I was tricked into thinking I had “grit” • Hacker News Board

Re: I was tricked into thinking I had “grit”

#211

Post by koheripbal » Thu, May 07, 2020, 5:25 PM UTC

lonelappde wrote: post #115

koheripbal wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...and that's why he also said on Monday: "If you took someone and asked them, without them knowing whether they'd be born boy or girl, black or white, with or without any relevant talent, or to rich or poor parents, and asked them when and where they'd like to be born. They'd answer, 'The US, in modern times'. There is no place on Earth, and no time in history, that a person can make the most of their talents, as to…

The problem with the that quote is that "it's better now than before" is used my large political movements to justify cancelling the effort that got us here, and letting us backslide.

I've never seen anyone on consequence suggest we cancel any major social program or civil right.

That sounds more like irrational fear on your part.

Re: I was tricked into thinking I had “grit”

#212

Post by koheripbal » Thu, May 07, 2020, 5:26 PM UTC

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #114

koheripbal wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...and that's why he also said on Monday: "If you took someone and asked them, without them knowing whether they'd be born boy or girl, black or white, with or without any relevant talent, or to rich or poor parents, and asked them when and where they'd like to be born. They'd answer, 'The US, in modern times'. There is no place on Earth, and no time in history, that a person can make the most of their talents, as to…

There’s a subtle issue with that quote: one of the predicates is “with or without any relevant talent”, but the answer of the modern US seems to assume talent that one can make the most of. Why not pick a modern country with a better social safety net, lower inequality, and greater economic and class mobility?

> Why not pick a modern country with a better social safety net, lower inequality, and greater economic and class mobility?

If you have no talent or ambition, that definitely makes sense. You are better off in Sweden, Germany, or France.

Re: I was tricked into thinking I had “grit”

#213

Post by unreal37 » Fri, May 08, 2020, 3:20 PM UTC

projektfu wrote: post #176

unreal37 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That article starts with an incorrect premise. "America isn’t supposed to allow moats, much less reward them. Our economic system, we claim, is founded on free and fair competition." That's called a straw man. No one has ever said America "doesn't allow moats" and that there is "free and fair competition". The whole point of business is, within the law, to build a moat that makes it impossible for a late-starting com…

Funny, I thought the point of business was to exchange goods and services in mutually beneficial ways. The rest is rent seeking.

That quote is probably right out of a business school textbook.

Any Apple customer will tell you they "benefit" from spending all their computer and phone money with Apple. Apple trying to build a moat around their ecosystem doesn't preclude mutual benefit.

Re: I was tricked into thinking I had “grit”

#214

Post by projektfu » Fri, May 08, 2020, 3:57 PM UTC

unreal37 wrote: post #213

projektfu wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, I thought the point of business was to exchange goods and services in mutually beneficial ways. The rest is rent seeking.

That quote is probably right out of a business school textbook. Any Apple customer will tell you they "benefit" from spending all their computer and phone money with Apple. Apple trying to build a moat around their ecosystem doesn't preclude mutual benefit.

The vast majority of businesses are what I describe. The large economic profits are mostly rents accumulated by a small fraction of businesses, in a Pareto distribution. I argue we’d do fine with less of the rentiers.

Re: I was tricked into thinking I had “grit”

#215

Post by yaitsyaboi » Sat, May 09, 2020, 12:59 AM UTC

koheripbal wrote: post #208

yaitsyaboi wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like a very mid 20th century POV. Which I totally get for Buffett. Most rankings of social mobility put the US outside the top 20. The highs are higher here, but the path to get there, especially from the bottom 10%, is more difficult than almost any country we consider a peer.

I don't think that's accurate. Economic mobility in the US has been so high for so long, that it stands to reason that most families in the US have already achieved their potential. What is probably a more telling indicator is the degree to which poor IMMIGRANTS are able to move up - an indicator that the US dominates. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/11/1/20942642/s...

I don't think that stands to reason at all. That sounds laughable, especially in the context of the heinous things American society did to purposefully black families from "achieving their potential". While immigrant families' ancestors were in their home countries accruing assets, educational opportunities, and (relatively more) equal access to what their country had to offer, black people here were held back from their white peers. Home equity, educational opportunities, freedom from police harassment, the ability to organize politically without facing literal terrorism.

Re: I was tricked into thinking I had “grit”

#216

Post by natmaka » Sat, May 09, 2020, 8:33 AM UTC

In my opinion the ultimate form of "grit", which is something along the "NEVER QUIT!" line, is (as are most "ultimate forms" of anything...) completely counterproductive and even dangerous.

If nothing important is in line there is no good reason to dissipate resources into something when doing otherwise would be more efficient.

Re: I was tricked into thinking I had “grit”

#217

Post by oska » Sat, May 09, 2020, 3:54 PM UTC

unreal37 wrote: post #213

projektfu wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, I thought the point of business was to exchange goods and services in mutually beneficial ways. The rest is rent seeking.

That quote is probably right out of a business school textbook. Any Apple customer will tell you they "benefit" from spending all their computer and phone money with Apple. Apple trying to build a moat around their ecosystem doesn't preclude mutual benefit.

I think most Apple customers will tell you that Apple products are too expensive.

Most 'moats' are not beneficial to the consumer. What's beneficial to the consumer is competition, and companies innovating, not building moats, to stay ahead of their competitors.