a deadly threat during a riot, costs at most $10 of ammunition per criminal)

Ah yes, a competent police force is a death squad for the poor.

If you're going to advocate for murdering the poor why not go whole hog and just herd them into camps for eradication? That would presumably be a lot more efficient since you're centralizing everything

Re: IT is the cause of rising income and wealth inequality since the 1970s [pdf]

#124

Post by drewmol »

pdkl95 wrote: post #72
jstanley wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's your parent, partner, or kids, (or even if it's not -- it could be anyone) you're welcome to provide for them yourself. You're also welcome to donate to (or even work for!) charities that provide for them. But it's not OK to force everyone else to provide for them.

Mark Blyth (prof. of political economy at Brown) has advice for anyone with this attitude: "The Hamptons is not a defensible position"[1]. What are you going to do when a large fraction of the population starts getting hungry and they decide taking what they need from you (and everyone else with wealth/resources)? Do you really think that the police will simply arrest them? What about when someone starts shooting and…

Interesting response, thanks. To parent's comment:

If >it's not OK to force everyone else to provide for them.

Along the same lines of thinking:

it's not OK to force everyone else to defend your assets/property/lifestyle

Or at least it's unlikely you will succeed in that effort

Re: IT is the cause of rising income and wealth inequality since the 1970s [pdf]

#125

Post by jrs95 »

pdonis wrote: post #118
jrs95 wrote: post #79

It isn't the technology that's to blame for how the wealth it creates is distributed. That's just silly. And honestly, an efficient socialist economy is made much more realistic by modern technology. There's a lot that can be done to offset some of the downsides that have been associated with it in the past.

> an efficient socialist economy is made much more realistic by modern technology No, it isn't, because no amount of technology will solve the fundamental information problem with centralized control, which is what any socialist economy must depend on. Nor can technology fix the fundamental incentive problem with socialist government, which is that decisions affecting everyone are made by people with the least amount…

The information problem is exactly what I'm referring to. We have a lot of means of gathering and analzying information that we didn't have before, and those could be used to accomplish this. I'm also not advocating for a fully planned economy either, that has a lot of problems including the ones you mentioned.

Re: IT is the cause of rising income and wealth inequality since the 1970s [pdf]

#126

Post by pdkl95 »

yters wrote: post #96
pdkl95 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mark Blyth (prof. of political economy at Brown) has advice for anyone with this attitude: "The Hamptons is not a defensible position"[1]. What are you going to do when a large fraction of the population starts getting hungry and they decide taking what they need from you (and everyone else with wealth/resources)? Do you really think that the police will simply arrest them? What about when someone starts shooting and…

In the long term isn't it economically better to get people out of this welfare culture so they can provide for themselves? Gangs aren't formed to feed starving people, they form because the culture is broken. In the long term, placating gangs with welfare money will backfire. Arguably it's the welfare money that significantly led to the culture breakdown in the first place by destroying economic and social structure…

What "culture"? What "gangs"? I'm talking about the mobs that form when enough people lose basic necessities like food and shelter. When enough people have to choose between starving to death or joining the mob that's taking food by any means necessary, most choose the latter. Given the options, that's a rational choice. Nobody wants to be part of a mob starting a food riot, but that's what human s do when you they are out of options.

> they form because the culture is broken

Have you ever actually met many poor people? "Culture" isn't the problem, and they are some of the hardest working people in the country. They are also some of the nicest people I've ever met and by far the most generous.

If you want to actually fix the problem so welfare isn't necessary, fix the things that are currently denying them the opportunity to improving their situation such as the prison-industrial complex, racist crap like "redlining", various predatory business practices, and regressive taxes. Find ways to increase labor's power such as unions or guilds, with the goal of increasing both available jobs and job stability.

> Arguably it's the welfare money that significantly led to the culture breakdown

That is pure nonsense. Seriously, try actually living[1] below the poverty line for a while, or talk to people that have had to live through a lifetime of denied opportunities.

[1] Due to an unfortunate medical situation, I currently live on less than $1500/month.

Re: IT is the cause of rising income and wealth inequality since the 1970s [pdf]

#127

Post by charlesdm »

jrs95 wrote: post #108
tetraca wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I've seen, I don't believe it's universal. The hostility is toward certain kinds of people who encourage and enable centralization or crystallization of power. People like Richard Stallman are generally liked, but people like Peter Thiel or Mark Zuckerberg are not. Mind you I don't know what the Tankie side of things really says because I loathe them.

It's definitely not universal. But in my opinion, it's more like there are people who think they're better than us that are upset that we're as successful as we are. And being predominantly white men doesn't help, even if we do tend to lean left. That shitty documentary Nancy Pelosi's daughter made is probably a good example of that. The premise is basically that tech workers are terrible and are destroying San Franc…

Do software engineers predominantly lean left? I think the left / right debate is quite outdated, with both sides having equally good (but also bad) ideas about certain subjects.

Why can't you lean left on healthcare and LGBT rights, yet more right on certain economic policies and tax issues?

Re: IT is the cause of rising income and wealth inequality since the 1970s [pdf]

#128

Post by turk- »

Globalization is the cause of inequality. Technology just facilitates it. Capitalism leads to a concentration of wealth in the hands of a few and periods of globalization have resulted in high levels of inequality. Inequality today is comparable to the levels during the gilded age and there was no IT back in the 1870's.

Re: IT is the cause of rising income and wealth inequality since the 1970s [pdf]

#129

Post by paulus_magnus2 »

madengr wrote: post #74
paulus_magnus2 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment. --Warren Bennis Bu imagine an alternative world without factories. The maker movement is still ahead of us. Imagine there exists an open-hape-wiki with 3d-models of every part of every thing we ever built (actually these models exist already…

Sure, but why is the person from Ukraine in the loop? Don't get me started on 3D printing (I have one). It has its uses, and more so (with all the hype) it doesn't have its uses.

The person from Ukraine is in the loop anyway, except currently they are employed by BigCo1 at $1/day and still BigCo1 charges you $100/h for services taking all the arbitrage profits.

The goal is to dis-intermediate, to enable person to person (customer & supplier) to profit from the living cos / efficiency arbitrage.

Re: IT is the cause of rising income and wealth inequality since the 1970s [pdf]

#130

Post by fundabulousrIII »

jrs95 wrote: post #108
tetraca wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I've seen, I don't believe it's universal. The hostility is toward certain kinds of people who encourage and enable centralization or crystallization of power. People like Richard Stallman are generally liked, but people like Peter Thiel or Mark Zuckerberg are not. Mind you I don't know what the Tankie side of things really says because I loathe them.

It's definitely not universal. But in my opinion, it's more like there are people who think they're better than us that are upset that we're as successful as we are. And being predominantly white men doesn't help, even if we do tend to lean left. That shitty documentary Nancy Pelosi's daughter made is probably a good example of that. The premise is basically that tech workers are terrible and are destroying San Franc…

Recently run into this in uni. God save me from the highly educated minority who are always right and love to argue (with tenure). Basic fact: You don't know anything except what you are told by what I design.
Post reply on HN