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

Tech Is Splitting the U.S. Work Force in Two

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 541 posts

Re: Tech Is Splitting the U.S. Work Force in Two

#121

Post by throwawayjava »

aphextron wrote: post #108
throwawayjava wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a ridiculously false dichotomy. Plenty of folks in the midwest/south/appalachia/dakotas/etc. don't give a shit about their communities, and plenty of people in dense coastal cities care deeply about the people around them. And vice versa (as you noted). Weekend (or, anyways, short) vacations to Paris are a thing. On the other hand, they are also super cheap historically speaking ( Paris, stay in a hostel and…

>Weekend (or, anyways, short) vacations to Paris are a thing. On the other hand, they are also super cheap historically speaking ( Paris, stay in a hostel and it's Try repeating this statement to a friend who is deciding between groceries or gas to get to work this week. You really can't comprehend what life is like on the minimum wage of $15k.

> > You really can't comprehend what life is like on the minimum wage of $15k.

I have personal experience with exactly that kind of poverty, and the chronic physical/mental health problems and financial roadblocks to prove it.

Putting your assumptions about my life aside, you missed the point.

The presumption that people "in the interior" are poor and virtuous and people "on the coasts" are rich and morally bankrupt is profoundly wrong.

The presumption that people who "work with their hands" are poor and people who work in technology are rich is also wrong.

There are people in each quadrant of the "interior"/coast/rich/poor divide. The "rich=coast=no morals=tech" trope is just the opposite side of the ugly "poor='interior'=lazy=uneducated" coin.

I'll also repeat one of my original questions: who in the "interior" actually refers to the "interior" as the "interior"? I literally never heard that language until I moved to a coast.

Re: Tech Is Splitting the U.S. Work Force in Two

#122

Post by throwawayjava »

baroffoos wrote: post #71
throwawayjava wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a three day weekend with a "day of service" is a much better solution. Working 8 hours a day already leaves enough downtime in my schedule to get bored, but not enough to turn that boredom into something productive. 6 hours would be outright hell. The problem is, the extra two hours don't really provide me with any compelling new opportunities to contribute! That's barely enough time to get at a school and vo…

I'd prefer the shorter days. A 6 hour day would leave more time for daily exercise and cooking healthy food for dinner and lunch the next day. I would probably also feel more relaxed on the weekend to work on personal programming projects.

That's fair. There are probably a lot of ways to structure this.

Re: Tech Is Splitting the U.S. Work Force in Two

#123

Post by mrhappyunhappy »

refurb wrote: post #104
nicklaf wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or are you suggesting we ban working? Well, with a sufficiently progressive tax, you might choose to stop volunteering your time for what will be diminishing returns in income.

Ok, fair point. But as someone already mentioned, would we want someone like Elon Musk to not work?

Just because you don’t have to work doesn’t mean you wouldn’t want to anyway - perhaps money is not the only motivation for working when your basic needs are met.

Re: Tech Is Splitting the U.S. Work Force in Two

#124

Post by shard972 »

_t2kx wrote: post #103
shard972 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people think germ theory is meaningless. So what?

Germ theory has basis in science. IQ tests do not.

So why does the US army use it to both screen out recruits but to identify who should be elevated into the officer core if it's not based in science?

Why is it that IQ after all these years has the best correlation with many positive results such as academic ability and job success?

I'm not even sure if this a troll to be honest so i would like a bit more an argument than "it's not science cause i say so".

Re: Tech Is Splitting the U.S. Work Force in Two

#125

Post by baroffoos »

mrweasel wrote: post #97
baroffoos wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this backed up by any stats? Last I saw the stats on America showed the top % is unimaginably rich and the inequality is massively worse than other countries like Australia where the average person is much better off.

No, and I might very well be completely wrong. My reasoning is that some one like Jeff Bezos is worth $150 billion, if we take all his money (which we can't do, because most of his wealth isn't exactly in cash), then each American could receive something like $500. That's not really helpful, and we can only do that once, if we take ALL his money. Maybe I'm underestimating how many rich people the world has, and how m…

The $150 billion sitting in bezos bank account does very little for everyone. If it was distributed among the population of America, most of it would be spent very quickly and there would be huge benefits for everyone. Preventing hoarding would do a lot of good for society.

Re: Tech Is Splitting the U.S. Work Force in Two

#126

Post by stale2002 »

WrtCdEvrydy wrote: post #82
stale2002 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately, there are lots and lots of "technology" jobs that do not fit people's preconceived notions of what it means to be working in "STEM". Think, things like being a designer, product manager, analyst, ect, ect, ect. Even the job I do today, working as a web developer, is something that the "hardcore" programmers of 40 years ago, would likely look down on, as I do not fit into their traditional opinion, from 4…

> would likely look down on The reason for this is because 40 years ago, you had to write everything to get something on screen. The modern generation benefits from the foundational knowledge and be able to do more.

Yes exactly.

And to further expand this metaphor, I am sure that in another 40 years, there will be significantly more tools that will allow people to more easily develop things.

Such jobs would also be very valuable.

Re: Tech Is Splitting the U.S. Work Force in Two

#128

Post by rland »

baroffoos wrote: post #125
mrweasel wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, and I might very well be completely wrong. My reasoning is that some one like Jeff Bezos is worth $150 billion, if we take all his money (which we can't do, because most of his wealth isn't exactly in cash), then each American could receive something like $500. That's not really helpful, and we can only do that once, if we take ALL his money. Maybe I'm underestimating how many rich people the world has, and how m…

The $150 billion sitting in bezos bank account does very little for everyone. If it was distributed among the population of America, most of it would be spent very quickly and there would be huge benefits for everyone. Preventing hoarding would do a lot of good for society.

On the contrary. Most of that money is the capital that makes up Amazon and its subsidiaries, which has consistently grown faster (created more wealth/benefit) than almost any other entity in our society.

That's your neoliberal take. Personally, I'm a little dubious that wealth created is 1:1 with social benefit created. But to say that his bank account benefits nobody would be a misrepresentation.

Re: Tech Is Splitting the U.S. Work Force in Two

#129

Post by atemerev »

jedberg wrote: post #98
atemerev wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is my wealth that is going to be “redistributed”. I am a relatively well off software engineer; I was born in a poor family on the outskirts of a Siberian town. I learned to program all on my own, by visiting my friends with computers and taking programming books from the local library. It wasn’t a “function of circumstance” — it was a function of my interest and targeted activity. What is unfair here?

Sounds like you landed in the lucky circumstance of having access to a computer and access to a library with programming books. You also got lucky with finding a job that let you save enough money to go somewhere else. Should we not do our best to afford that "luck" to everyone?

With my own money, I am occasionally donating to libraries and other charities. Of course, you are free to do that and anything else with you own money, too.

Re: Tech Is Splitting the U.S. Work Force in Two

#130

Post by barry-cotter »

TomMckenny wrote: post #99
toomanybeersies wrote: post #27

The problem is that as a society we believe that people need to work 40 hours a week to survive. We replace people with robots and retain the same output. We are more productive than ever before, yet work the same amount. Physical and uneducated work is being replaced by automation, yet we expect these people replaced by robots to find jobs to survive where there are now none. I don't believe in Universal Basic Incom…

Higher wages with shorter work hours would be a great step in the right direction. I believe Keynes even suggested it. But, a post-scarcity society, where labor is nearly valueless, still requires everyone have their needs met regardless of what they "own". But in that future as through all the past, most people are born owning little more than their labor. So a post-scarcity society does not just require the technol…

> Higher wages with shorter work hours would be a great step in the right direction. I believe Keynes even suggested it.

No he didn’t. He suggested we’d have chosen to work fewer hours and have more leisure because we could afford both greater consumption and greater leisure than were possible when he wrote. Higher wages than now, with shorter work hours than now is possible only with growth in economic productivity so we can produce more (goods, services) with less (material input, labour). We can’t just decide to work 20 hours a week and maintain our current standard of living by fiat.

Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren (1930)

https://assets.aspeninstitute.org/content/uploads/files/cont...

Post reply on HN