Someone is stealing your life (1990) • Hacker News Board

Re: Someone is stealing your life (1990)

#91

Post by rbarooah » Wed, Mar 02, 2011, 8:11 PM UTC

rick888 wrote: post #37

rwl wrote: post #26

The upshot of this piece is much more significant than the comments here have been willing to admit. Yes, you can write the author off as having a whiny, blame-others attitude. Yes, you can say that if he would just take matters into his own hands, the path of entrepreneurship is hard but ultimately rewarding. And maybe that's right. But if you say that, then you have already accepted a premise that the piece is call…

"But if you say that, then you have already accepted a premise that the piece is calling into question, namely: why should that be the choice that everyone faces?" Do you have an alternative? Humans have tried many different methods over many thousands of years and our current system is the result of trying and failing many, many times. It's the most fair and allows pretty much anyone to be successful. Life is diffic…

I'd like to see a list of these 'many' different systems that have been tried.

It seems to me as though we've tried 'kings/dictators' lots of times, and we've watched communism devolve into 'kings/dictators', and we may very well be in the process of watching capitalism devolve into 'kings/dictators' as wealth and political power seem to being concentrated more and more in the hands of a small group.

I personally agree that blaming others doesn't help. Each individual makes their own decision in the end.

Except that most people are forced to go through more than a decade of training to accept employment by others and do as they are told. That puts people at a disadvantage when it comes to learning how to act independently.

The solution may be for each person to make their own choices, but it doesn't help to pretend that there are no forces working against that.

Re: Someone is stealing your life (1990)

#92

Post by drndown2007 » Wed, Mar 02, 2011, 8:16 PM UTC

steveklabnik wrote: post #78

pdx wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should we structure our society so that, for the average person, self-sacrifice is the only way to survive, much less get ahead? So, we should structure our society so that you can get ahead without sacrifice? Do you get to be ahead of me or do I get to be ahead of you? I just want to be clear which of us gets ahead of the other one, what with neither one of us sacrificing anything.

You could both move forward together, rather than ensuring that someone is always ahead and another is farther behind... A rising tide lifts all boats.

And what exactly is going to make that tide rise? Nothing is free -- everyone has to work. We have to sacrifice our time and energy to survive and have some comforts. There's no way around that one.

Re: Someone is stealing your life (1990)

#93

Post by rbarooah » Wed, Mar 02, 2011, 8:18 PM UTC

ajju wrote: post #27

" And to compete in the business community, you'll find yourself having to treat others - your employees - as much like slaves as you can get away with. Pay them as little as they'll tolerate and give them no say in anything, because that's what's most efficient and profitable. Money is the absolute standard. Freedom, and the dignity and well-being of one's fellow creatures, simply don't figure in the basic formula."…

Are you seriously arguing that Google and Zappos are representative of many companies?

Re: Someone is stealing your life (1990)

#94

Post by rbarooah » Wed, Mar 02, 2011, 8:21 PM UTC

tomrod wrote: post #34

tomrod wrote: post #32

As with other comments, I agree the tone is self-defeating. When did we forget the difference between problems and conditions? Problems are things with solutions within our power. Conditions are things without solutions within our power. I feel the author could benefit greatly by learning how to determine what could be solved with one's own effort--and an employer stealing life away is solvable, IMHO, in numerous way…

Also, this piece could be an argument for automation. If the employer is stealing your life, would you not be happier having a machine do your job, giving you the freedom to live your life?

How can that be arranged?

Re: Someone is stealing your life (1990)

#95

Post by rick888 » Wed, Mar 02, 2011, 8:26 PM UTC

grammaton wrote: post #53

rick888 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"But if you say that, then you have already accepted a premise that the piece is calling into question, namely: why should that be the choice that everyone faces?" Do you have an alternative? Humans have tried many different methods over many thousands of years and our current system is the result of trying and failing many, many times. It's the most fair and allows pretty much anyone to be successful. Life is diffic…

"It's the most fair and allows pretty much anyone to be successful." These are highly debatable points.

"These are highly debatable points."

I don't see any debating going on with your post.

Re: Someone is stealing your life (1990)

#96

Post by pbhjpbhj » Wed, Mar 02, 2011, 8:26 PM UTC

jonnathanson wrote: post #74

rgraham wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Courage, bravery, bravado, boldness, gusto, audacity, pluck, fearlessness, risk-tolerance, temerity, tenacity, fortitude, nerve, or stoutheartedness work for you? It is indeed a choice. The consequences of reversing that choice get much more complex as you gain responsibilities in life. Ultimately, however, your life is on you. No one else can care like you do.

Yes, though as a corollary, we need to remember that the "accumulation of responsibilities" is composed largely (though not solely) of the accumulation of a set of outcomes from a set of prior choices.

>we need to remember that the "accumulation of responsibilities" is composed largely (though not solely) of the accumulation of a set of outcomes from a set of prior choices

Our primary responsibility, if it is really one, is to care for ourselves; we have no choice but to take it. One of the main responsibilities we accumulate is the responsibility to care for ageing relatives.

There are other major responsibilities - care for environment, for society - that are not born out of our prior choices (though our ability to handle those responsibilities is greatly affected by our past choices).

Re: Someone is stealing your life (1990)

#97

Post by rick888 » Wed, Mar 02, 2011, 8:32 PM UTC

rbarooah wrote: post #91

rick888 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"But if you say that, then you have already accepted a premise that the piece is calling into question, namely: why should that be the choice that everyone faces?" Do you have an alternative? Humans have tried many different methods over many thousands of years and our current system is the result of trying and failing many, many times. It's the most fair and allows pretty much anyone to be successful. Life is diffic…

I'd like to see a list of these 'many' different systems that have been tried. It seems to me as though we've tried 'kings/dictators' lots of times, and we've watched communism devolve into 'kings/dictators', and we may very well be in the process of watching capitalism devolve into 'kings/dictators' as wealth and political power seem to being concentrated more and more in the hands of a small group. I personally agr…

"It seems to me as though we've tried 'kings/dictators' lots of times, and we've watched communism devolve into 'kings/dictators', and we may very well be in the process of watching capitalism devolve into 'kings/dictators' as wealth and political power seem to being concentrated more and more in the hands of a small group."

Why is it concentrated into a small group? Everyone seems to think the answer is to take the money by force from the people that earned it and give it to the people that "need" it.

"Except that most people are forced to go through more than a decade of training to accept employment by others and do as they are told. That puts people at a disadvantage when it comes to learning how to act independently."

They aren't forced, they choose to make this decision. Anybody can start a company and make money (and not work for anyone), but much fewer choose to go down this path. It's because it takes too much work. Sacrificing your free time for something that may or may not succeed isn't easy. I've been doing it for the past 5 years and I'm only now actually making a profit.

Another problem I've noticed is that many people give up too easily. They want success right now..and if it doesn't happen, they deem it as a failure.

"The solution may be for each person to make their own choices, but it doesn't help to pretend that there are no forces working against that."

This solution is already available and working.

Re: Someone is stealing your life (1990)

#98

Post by Tichy » Wed, Mar 02, 2011, 8:38 PM UTC

The only interesting question is if it really is the case that if you are a have-not, you never have a chance of starting a successful business.

Of course we know that it is possible to start out with little (YC is the living proof of that), but that might only be exceptions to the rule. I am not yet sure that our society really is not skewed. Or at least there might not be a universal law protecting the chances for the "small people". It seems possible that in a few years time, Apple Facebook and Google control the internet and again the options of the small people will be reduced to low-margin sharecropping.

Atm I am leaning to the belief that chances are good enough. If that is the case, the only sensible estimate for the fair price of work seems to be market value. I have yet to see another definition of fair that works. So if the employers can get away with paying their employees little money, it must be because the market does not afford more. There might be millions of jobless waiting to take over their jobs, for example - what would the jobless think about the fair price for a job?

Then again, politics define at least some of the rules of the market (as an extreme example, government could decree a maximum wage) . But if the author thinks the market is broken, he should say so, and state in what way it is broken and how it could possibly be fixed. Just calling somebody a thief doesn't accomplish anything.

Re: Someone is stealing your life (1990)

#99

Post by grammaton » Wed, Mar 02, 2011, 8:39 PM UTC

rick888 wrote: post #95

grammaton wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It's the most fair and allows pretty much anyone to be successful." These are highly debatable points.

"These are highly debatable points." I don't see any debating going on with your post.

See my comments throughout the rest of the thread.

Re: Someone is stealing your life (1990)

#100

Post by rick888 » Wed, Mar 02, 2011, 8:42 PM UTC

georgieporgie wrote: post #48

rick888 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"But if you say that, then you have already accepted a premise that the piece is calling into question, namely: why should that be the choice that everyone faces?" Do you have an alternative? Humans have tried many different methods over many thousands of years and our current system is the result of trying and failing many, many times. It's the most fair and allows pretty much anyone to be successful. Life is diffic…

Do you have an alternative? I'm not the parent poster, but I suggest that co-ops have led to greater employee satisfaction. There are also non-co-op companies where employees all have a say in business decisions, and they have done well and have great employee satisfaction and retention. The current (big) business climate dictates that the sole purpose of a company is to maximize shareholder value at all times, at al…

"There are also non-co-op companies where employees all have a say in business decisions, and they have done well and have great employee satisfaction and retention."

I have a feeling that all of these ideas that you and many others want to try have already been tried. It's resulted in the type of company structures we have today.

Personally, I've been involved in enough groups and organizations to know that not everyone should have a say in business decisions. Lots of people have ridiculous ideas and it would result in the downfall of the group/company (I've seen it happen). Other people just aren't interested. They want to collect their paycheck and go home.

"The current (big) business climate dictates that the sole purpose of a company is to maximize shareholder value at all times, at all costs. I suggest that the purpose of a company is to provide value to all stakeholders, and find a healthy balance."

You can start a company right now that does this. Why not try your theories out? That's the beauty of our current free system (at least in the US). You can try out ideas that may or may not work without having to force everyone to abide by your rules.

"I suggest that the purpose of a company is to provide value to all stakeholders, and find a healthy balance."

This should be up to the person that owns the company. I don't like the idea of forcing others to my ideals.