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

Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses

businessinsider.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 248 posts

Re: Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses

#181

Post by ewindal »

frashelaw wrote: post #170
jb775 wrote: post #51

Stories like this are clearly intended to support the politics behind raising the min wage...and Business Insider is a known propaganda machine for the left. What the story intentionally doesn't point out is that a hike in minimum wage wouldn't impact Wall Street bonuses whatsoever (or business exec salary/bonuses). The cost would be shifted to non-unionized middle class workers, such as software devs via wage stagna…

> corporate business newspaper is a mouthpiece for the "left" you mean liberals, who are by no measure left: they simply want woke capitalism. leftists want to end capitalism.

Socialists and leftwards want to end capitalism. There’s a large spectrum of leftists that don’t want that, ie. social democracy.

Re: Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses

#182

Post by EdwinLarkin »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #130
worker767424 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked at some tech jobs in Wellington and shocked at how little they pay compared to SF. The cost of living in cheaper, but not that much cheaper.

NZ pay in general is very poor compared to other developed countries in my opinion. When you compare SF tech salaries to NZ tech salaries it's just ridiculous though. I would say SF TC is 4x or more than NZ salaries (Stock grants are not common) for similar positions.

SF salaries are ridiculous compared to anywhere else. Not even Switzerland can compare. The only places where you can earn just as much as you do in SF is consulting anywhere in the rich world or those few positions in Chinese megacities.

I am actually surprised SF did not lower salaries exactly for this because there's nowhere else to go if you want to at least keep your SF salary.

Re: Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses

#183

Post by EdwinLarkin »

ewindal wrote: post #181
frashelaw wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> corporate business newspaper is a mouthpiece for the "left" you mean liberals, who are by no measure left: they simply want woke capitalism. leftists want to end capitalism.

Socialists and leftwards want to end capitalism. There’s a large spectrum of leftists that don’t want that, ie. social democracy.

In my opinion the existence of radical left or socialists is a testament of capitalism. These forces exist as a regulation force on the market.

Re: Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses

#184

Post by noxer »

jbverschoor wrote: post #132
Aunche wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bailouts just encourage them to take greater risks, leveraging debt in dangerous ways that will blow up the system again. In practice, this hasn't happened. As a whole, financial institutions are more risk-adverse than ever. Keep in mind, that they don't want another Dodd-Frank.

Why do you think so? The whole GME thing could potentially bring infinite losses

No it can not. It just moves money to someone else which usually leads to more stable markets because thous who bet wrong lose and the other win.

Re: Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses

#185

Post by bawolff »

mstipetic wrote: post #166
bawolff wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no such thing as infinite money. Cash just symbolizes value its not actually "value", and you can't make infinite value by just printing infinite cash.

I’m not the person you should be explaining that to

You seem to think that the government's control of the money supply means its easy for them to make a profit.

Re: Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses

#186

Post by Melting_Harps »

gremlinsinc wrote: post #167
Melting_Harps wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What kind of technology enabled wealth gap in feudal society? It seems it was more about religion being used to subdue people. I'd argue the advent of centralized currencies did more harm than any and all standing armies combined. When you think about what a parasitical entity does in biology, you realize that simply killing a host is not evolutionary advantageous--their are 3 types of parasitism, not to be confuse…

What do you consider centralized currency? I mean, Rome had coin, I'm not sure about egypt and ancient sumeria, but I know they had gold and plenty of slaves. People have been warring and exploiting others since civilization... I can't say 10k years back before the move towards grouping in clans and cities... But technological currency also could "right the wrongs"... Imagine if each person could only have 1 bank acc…

> Imagine if each person could only have 1 bank account on a blockchain, verified by identity which is somewhat centralized but governed by a DAO.

Are you seriously pitching me the DAO, like I don't know it was one of the biggest exit scams in all of Cryptocurrency History?

Listen, you ETH guys worship Vitalik and walk around pounding that koolaid that you give us all that work in the space a bad name, give it a rest... I mean it, money is something ETH just isn't good at. In fact, I still cannot see any value or a usecase in ETH to this day besides a bunch of pump and dump schemes that tarnish what BTC and other alts have done.

I was forced to use solidity and hyperledger at an enterprise level for a megacorp, tied what the ripple and stellar idiots that were brought on without my consent to a project I had been brought no I had no choice but to leave the project and the Industry for some time. We had to loss weeks/months of work to make something that had worked in BTC (multi-sig escrow) for years just because it sounded better if it had a functionality in those 3 useless alts.

To this day I still cannot believe Vitalik, a former Unsystem developer, didn't just make this all up and his hiding all of exit scam money to contribute to the BTC network in some way; none of it adds up at all, how do you from squatting and working on FOSS in Spain to being best buddies with Putin? Chances are had he just held onto a fraction of his BTC from back then they'd all be millionaires since 2017.

But to answer you question:

Centralized currency: The means to issue and control the medium of exchange in any system (eg: civilization, country) and impose arbitrary and even malicious actions to detriment of those who reject or oppose your currency. Often a role held by Nation States and by extension Central Banks that preclude said entities.

Re: Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses

#187

Post by mstipetic »

bawolff wrote: post #185
mstipetic wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not the person you should be explaining that to

You seem to think that the government's control of the money supply means its easy for them to make a profit.

No I think that it's easy for people that got the bailout to make a profit while being flush with cash in a crisis which they themselves caused, with no repercussions. Printing that money devalues everyone else's money, so it's basically a transfer of wealth from everyone to wall street.

Re: Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses

#188

Post by Melting_Harps »

TeeMassive wrote: post #159
Melting_Harps wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a whole, financial institutions are more risk-adverse than ever. And this includes Hedgefunds, like Melvin Capital, Citadel and the like? Doesn't the Robinhood and GME thing DIRECTLY contradict what you're saying? Furthermore, they are over leveraged on real estate in teh US and BlackRock accounts for every greater RE holdings than post 2008 housing crisis. I'm not sure what you are talking about, Dodd-Frank is…

> And this includes Hedgefunds, like Melvin Capital, Citadel and the like? Doesn't the Robinhood and GME thing DIRECTLY contradict what you're saying? Meme stocks are a thing born out of social media just very recently and will most likely not happen that much given that now edge funds are aware of it and have probably already deployed the appropriate counter-measures.

> Meme stocks are a thing born out of social media just very recently and will most likely not happen that much given that now edge funds are aware of it and have probably already deployed the appropriate counter-measures.

Tesla was called a meme stock, and it turned Elon into the World richest man (depending on the day or week) and he went on to invest in BTC and then pump DOGE in defiance of the SEC who stand on the sidelines with the credit agencies who arbitrarily enforce the 'law' and 'regulate' when it see's fit.

How exactly are you arriving at your conclusion with any reason or logic behind it?

Meme stocks, an overly used and frankly absurd notion as it is all can be seen that way since it's all just smoke and mirrors hiding a very pernicious casino business model at the end of the day, but lets say they are; what stops any of them from stopping them from what was once called 'vigilante investors' in the early 2000s?

Hell they couldn't even stop ponzi schemes like Bernie Maddof, or outright fraud like credit default swaps that allowed the World economy in 2008 to blow.

If anything it shows just how entrenched the politicla class and the financial class collude to extract wealth from Society with little to no punishment, think MF Global.

Re: Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses

#189

Post by Negitivefrags »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #162
Negitivefrags wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alturnative is letting things fail. It causes a lot of pain in the short term with people losing their jobs and general economic fallout. This causes a lot of suffering. But on the other hand, the rich will lose more, and during the rebuilding a different set of people will gain the upper hand and end up on top. It's hard to get the political will to actually allow what needs to happen to fix wealth inequality.

> But on the other hand, the rich will lose more Will they, though? Going by absolute value, perhaps, but that's nowhere near the whole story. Yes, if owners of a megacorp lose $100M, they've lost more than all their employees combined - but they still have a $1B between them in other assets, offshore bank accounts, whatnot, so they stay rich , while their employees suddenly find themselves in a life-threatening emer…

If you are going to make the argument that the rich losing large sums of money doesn’t matter much, couldn’t you use the same line of reasoning to argue that the rich gaining large sums of money doesn’t matter much either?

Re: Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses

#190

Post by anoncake »

donw wrote: post #117
bawolff wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's "no technology", because ancient rome was full of giant wealth gaps. Maybe if you mean hunter-gatherer societies, but i don't really know enough about them to comment.

Rome was an incredibly advanced society with a great deal of technology, though.

Not compared to today. If technology and wealth gap were linked, ancient Rome would have been much more equal than our society.
Post reply on HN