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

The rise of the pointless job

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 499 posts

Re: The rise of the pointless job

#461

Post by AmericanChopper »

gaius wrote: post #460
AmericanChopper wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you actually suggesting that it’s larger than the US army?

US Army 476,000 regulars, North Korea 1.1M. So yes, twice as big in terms of people.

You're comparing the entire NK armed forces to one US branch. The entire USA armed forces is about 1.3M active personnel, with about 800K reserves. Which the US manages to achieve without conscription or slavery. If you also consider equipment and vehicles (which you absolutely should), then NK is not even remotely close. The number of naval ships, air crafts, tanks, armored combat vehicles, APCs, UAVs , etc... that the US has is so far ahead of any other country that it's not even worth trying to draw a comparison.

You've made an overstated example of a single outlier. There's outliers at the other end too, with both countries that are too dysfunctional to have any national security at all, and countries that simply ride the coattails of their stronger allies.

In any case, this is all entirely irrelevant to my point, which is that armed forces do contribute measurable value to society, and that the level of investment in them is typically proportional to the level of security a country requires.

Re: The rise of the pointless job

#462

Post by gaius »

AmericanChopper wrote: post #461
gaius wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US Army 476,000 regulars, North Korea 1.1M. So yes, twice as big in terms of people.

You're comparing the entire NK armed forces to one US branch. The entire USA armed forces is about 1.3M active personnel, with about 800K reserves. Which the US manages to achieve without conscription or slavery. If you also consider equipment and vehicles (which you absolutely should), then NK is not even remotely close. The number of naval ships, air crafts, tanks, armored combat vehicles, APCs, UAVs , etc... that…

You're comparing the entire NK armed forces to one US branch.

No I am not https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_countries...

Re: The rise of the pointless job

#463

Post by freekh »

foamflower wrote: post #83
lainga wrote: post #15

I have said this before, but I see some parallels between the modern world and Japan during the early Tokugawa era. Japan had pretty much reached a steady state by the time Tokugawa Iyeyasu came to power in 1600; most of the available land had been cultivated or settled, and, especially after the policies of Toyotomi Hideyoshi, society was locked in a rigid structure without much room for advancement or unrest. As a…

When my family lived in Japan years ago, we noticed that when taking the train, approximately three attendants checked our tickets before we boarded a train. At least two of those jobs are "bullshit" in terms of producing wealth, but they are socially beneficial in a culture where the social contract requires near-zero unemployment. (I, apparently like you, can't help but remember this kind of arrangement when listen…

This is the same feeling I have when visiting the us. Remember coming into a Starbucks staffed by 5 people but only one doing something. At an airport there was a bunch of people whose job was to make sure I had my passport open prior to going through security. And so on and so on. It might just be my cultural shock though when going there. When you go to a different country you sometimes pick up 'strangeness' and generalise it to the whole country...

Re: The rise of the pointless job

#464

Post by AmericanChopper »

gaius wrote: post #462
AmericanChopper wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're comparing the entire NK armed forces to one US branch. The entire USA armed forces is about 1.3M active personnel, with about 800K reserves. Which the US manages to achieve without conscription or slavery. If you also consider equipment and vehicles (which you absolutely should), then NK is not even remotely close. The number of naval ships, air crafts, tanks, armored combat vehicles, APCs, UAVs , etc... that…

You're comparing the entire NK armed forces to one US branch. No I am not https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_countries...

Yes you are.

>US Army 476,000 regulars

And that number goes up to ~1.3M once you add in the Air Force, Navy and Marines. And as I've said, you're still only comparing numbers of service personnel, and ignoring capability, equipment and other resources. You're also ignoring the point I was making entirely.

Re: The rise of the pointless job

#465

Post by gaius »

AmericanChopper wrote: post #464
gaius wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're comparing the entire NK armed forces to one US branch. No I am not https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_countries...

Yes you are. >US Army 476,000 regulars And that number goes up to ~1.3M once you add in the Air Force, Navy and Marines. And as I've said, you're still only comparing numbers of service personnel, and ignoring capability, equipment and other resources. You're also ignoring the point I was making entirely.

You said

the country with the biggest economy ends up with the biggest army.

That is demonstrably false, as shown in that Wikipedia article. In fact, there is barely any correlation between the size of a country’s economy and its army.

You're also ignoring the point I was making entirely.

Since your facts are wrong, there isn’t even a point to ignore

Re: The rise of the pointless job

#466

Post by ItsMe000001 »

randomdata wrote: post #452
learc83 wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just basic supply and demand though. There are many other factors driving up CEO pay. 1. CEO pay at public companies is public, so they feel the need to keep up with other companies. 2. The incestuous relationship between CEOs and the boards of directors that set their pay. CEO compensation isn't tied to performance.

> 1. CEO pay at public companies is public, so they feel the need to keep up with other companies. That's just basic supply and demand. Since pay is public, people know how much the other party will balk at, affecting the supply. > 2. The incestuous relationship between CEOs and the boards of directors that set their pay. That's just basic supply and demand. Like I said, the people who have that kind of relationship…

CEO pay is not just supply and demand. You cannot even tell what "supply" even is, because "CEO supply" is nothing that can be well defined. You could make a lot of people CEO from the 2nd and 3rd ranks who also have the experience and knowledge, or you can seek only people who already have been CEOs - which does not guarantee anything at all, because CEO success depends a lot on context and circumstances. CEO supply is extremely flexible based on psychology for one (who you are willing to accept for the role is extremely subjective and based on personal preferences), and can also very easily be changed through actions (whom do you give a chance to learn to lead, and how). So the possible "supply" of CEOs is decided on a whim to a large degree, based on subjectivity (even if it's attempted to be hidden by some "thorough search" - which uses those same subjective criteria and selection heuristics).

You misuse economic theory by simply using it to make unsubstantiatable claims pretending that it somehow proves anything as long as you use the right magic words from economic thinking.

Re: The rise of the pointless job

#467

Post by dasmoth »

ghaff wrote: post #454
gaius wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OTOH last time I was in St.Pancras there was a guy collecting the fees to use the washroom The toilets at St Pancras are free and always have been. He was just some random guy you gave money to!

Maybe was another a London station. Recall there being a turnstile.

King’s Cross is right next door and had turnstiles last time I was there.

Re: The rise of the pointless job

#468

Post by dragandj »

gkya wrote: post #455
dragandj wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Janissaries were slave-warriors rather than mercenaries, though.

Slave-warriors in the name only though. They were literally one of the most powerful classes in the entirety of the empire for many centuries, after the dynasty and the dirigents themselves.

Sure, but they were not mercenaries. They did not enroll, but were taken from their families in occupied lands as small children, raised and educated as warriors, and the only career option they had, and family they knew of is the army.

Re: The rise of the pointless job

#469

Post by randomdata »

ItsMe000001 wrote: post #466
randomdata wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. CEO pay at public companies is public, so they feel the need to keep up with other companies. That's just basic supply and demand. Since pay is public, people know how much the other party will balk at, affecting the supply. > 2. The incestuous relationship between CEOs and the boards of directors that set their pay. That's just basic supply and demand. Like I said, the people who have that kind of relationship…

CEO pay is not just supply and demand. You cannot even tell what "supply" even is, because "CEO supply" is nothing that can be well defined. You could make a lot of people CEO from the 2nd and 3rd ranks who also have the experience and knowledge, or you can seek only people who already have been CEOs - which does not guarantee anything at all, because CEO success depends a lot on context and circumstances. CEO supply…

> You cannot even tell what "supply" even is

It’s pretty easy to figure out. Typically there will be exactly one person the board is willing to trust. It doesn’t matter how they reached that conclusion.

Being the only person in the world deemed suitable for the task gives incredible leverage when demand is near infinite.

> You misuse economic theory by simply using it to make unsubstantiatable claims

It would appear that you’re simply overthinking this. We’re talking about basic supply and demand, not a complex economic theory. It is simply an observation of what people agree to. We call it basic because it doesn’t represent anything more.

Re: The rise of the pointless job

#470

Post by gkya »

dragandj wrote: post #468
gkya wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slave-warriors in the name only though. They were literally one of the most powerful classes in the entirety of the empire for many centuries, after the dynasty and the dirigents themselves.

Sure, but they were not mercenaries. They did not enroll, but were taken from their families in occupied lands as small children, raised and educated as warriors, and the only career option they had, and family they knew of is the army.

Certainly. I just wanted to clarify what "slave-warrior" meant in this context, because in itself the word makes me think of actual slaves living in misery and getting thrown onto enemies to keep them busy getting killed. Originally janissaries were taken forcefully, but the careers they made, many families bribed the collectors to pick their children, and later, muslims too forced the govenrment to make the concession of accepting their children into janissary "ocak"s. Not only, but janissaries started getting families (forbidden initially), and making their children janissaries too, and thus the corruption of the janissaries. Also, janissaries were not mere warriors. They took part in many activities and had many responsabilities in peace time. E.g. the firemen of Constantinople were janissaries. They were also the ruling elite in some remote parts of the empire.

BTW while "taken from their families" is correct, many kept ties with the families. The Sokollu dynasty of grand viziers who practically ruled the empire for decades were taken the same way, but the first of Sokollus, Mehmen Sokollu, was not only able to pass on his position to his relatives, he re-established the Serbian Orthodox Church and got his brother to become its patriarch. We can discuss the humanitarian aspects of this, but practically, these people are not slaves at all; in fact, thinking that these people were slaves is downplaying what a disaster actual slavery is.

Post reply on HN