Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession • Hacker News Board

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#251

Post by jddj » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 7:21 PM UTC

pvaldes wrote: post #85

jahaja wrote: post #2

Imagine if the current protests against inequality (and thereabouts) going on all around the world would be reported, scrutinized, and debated as much as when any of the established "enemies" have civil unrest. How quickly would things change?

Protests will not work, only young people deciding massively to vote a third party would make a dent on the current fossilised power inbalance. No matter how many times you ask for gun control or a fair healthcare system. It will not happen. The alternative is what we are seeing in Europe, with students 15 yo playing real world Resident Evil in Barcelona with chainsaws and torches (and finding it more funny and rewar…

Just on the chainsaw point, take care: unless it somehow happened in the only corner of the city with police and protestors but without 100 smartphone cameras pointed at them at all times, it's utter bullshit.

These police have been totally disproportionate in their use of force and hence have a huge incentive to sensationalise the actions of those 15 year olds.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#252

Post by root_axis » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 7:23 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #237

root_axis wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lambasting abstract economic theories is meaningless. The U.S. economy already implements some socialized policies and moving further in that direction for some aspects of our economy isn't necessarily bad. For example, a single-payer healthcare system is obviously superior to our current one, even if it is "socialized", but having socialized healthcare doesn't mean the U.S. is "socialist" any more than the existence…

Funny, just yesterday I was commenting on an HN story about Bernie Sanders proposing to give half ownership of companies to their workers. Yes, people are proposing "bestowing collective ownership of private capital to the proletariat", or something very close to it.

> or something very close to it.

Mandating that some large corporations award some stock to their employees may be socialism in your eyes, but that's not actually socialism, it's just a FUD talking point.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#253

Post by AnimalMuppet » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 7:30 PM UTC

gen220 wrote: post #139

Maybe I’m naïve, but to me the word “capitalism” is not an “economic policy” that can be changed through deliberate action, but rather a framework of analysis that makes predictions on supply, demand, and pricing in markets that are varying levels of free. I’m confused when people in my generational cohort say things like “capitalism is unfair” or “capitalism sucks”, in reference to the system of government and benef…

Rerunning a comment of mine from five days ago, because it also fits here:

Rodney Stark says that the distinguishing mark of capitalism is that (at least part of) the profits are re-invested in better tools for productivity gains. In this view, "the existence of property rights, money, and the right to freely enter into contracts except when prohibited by law" are prerequisites, but they aren't capitalism. Capitalism is what you do once you have that foundation in place.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#254

Post by AnimalMuppet » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 7:31 PM UTC

root_axis wrote: post #252

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, just yesterday I was commenting on an HN story about Bernie Sanders proposing to give half ownership of companies to their workers. Yes, people are proposing "bestowing collective ownership of private capital to the proletariat", or something very close to it.

> or something very close to it. Mandating that some large corporations award some stock to their employees may be socialism in your eyes, but that's not actually socialism, it's just a FUD talking point.

I didn't say it was socialism. I said it was bestowing collective ownership of private capital to the proletariat - which it very clearly is.

Or at least which it very clearly is quite close to. It's bestowing collective ownership of half of private capital to the part of the proletariat that works at that business.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#255

Post by AnimalMuppet » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 7:34 PM UTC

notacoward wrote: post #210

perceptronas wrote: post #10

>After the 2008 recession, President Obama and the Democrats effectively saved capitalism from itself; a more radical leadership would fight to replace it with a better system. This time around there may be far more pressure from below to do just that, especially with a more organized left and more class conscious young people. As a former soviet occupied country citizen, I am amazed that westerners would want to ove…

There were many differences between the Soviet Union and the US. Nominal socialism vs. nominal capitalism was only one, and many would argue not the biggest. Personally, I'm amazed that so many people who suffered under deeply authoritarian regimes seem to support the authoritarian party in current US politics. Members of exclusive clubs colluding with each other outside of the market or public view tends to work out…

Er, which is the authoritarian party in US current US politics? To me, I'd say there isn't a clear answer. It depends on which issue we're talking about.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#256

Post by jcmoscon » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 7:46 PM UTC

diffeomorphism wrote: post #30

xienze wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have absolutely no incentive to work hard when doing so doesn't materially affect income. And you think that would improve under socialism or communism?

That is literally the opposite of what the sentence said?

But that's the option that they are giving.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#257

Post by AnimalMuppet » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 7:47 PM UTC

devsag wrote: post #122

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We abandoned Bretton Woods and triggered the hugely inflationary seventies - the 73 oil crisis helped a lot here too. We've had, and still have, the Nordic model. Capitalism is dramatically different today than it was in the 1960s in most countries. We've had the monetarism/neoliberal experiment for 40 years. We've had globalisation to completely disconnect capitalism (and capital) from government, country and employ…

The only difference is there was no labor capital at that period. The risk of capital has been transferred to labor from capitalists. The real change in government happened through Reagan who legalized big corps and started the age of M&A. Globalisation also did help in economy but countries like China which have closed markets but access to open markets lead to more marginalization of labor.

Reagan legalized big corps? Say what? There were big corps before Reagan. General Motors, say.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#258

Post by jimmywanger » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 7:47 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #244

jimmywanger wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you make the pay high enough? Compel labor, print money, or some sort of complicated metric? "Based on family background, education, and IQ tests, we estimate that your best job is electrical technician."

You keep raising pay until people are willing, uncoerced, to take jobs that they don't find "fulfilling". You do that just by offering money for the job. You don't try to guess who "should" take the job, you just offer it. You don't compel labor, you don't print money. You just raise the pay, and raise the rates you charge for garbage collection to pay the salaries. (And, yeah, at that point you have a bit of coercio…

> You don't compel labor, you don't print money.

vs two sentences later.

> And, yeah, at that point you have a bit of coercion

Which is it? Can you compel a poor peasant farmer to stay on the farmer and grow food because that's what society needs as a right?

> If a home doesn't, they're probably going to be in violation of some kind of law.

Law itself is coercion. Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. The only reason we pay taxes for stuff we might not use, like the public education system and libraries, is forced by the threat of violence and imprisonment. Would you be going to jail if you didn't pay the portion of them that went to the military? What do you think happens when you refuse to go to prison?

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#259

Post by root_axis » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 7:55 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #254

root_axis wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> or something very close to it. Mandating that some large corporations award some stock to their employees may be socialism in your eyes, but that's not actually socialism, it's just a FUD talking point.

I didn't say it was socialism. I said it was bestowing collective ownership of private capital to the proletariat - which it very clearly is. Or at least which it very clearly is quite close to. It's bestowing collective ownership of half of private capital to the part of the proletariat that works at that business.

Forcing companies to offer stock to employees is not "bestowing collective ownership of private capital". Stock is private ownership by definition. Using that logic the minimum wage is socialism because it enforces a wealth transfer to low-skilled employees.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#260

Post by SlowRobotAhead » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 8:08 PM UTC

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #187

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know about anyone else but I’m tired of the “automation” doomsday predictions that don’t understand we don’t lose jobs, they just transfer with new technology. Did the cottongin end slavery? No. It make it more efficient. Did the rail system go away with national highways? No. We have much better last mile access. Have robots replaced union workers? Union membership has decreased since the 80s, but unemployme…

I agree with your thrust but one caveat: "despite cars horses are still around" This is an absolutely terrible argument, because the population and societal use of horses have been greatly reduced once the automobile came into play. If we were to transfer this with people, this means that once automation comes into the play, the vast majority of working humans will be culled and those remaining are only luxury/recrea…

Ok, fair enough, but read the larger context though. The people who had equestrian professions didn’t die. And there weren’t a mass of people displaced as refugees as the car became popular.

It just created different jobs. Things that weren’t possible or didn’t exist before cars.

It’s the same thing with “automation”. People like to pretend that one day soon everything will just be straight up replaced with robots overnight and we just won’t know what to do with ourselves. Not only isn’t that the case, it ignores the history of disruptive technology for the last 10,000 years.

The root of the argument is made much better with overpopulation. But developed countries can’t be made to subsidize that - make the argument automation and maybe you can convince some people to believe in socialism.