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

Tech bosses are globalists, not libertarians

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 222 posts

Re: Tech bosses are globalists, not libertarians

#201

Post by puranjay »

current_call wrote: post #199

This isn't news, is it? Google hates decentralization. Visa and money transfer restrictions force them to improve the areas they're based out of. Open communication makes it harder for them to control public opinion. Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google, coauthored a book, The New Digital Age, about how in the future there won't be any border restrictions and 'fake news' will be censored away. Here, I have quotes! More ef…

> People who try to perpetuate myths about religion, culture, ethnicity or anything else will struggle to keep their narratives afloat amid a sea of newly informed listeners.

This is pretty damn terrifying.

Who is the authority on what qualifies as a "myth" or a "lie"?

We're coming closer to a Ministry of Truth every single day. And people who I would otherwise call 'smart' are actively cheering for it if it protects their own sacred belifs

Re: Tech bosses are globalists, not libertarians

#204

Post by throwaway2016a »

wallace_f wrote: post #170

Gloablist vs Libertarian is a strange dichotomy to me. As a Libertarian this study would mark me as a 'globalist.' I believe free trade and immigration are good, and that foreign policy is important. They go on to ask SV if 'they are libertarians' by asking if they believe in Minarchism--that the State should only provide police and military, which most libertarians themselves don't even agree is an ideal interpretat…

Thank you, I came here to say something about this, the whole article seems to misunderstand libertarianism.

The extreme fringe of libertarianism is anarchism and I think that is really what they were getting at. But most Libertarians as with any political affiliation are not at the fringe (though they may be the loudest).

This would be like judging all Republicans based on the Tea Party or all Democrats based on Socialism.

Re: Tech bosses are globalists, not libertarians

#205

Post by pvg »

lliamander wrote: post #197
pvg wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A national geopolitical policy in which the entire world is regarded as the appropriate sphere for a state's influence." and "Anyone who desires world government (or the diminishing of local governments)" do not 'match up'. It's not the same ballpark, it's not even the same game. There is absolutely nothing in the former that implies or suggests a desire for world government. There really isn't any serious mainstrea…

> "A national geopolitical policy in which the entire world is regarded as the appropriate sphere for a state's influence." and "Anyone who desires world government (or the diminishing of local governments)" do not 'match up'. It's not the same ballpark, it's not even the same game. Is there a distinction to be made? Sure. Not in the same ballpark? Hardly. Power and influence are zero sum. If one state exerts its inf…

I think if you'd found that the definition of 'globalist' meant 'a person who likes turnips' you'd have written the same lengthy missive explaining how that dietary preference is equivalent to support for world government, possibly based on the self-evident idea that turnip-fancy is zero sum. This isn't argument, it's just throwing around terms with enough coinciding letters to try to reach a pre-determined conclusion/idée fixe. Let's call it a day before you end up having to connect the turnipists to the globular clusterists and the black helicopterists.

Re: Tech bosses are globalists, not libertarians

#206

Post by conanbatt »

wallace_f wrote: post #170

Gloablist vs Libertarian is a strange dichotomy to me. As a Libertarian this study would mark me as a 'globalist.' I believe free trade and immigration are good, and that foreign policy is important. They go on to ask SV if 'they are libertarians' by asking if they believe in Minarchism--that the State should only provide police and military, which most libertarians themselves don't even agree is an ideal interpretat…

I thought chomsky was anarco-sindicalist.

Re: Tech bosses are globalists, not libertarians

#207

Post by notacoward »

CryptoPunk wrote: post #178
Applejinx wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But labor productivity growth doesn't cause any wage gains anymore, hasn't for decades upon decades. Probably worth asking if you assert that American corporate taxes are the highest in the world: sometimes there are just major, major reality-based differences in the discourse and it's useless talking any further. I know I can't believe some of your axioms here, unfortunately.

It's tracked labour productivity growth very closely: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/22_wage...

That graph shows the exact opposite. From near-parity with the output figures in 1947-1972, wage/compensation struggle to stay about half that in 2005-2014. In other words, the workers are not benefiting in proportion to productivity.

Re: Tech bosses are globalists, not libertarians

#208

Post by CryptoPunk »

CalChris wrote: post #179
CryptoPunk wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Per capita social spending was vastly greater in the 1980s than the 1970s and it was vastly greater in 1990s than the 1980s: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2013/01/16/us/politics/16fiv... https://static01.nyt.com/images/2013/01/16/us/politics/16fiv...

I'm not sure what that has to do with the poverty rate continuing to decline until the mid-70s and then staying down. You said something about the regressive policies that hurt the poor . You haven't shown any evidence for this claim.

Poverty rates have failed to decline during almost the entire era of rapidly increasing social spending. There is less than a decade of poverty rate reduction during the War on Poverty era, and it is all at the beginning, when the economy and populace had still not become accustomed to large social welfare programs, and when the size of these programs was much smaller than it is now.

If social programs reduced poverty these aren't the stats you'd see.

Re: Tech bosses are globalists, not libertarians

#209

Post by CryptoPunk »

notacoward wrote: post #207
CryptoPunk wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's tracked labour productivity growth very closely: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/22_wage...

That graph shows the exact opposite. From near-parity with the output figures in 1947-1972, wage/compensation struggle to stay about half that in 2005-2014. In other words, the workers are not benefiting in proportion to productivity.

It's still highly correlated for most of recent history, meaning for most of the last 50 years. 2005 to 2014 is only a nine year period, and even during this period, compensation growth has been well half (0.9 vs 1.5) of output growth.

Re: Tech bosses are globalists, not libertarians

#210

Post by CalChris »

CryptoPunk wrote: post #208
CalChris wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what that has to do with the poverty rate continuing to decline until the mid-70s and then staying down. You said something about the regressive policies that hurt the poor . You haven't shown any evidence for this claim.

Poverty rates have failed to decline during almost the entire era of rapidly increasing social spending. There is less than a decade of poverty rate reduction during the War on Poverty era, and it is all at the beginning, when the economy and populace had still not become accustomed to large social welfare programs, and when the size of these programs was much smaller than it is now. If social programs reduced povert…

So you are going from You mean regressive policies that hurt the poor, right? to There is less than a decade of poverty rate reduction during the War on Poverty era, ....

Cutting the Poverty Rate from about 22% to about 12% is hurting the poor. Got it.

Post reply on HN