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

Thomas Sowell interview

city-journal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 457 posts

Re: Thomas Sowell interview

#71

Post by hedberg10 »

mc32 wrote: post #51
kypro wrote: post #37

Thomas Sowell has had a huge impact on me and my views on economics. I'm from a poor working-class background and am often irritated by the needless language barriers of academics. > “Too many academics write as if plain English is beneath their dignity,” Sowell once said, “and some seem to regard logic as an unconstitutional infringement of their freedom of speech.” Sowell is unique in this respect. He's book, "Basi…

I wish other writers would take this to heart. Reading The New Yorker it’s as if their language is a shibboleth and if they didn’t use it, it would alienate their audience for using average language, yet they are the same people who pontificate and pretend they advocate for the lower classes.

Let them. If you have the psychological need to constantly show how smart you are, your life will be very stressful indeed.

You will want to manipulate others to get confirmation of your acrobatics and always be on the lookout for disproof. This will lead to you limiting your life severely for fear of actually finding it.

-former smartness showoff who now acts betterer

Re: Thomas Sowell interview

#72

Post by auganov »

djrobstep wrote: post #31
jakebasile wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does he state that the poor did not earn their wages while the rich did? It seems to me he's saying that it is ok for everyone to keep their earnings across all income brackets.

Saying that somebody's pre tax income is "their earnings" in the first place is precisely the problem. The tax you pay doesn't belong to you and you didn't earn it - the law is very clear on this.

It doesn't even say that much. It simply ridicules proponents of wealth redistribution for sometimes calling those opposed "greedy", while they themselves are being "greedy" in going after other people's money. Whether taxes are okay isn't discussed.

Re: Thomas Sowell interview

#73

Post by deiznof »

ghufran_syed wrote: post #68
deiznof wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that calling out systemic racism is like a Nazi propaganda tactic. Look up any of his other views on literally any social issues, it's just whatever Fox News-esque conservative would want to hear. Like, somehow it's not the government snatching people up in vans that is Nazi-like, it's actually the anti-racist protesters that are Nazi's to the genius brain of Thomas Sowell. How do people idolize this guy?

if you define “conservative” as “wrong”, then I understand your point, but then your statement is trivial - it’s a statement of opinion, “sowell is wrong”, masquerading as evidence and using 12 times as many words as needed.

Yes, I am giving my opinion on Thomas Sowell in a post about Thomas Sowell. My post is very short, like a third of it is a quote from him. And I didn't define conservative as wrong, I said he is a standard, non-special conservative AND wrong. What are your actual disagreements?

Re: Thomas Sowell interview

#74

Post by cma »

pjc50 wrote: post #64
amachefe wrote: post #3

In this time of ultra conformism and cancel culture. It is refreshing to read an articulate alternative view points. Sowell has an experience of with sides of the debate and brings that experience to his writing. I can't recommend him enough

What do you mean by "Cancel culture" here and what specifically do you think might apply to Sowell?

Be charitable, he could be talking about the Dixie Chicks or anchors that were fired for questioning the Iraq war. Or for the biggest example of modern cancel culture, Kaepernick's firing after targeting by the president.

Re: Thomas Sowell interview

#75

Post by jahaja »

deiznof wrote: post #61
jahaja wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was?

No, it was a COINTELPRO operation. They made up a bunch of propaganda for character assassination that, to no surprise, never got released because it didn't exist.

I'm aware of that, just wanted the poster to explain himself.

Re: Thomas Sowell interview

#76

Post by deiznof »

alexarnesen wrote: post #69
deiznof wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, it's a purely reductionist take on taxes while showing complete ignorance on who decides how much people earn in society. I wish people would stop listening to Sowell like he was the Jesus of economics. Outside of theory, he fumbles all the time.

I'm not trying to be obtuse... but isn't "who decides how much people earn" always the two people that enter into free association with one another, either by an employment contract or a sales contract?

It completely ignores political corruption 100%. It completely ignores union stomping over the past 60 years, among other things. This is what I mean by his ultra reductionist views, he refuses to consider external factors when he talks about social issues, which is weird for a top economist to do.

Re: Thomas Sowell interview

#77

Post by jahaja »

schemy wrote: post #54
jahaja wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was?

Yes, the FBI director sent him a letter to kill himself or have his affairs exposed.

Having "affairs" doesn't make someone a creep, and certainly doesn't deserve even the slightest mention when assessing the man.

Re: Thomas Sowell interview

#78

Post by sumtechguy »

brickmort wrote: post #49

I've read six Thomas Sowell books in the past few years. His book Basic Economics is a classic, but my favorite of his is Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One . It covers the things that the former does but, as the title suggests, applies it to a real-life scenario. He then walks through the scenario as it plays out to demonstrate his point to the reader. For example, when a city artificially lowers the rent,…

I like the book 'Economics in one lesson' by Henry Hazlitt which does something similar.

Re: Thomas Sowell interview

#79

Post by SaltyBackendGuy »

hedberg10 wrote: post #71
mc32 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish other writers would take this to heart. Reading The New Yorker it’s as if their language is a shibboleth and if they didn’t use it, it would alienate their audience for using average language, yet they are the same people who pontificate and pretend they advocate for the lower classes.

Let them. If you have the psychological need to constantly show how smart you are, your life will be very stressful indeed. You will want to manipulate others to get confirmation of your acrobatics and always be on the lookout for disproof. This will lead to you limiting your life severely for fear of actually finding it. -former smartness showoff who now acts betterer

> Let them.

Very sound advice.

Somewhat a tangent. I used to play a lot of poker. One angle that would work frequently to get information from people is exactly this.

Say something like "Ah you had AJ", even though you don't believe that. Then you might get a response "No I had __" or they might even show you their hand.

It's all tide to the need to prove how smart we are as humans.

Re: Thomas Sowell interview

#80

Post by justin66 »

deiznof wrote: post #53
alanaut24 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly do you disagree with?

The idea that calling out systemic racism is like a Nazi propaganda tactic. Look up any of his other views on literally any social issues, it's just whatever Fox News-esque conservative would want to hear. Like, somehow it's not the government snatching people up in vans that is Nazi-like, it's actually the anti-racist protesters that are Nazi's to the genius brain of Thomas Sowell. How do people idolize this guy?

> The idea that calling out systemic racism is like a Nazi propaganda tactic. Look up any of his other views on literally any social issues, it's just whatever Fox News-esque conservative would want to hear.

With regard to the Fox News-watching American conservative base and bad Nazi analogies, it's useful to keep in mind what you're dealing with. Grover Norquist said in an interview in 2003 that the estate tax is equivalent to the Holocaust. When Terry Gross politely allowed him to walk that statement back, he said that it's just morally equivalent to the Holocaust. [2] Of course all the thinking involved is total bullshit and the man is batshit crazy, but the interview is not without interest.

Such a lunatic must be the object of widespread derision on the right, right? Nope. Almost all Republican lawmakers sign his bizarre loyalty oath upon taking office, pledging they're not going to raise taxes. [3]

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2004/01/06/o...

[2] https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=145298...

[3] https://www.businessinsider.com/who-is-grover-norquist-pledg...

Post reply on HN