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

Billionaires Build

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 957 posts

Re: Billionaires Build

#461

Post by DoreenMichele »

drewrv wrote: post #235

This essay uses a weak straw-man: the only way to become a billionaire is by exploiting people I think the "principle of charity" or "steel-man" criticism of billionaires isn't that every single billionaire is directly exploiting people. It would be closer to something like this: The problem is that our society has feedback loops that make it hard to escape poverty, and feedback loops that let the wealthy amass more…

What's the point of being the wealthiest nation ever on paper, if there's terrible schools, high infant mortality, and lead in the drinking pipes?

I think it's a little more complicated than that. I think "virtual goods" make it hard to figure out exactly where we stand these days in terms of economic health, a la this past comment of mine:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22028732

Re: Billionaires Build

#462

Post by UK-Al05 »

ruined wrote: post #420
UK-Al05 wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LTV drawn to its logical conclusion leads to exploitation of every worker almost by definition. It is the core of the market economics = exploitation argument. Profit is simply value extracted from workers. As opposed to the arbitrage of the subjective preferences of multiple actors. The modern interpretation of how value can just appear. Those workers who got a return on capital delayed consumption now, for more con…

yes, one might make a moral judgement that exploitation is a tendency of capitalism, if one believes that people who control more capital have structural power over those who control less or no capital, thus narrowing the viable subjective preferences in a way that is "bad". but ltv on its own provides no such judgement, it simply describes the material relationship.

LTV on its own shows very little predictive value in the real world. Which is why it isn't used.

Marginal economics explains and models a lot things we see in reality.

I'm much more likely to believe a model that has predictive ability.

Re: Billionaires Build

#463

Post by thn-gap »

Aunche wrote: post #372
chillwaves wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither category should exist. The fact billionaires exist is an indictment against our system and how we allocate resources.

I think most people agree that a book author deserves a couple dollars every time someone purchases their media. JK Rowling's stories have been read and watched billions of times? Who deserves to control that capital more than JK Rowling herself?

Those people in the production chain of her media, who suffer due to their poor economical status.

Or at least I'd consider it to have more priority, than J.K Rowling amassing few more millions herself.

I wouldn't have such big issue with Billionaires, if there weren't so much suffering from the exploited population.

Re: Billionaires Build

#464

Post by dredmorbius »

UK-Al05 wrote: post #355
curun1r wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Paul is fundamentally not understanding the argument behind “billionaires exploit workers.” It isn’t that billionaires are fundamentally bad people or that they’ve accumulated their wealth through misdeeds. But what it is is that it’s basically impossible to accumulate that amount of wealth through work. Instead, you have to be able to capture the difference between the value of someone else’s work and what y…

This is basically the labour theory of value and ignores the value of capital and organisation. Some guy delivering stuff in a garage is not going to be nowhere near as productive as an Amazon worker. The crucial bit that people miss is that it is capital, goodwill and organisation allows employees to generate so much money in the first place. Basically the sum is greater than its parts. If you want to know where pro…

The value of any commodity, therefore, to the person who possesses it, and who means not to use or consume it himself, but to exchange it for other commodities, is equal to the quantity of labour which it enables him to purchase or command. Labour, therefore, is the real measure of the exchangeable value of all commodities.

-- Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, Book 1,Chapter 5 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_I/...

Re: Billionaires Build

#465

Post by Aunche »

akg_67 wrote: post #453
Aunche wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bezo's wealth comes from his shares, which he had since the beginning. 20 years ago, anyone who worked at Amazon could have used a small fraction of their wages to buy Amazon shares. If they had, they'd be millionaires. However, that's a risk that only already rich people are willing to take.

Tell that to Amazon warehouse worker making $10-20 an hour that instead of putting food on the table, roof on the head of his family, he should have bought Amazon shares. Bezo is epitome of what’s wrong with America and American “capitalist” system.

New Amazon workers aren't the ones who made it a trillion-dollar company. The older ones were. By your standards, the only way Amazon could compensate them fairly is to pay workers in Amazon shares and force them to hold it.

Re: Billionaires Build

#466

Post by ajmadesc »

api wrote: post #342
claudeganon wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, I was just responding to the question, whose posing is often used to suggest that the US is the best of all possible resource allocation worlds. I don't want to live under a regime like the CCP, but we did just run this experiment and the U.S. system of resource allocation failed miserably.

I don't think it's the best of all possible worlds, but it is better than some. Only a small percentage of billionaires do incredibly valuable things, but those who do are doing things that I can't imagine the US government of today ever doing. The US government would be having meetings to schedule the meeting to discuss the meeting schedule, or fighting over culture war issues.

You don't think that the culture war issues are manufactured to distract the masses from endless war, tax cuts, corporate subsidies, etc?

I think that the government has been sabotaged. Intentionally impairing it's functions to justify the critiques of functionally.

"I want to make the government small enough to drown in a tub"

"Government doesn't work, elect me and I'll prove it"(that one's a joke but conveys the point)

Re: Billionaires Build

#467

Post by 8note »

stopachka wrote: post #347
yellowapple wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, just because someone squanders an advantage doesn't mean that one didn't have an advantage to begin with. And that's the fundamental difference between the child of a musician v. the child of a billionaire. In order for the musicians' child to be a prodigy like one's parent, there's still considerable training and practice required. In order for the billionaire's child to be a billionaire like one's parent, t…

> That is: the passing down of musical aptitude through multiple generations requires each generation to put in approximately the same labor as the previous. Let’s think on that a bit. Consider, if a parent is a musical prodigy, it’s akin to having a fantastic coach at an early age. They can teach you hard-earned insights, help you make the right choices, introduce you to the right people. This makes achievement cons…

Investing well is a worse strategy that investing long. Doing a real low percent gain for 500 years is going to be more predictable than investing well over 5 years

Re: Billionaires Build

#468

Post by [deleted] »

zd123 wrote: post #366
throwaway09223 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a straw man, it is an extremely common belief and it deserves to be addressed and debunked. My social media is stuffed to the brim with people posting exactly this sentiment. It is true that there are other, more reasonable beliefs.

Lets assume it is not a strawman, what empirical evidence suggests that this is not the case? I mean, as an example, billionaires have access to top notch lawyers that lower their tax bill, look at Trump’s recent tax filings for example. Can you reasonably argue that they are not unfairly taking advantage of society, and by extension its people? What about government lobbying etc. I mean the list goes on. Personally…

[deleted]

Re: Billionaires Build

#469

Post by vondur »

cactus2093 wrote: post #417
bedhead wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right about the feedback loops that make it hard to escape poverty. The most uncomfortable one to talk about is basic social network effects. Two people meet at some prestigious college and get married - are we shocked they have children who are predisposed for success? Besides from having god-given IQ, they are likely some combination of ambitious, punctual, respectful of authority, long-term oriented, hard-…

In your explanation I see the feedback loop that makes it easier for you and your children to stay out of poverty if you're already successful. I don't see a feedback loop that makes it hard to escape poverty. Why did the high school dropouts drop out in the first place, and why does that make their kid more likely to drop out? Ideally their kid should still have access to public school education, with all the tools…

When children have a rough family/home life growing up, that can create some big obstacles to overcome later in life. If their parents don't see a value in education, then the children tend to inherit that outlook took, thus continuing the cycle. Of course, some will work there way out of it, but I'd imagine that number is small compared to those who get stuck in it.

Re: Billionaires Build

#470

Post by jacknews »

PG confuses 'bad people' with a bad system.

I don't think Zuckerberg, or Bezos are necessarily bad people, but they are the beneficiaries of a bad system, which squeezes work and wealth from poorer people and sucks it to the top.

Post reply on HN