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

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

theweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 309 posts

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

#261

Post by jimmywanger »

flmontpetit wrote: post #242
jimmywanger wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends. How much do you need to make? Do you need broadband, the new mobile, or a car and insurance? Will 3 days working as a garbageman make you reasonably happy? If so, please go ahead and do that and spend the rest of your time doing art. If you really feel as though you need amazon prime and new shoes every 3 months, you better to out and make that money. You have no right demanding that other people work to mak…

I am a white, male software developer. I have absolutely nothing to complain about or envy others. Find something more solid to lean on than a straw man. If those who feel entitled to the work of others enrage you, then perhaps you should point your anger at the parasitic bourgeoisie who siphon wealth away from society for doing absolutely nothing useful.

> I am a white, male software developer. I have absolutely nothing to complain about or envy others.

Congratulations for your situation in life and happiness. Many people will never know that.

> I am a white, male software developer. I have absolutely nothing to complain about or envy others.

Then you must feel very privileged because of your ethnicity, your country of citizenship, and education.

> Find something more solid to lean on than a straw man.

You're the one that raised the example of the garbageman/artist and just because I point out some flaws in that example, your personal situation makes this a strawman?

> If those who feel entitled to the work of others enrage you, then perhaps you should point your anger at the parasitic bourgeoisie who siphon wealth away from society for doing absolutely nothing useful.

Like, maybe sit at a screen all day and tap at a keyboard once in a while? Does that count as "the parasitic bourgeoisie"?

You realize that there are people in your age group which because of differing backgrounds, live in unimaginable squalor, get paid piddling amounts of money, and fight for those jobs. Also, mess their country up with pollution because we can't do that here.

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

#262

Post by AnimalMuppet »

jimmywanger wrote: post #258
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> > 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?

Of course not. You can, however, compel people to pay taxes. And you can compel people to not just throw their garbage out into the street.

If you think taxes are equal to slavery, you've never been a real slave.

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

#263

Post by danharaj »

Will_Parker wrote: post #243
danharaj wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a great many things you can't debate about people. For example, you would be severely censured if you debated whether your colleague's chronic illness really was as bad as they claim it is. If the position is "I should be able to question and debate anything about my colleagues" then the position is obviously absurd and I would ask a person holding such a view to reevaluate what they think society is. I don…

> So, why are you troubled that you can't debate this particular thing, when I'm sure there are things you shouldn't debate about your colleagues? I'm troubled by the top-down nature of what is decided to be beyond debate vs not: it feels like it is leading to a scary kind of authoritarianism I don't want. For fun, I'll throw you a specific plausible hypothetical. If an app has a gender identity field, and a user ent…

> For fun, I'll throw you a specific plausible hypothetical. If an app has a gender identity field, and a user enters "Apache Helicopter", should this be treated as valid data or not?

Depends on what the data is being used for? This is irrelevant, unless you're an app that collects statistics on its colleagues.

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

#264

Post by AnimalMuppet »

root_axis wrote: post #259
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't see much difference between "collective ownership" and "private ownership by everyone".

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

#265

Post by root_axis »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #264
root_axis wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't see much difference between "collective ownership" and "private ownership by everyone".

It's not "private ownership by everyone", it's "stock ownership by some individuals employed by the company". Not even remotely close to the same thing.

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

#266

Post by notacoward »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #255
notacoward wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yes, it definitely depends on whether you're cherry-picking a few issues or taking a more balanced view. When it comes to property rights, most would say the Democrats' acceptance of higher taxation and regulation makes them more authoritarian. And then there's the second amendment. On the other hand, the "anti terrorism" (pro war) "tough on crime" Republicans seem rather inimical to individual freedom at a much more fundamental level:

* More search, seizure, and surveillance * Less due process * Less independent judiciary * More suppression of information (violation of public records laws, gag orders, general enmity toward science/journalism/education) * More tolerance of authoritarian regimes elsewhere * Corruption and concentration of influence among leaders' cronies

Really, unless you're a corporation, you have much more to fear under a Republican government than under a Democrat one. If you want to see which party is more authoritarian, look at which one real civil-liberties organizations like ACLU, CCR, etc. find more objectionable. More partisan-political organizations that focus only on "economic rights" and generally act as extensions for the Chamber of Commerce don't paint an accurate picture.

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

#267

Post by AnimalMuppet »

root_axis wrote: post #265
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see much difference between "collective ownership" and "private ownership by everyone".

It's not "private ownership by everyone", it's "stock ownership by some individuals employed by the company". Not even remotely close to the same thing.

How is it not, if everyone receives ownership of the company that they work for? Does that not, on the level of the society as a whole, add up to "bestowing collective ownership of private capital"?

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

#268

Post by jimmywanger »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #262
jimmywanger wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> > 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? Of course not. You can, however, compel people to pay taxes. And you can compel people to not just throw their garbage out into the street. If you think taxes are equal to slavery, you've never been a real slave.

> Of course not. You can, however, compel people to pay taxes. And you can compel people to not just throw their garbage out into the street.

You cannot compel people to pay taxes, as New York discovered to its chagrin. [0] These are no longer Oregon Trail days, where to move you have to sell property and buy a stagecoach and oxen and spare axles. You just sort of buy another house in Arizona or Florida to ride out winters and don't spend more than 179 days a year in New York.

> If you think taxes are equal to slavery, you've never been a real slave.

Slavery is just an extreme form of taxation. Not only do you give up all fruits of your labor, but also give up your children from you.

If you don't believe me, you face fines for taking your kids out of public school in the US and the UK for taking your kids on vacation while school is in session. Probably because because they know better than you do what your child needs. How's that non-slavery working out for you? [1] [2]

[0] https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/State-facing-unexpec...

[1] https://abcnews.go.com/Travel/taking-kids-school-travel/stor...

[2] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/family-holidays/term-time...

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

#269

Post by flmontpetit »

jimmywanger wrote: post #261
flmontpetit wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a white, male software developer. I have absolutely nothing to complain about or envy others. Find something more solid to lean on than a straw man. If those who feel entitled to the work of others enrage you, then perhaps you should point your anger at the parasitic bourgeoisie who siphon wealth away from society for doing absolutely nothing useful.

> I am a white, male software developer. I have absolutely nothing to complain about or envy others. Congratulations for your situation in life and happiness. Many people will never know that. > I am a white, male software developer. I have absolutely nothing to complain about or envy others. Then you must feel very privileged because of your ethnicity, your country of citizenship, and education. > Find something mor…

Either you're trying to gaslight me, or we're on completely separate levels. This will be my last attempt at interfacing with you.

> Congratulations for your situation in life and happiness. Many people will never know that.

Correct.

> Then you must feel very privileged because of your ethnicity, your country of citizenship, and education.

That's the point. My political ideology is not self-serving. I am part of those who benefit from the status quo. I recognize all of that.

> You're the one that raised the example of the garbageman/artist and just because I point out some flaws in that example, your personal situation makes this a strawman?

You did not even allude to the "garbageman/artist" example. You insinuated that I was "complaining" and "feeling entitled to other people's money", which is trite conservative bullshit.

If we keep "sanitation work" and other difficult, menial tasks to their minimum rather than putting people to work for profit first and foremost, then the people who DO clean toilets and collect garbage will have more time in their week to find purpose and actualization elsewhere. Currently they are overworked and alienated and you would have us believe that's a necessary thing.

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

#270

Post by Ambele »

npo9 wrote: post #3

I’m really surprised this piece was almost entirely about public opinion, only using economics to discuss the likelihood of a recession soon and the effects of inequality. The levers our governments have been pulling to steer the economy are reaching their maximum. The system where we reduce interest rates to spur spending to stimulate the economy (probably) don’t work when interest rates negative.

It typically takes a reduction in interest rates of 4% to pull the economy out of a recession. Interest rates are at 2% right now so if we enter a recession, it'll be a doozy. Europe has been testing out negative interest rates and are finding out that negative interest rates are not stimulating the economy. The fed is expected to try out quantitative easing mostly by buying various dated treasuries from the open market and a lesser amount of the toxic debt banks are holding like CDOs or mortgage backed securities just like they did in 2008/2009. This all assumes a recession will happen which is debatable. If a recession was guaranteed, the stock market, which functions as a leading indicator, would already be down and it's not -- it's relatively flat.
Post reply on HN