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

The Real Class War

americanaffairsjournal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 634 posts

Re: The Real Class War

#171

Post by xwowsersx »

> But it is precisely for these reasons that the working class is unlikely to be decisive in shaping politics for the foreseeable future. However one defines the working class, it has scarcely any political agency in the current system and no apparent means for acquiring any. At most, working-class voters can cast their ballots for an “un­acceptable” candidate, but they can exercise no influence on policy formation or agency personnel, much less on governance areas that have been transferred to technocratic bodies.

What's the basis for this sweeping claim?

Re: The Real Class War

#172

Post by sodafountan »

Virtually every problem listed in this article is solved if bitcoin continues its historic rise - and yet you mention bitcoin on hacker news and you're down-voted to oblivion, it really is unbelievable.

The "Elites" are getting richer because capital is being used to accumulate more capital through dividends on stocks and revenue producing assets. The only reason money is being funneled into these assets is because they have the best return on investment, period. Money goes where it can get the best return.

The script gets flipped if that asset is a hard, un-inflatable asset like bitcoin with a built in scarcity mechanism.

Bitcoin doesn't have a dividend, if you're part of the 0.1 percent you can buy a ton of it, but in order to realize any gains you have to sell it and if you can't replenish it you'll have to go back to work to earn more. Of course all of that is in theory, a lot of the truly rich people in this world have income producing businesses and other assets aside from stocks but you could argue that that's a lot better than money simply producing more money.

The world desperately needs bitcoin to succeed.

Re: The Real Class War

#173

Post by Gunax »

rustyboy wrote: post #100
frockington1 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather live in a country where an individual can save and invest to become a billionaire. Look at America vs Canada, Scandinavia, England, and Germany the last decade. Where is the growth and innovation in those countries? Why do brilliant people flock to America to start their start up? I want to live in a country with opportunity, not one of equality. Thankfully with an American or EU passport you can choos…

That's a false dichotomy. There is no reason that you can't have the opportunity to be a billionaire, while making sure that no one goes homeless or dies from a preventable disease. People love to point to FANNG but the reality is America did this for the boomers, union membership was over 30% and we still had super wealthy people. CEO to average employee income was around 80:1, now it's closer to 250:1. When 3 peopl…

I don't agree that wealth is the factor that should be measured instead of income. Income is the number that matters--wealth is just unspent income.

I think wealth is just chosen because the differences are more dramatic.

Re: The Real Class War

#174

Post by WhompingWindows »

Wh1skey wrote: post #165

The story of Rome’s fall is both complicated and relatively straightforward yet it eerily resembles America: The state became too big and chaotic; the influence of money and private interests corrupted public institutions; and social and economic inequalities became so large that citizens lost faith in the system altogether and gradually fell into the arms of tyrants and demagogues. If all of that sounds familiar, we…

Not to mention they were all poisoned by lead, using it for sweeteners, pipes, and for their chalices and cups.

Re: The Real Class War

#176

Post by take_a_breath »

mc32 wrote: post #153
take_a_breath wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see how it’s any different, let alone “amateurish”. Clinton cleared the way for the internet to create as much wealth as it has (Telecommunications Act of 1996). Every President has had positive policies and negative policies, so we could play that game all day. Acting like deregulating airlines and busting unions are on the same level is curious. One has created some new companies (and many corporate bankrup…

Income stagnation is directly correlated to outsourcing and globalization. Union busting’s contribution to stagnation is sort of a side show. That’s to say strong unions cannot stop jobs from being sent overseas. What good does it do you to have a union without members because all work has been sent overseas? None! That’s Clinton and his MFN and fastracking into WTO. That’s who we have to thank as well as everyone wh…

You are taking theories and treating them as scientific facts.

Is it possible that weakening of unions made it easier for politicians to pass globalization policies which ultimately lead to wage stagnation?

Is it possible that trickle-down economics (lower taxes on the rich) lead to concentrated political power for the wealthy who were able to push policies that benefit them (Citizens United, Right to Work, stock buybacks, carried interest loopholes, NAFTA)?

Treating 40 years of economic history as a simple binary does nobody any favors. These things are very complex and deserve more than a brush-off.

Re: The Real Class War

#177

Post by whytaka »

dlkf wrote: post #104
frockington1 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather live in a country where an individual can save and invest to become a billionaire. Look at America vs Canada, Scandinavia, England, and Germany the last decade. Where is the growth and innovation in those countries? Why do brilliant people flock to America to start their start up? I want to live in a country with opportunity, not one of equality. Thankfully with an American or EU passport you can choos…

> I would rather live in a country where an individual can save and invest to become a billionaire. Steinbeck has a dynamite line about this. It's a goofy point at any rate because there is no evidence that you can realistically _save_ to become a billionaire. It's typically inherited. > Where is the growth and innovation in those countries? Literally everywhere? A fun exercise is to read about some burgeoning Canadi…

> Steinbeck has a dynamite line about this.

I'd appreciate you quoting it.

Re: The Real Class War

#178

Post by vonmoltke »

akhilcacharya wrote: post #156
barry-cotter wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yet the professional class has only marginal voting power and comparatively little to contribute to political funding, so it's not surprising that the astute ones are concerned. Likelihood of voting is highly correlated with education. I wouldn’t be surprised if the top ten percent are three or four times more likely to vote than the bottom decile. Money is also far less important in politics than many think. If mo…

> If money won elections Michael Bloomberg would have been president long ago, Mike Bloomberg has won every election he's run in, which is exactly 3 elections. Not the best example.

> If money won elections [Steve Forbes] would have been president long ago,

More appropriate example then. You can add Perot to that pile as well.

Re: The Real Class War

#179

Post by nyolfen »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #126
Pigo wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe if China played by the rules, and did something about ip theft...

China IS doing something about industrial espionage: they're supporting and encouraging it. This isn't dissimilar from what all the Western economies did with industrial espionage during the 1800's. In Rhode Island, we have the first mill in the US, known as Slater Mill, which was created by an industrial spy who stole secrets from England. The English were ahead in industry for textiles, coal mining, steam engines,…

no one is acting surprised, they’re acting upset, and rightly

Re: The Real Class War

#180

Post by raldi »

Clickbait antidote:

The real class war is between the 0.1 percent and (at most) the 10 percent—or, more precisely, between elites primarily dependent on capital gains and those primarily dependent on profes­sional labor.

Post reply on HN