Live data from Hacker News

Just Be Rich

keenen.xyz

991–1000 of 1001 posts

Re: Just Be Rich

#991

Inequality by itself is not a bad thing. Let's start from there. If 90% of the population had a (sustainable) lifestyle of current dollar millionaires, and the remaining 10% had a (sustainable) lifestyle of dollar billionaires, there would be lots of inequality, but it wouldn't be problematic. Inequality is only bad if you're in a zero-sum game. The rich do have the power to extract rents and "rig the system" to ceme…

> I personally don't believe that an unskilled worker in the US deserves to be paid 10X... A full-time worker deserves to be paid enough to live, period. Unskilled or not. They deserve a roof over their head, food on the table, and basic healthcare. Cost of living varies greatly based on locale, and comparing that number to the poverty wage in Bangladesh is what the invisible hand does, yes, but it's absolutely not w…

Ah yes, a common refrain these days! It feels nice, but as I think carefully about it there are problems. The biggest one is: what's "enough to live"? Enough so you don't die of deprivation of something? That's not enough. But people in America would claim that millions and millions of Americans don't have "enough to live". And yet, I promise you they do. Our poor are fat.

I think the basic issue is: people will disagree vehemently about what "enough to live is", and so your sentiment, while well-meaning, becomes an empty platitude in public discourse.

Re: Just Be Rich

#992
post #7

A lot of people who are just as smart and motived as Elon Musk or Steve Jobs will never be able to start their own companies and get rich. Because they have family obligations that take priority. Because they live outside high-income countries. Because they have no access to support network, so when they fail, they fall all the way to bottom. Because they may have made a crippling mistake in their pasts that now prev…

I'm sorry but this is consolations for the losers. This will sound really harsh and I'm not directing it at you (except where I say "you") but at this kind of tall tale I see a lot.

If they (in the above story) were so smart and motivated (towards starting corps and getting rich), why'd they:

Make a family and let that get in the way of that?

Not H1B or student-visa / postgrad it to "high-income countries"?

Not cultivate and create their support network?

Not overcome "crippling" mistake?

And so on? And endless list of weak excuses for why they'll only ever be mediocre, but hey, they're just as smart as Elon Must and Steve Jobs. That idea can buzz off. If they were, they'd be doing like them.

Did Musk and Jobs always "have it easy"? No, they got back up. Take 100 Musk and Jobs clones, I think only 25 will make it to the same approximate place they did. The rest will get done in by random stuff, and scattered across various levels of successful but not super successful. But I think only 1 or 2 will be "failures" or "average people" without any major success.

That's the character of these people. Succeed anywhere. But the "story" about it in the above comment, this story make it like choices don't matter.

A story to excuse "they"s own failure. A smug content, well, "coulda shoulda woulda" while wrongly taking the responsibility away from "they" and the "Musks and Jobses" for what they each got.

Consolation that disempowers. It's bad to do so. To tell people "poor is a state that something else decided for you. You have not much power to escape."

A person I think must have had it so easy to never have to work out how much you can accomplish if you commit and persevere.

This sort of "smug, content, rich country attitude" that people in "high income countries" can afford to take, because everything, even the "poor levels" are so comfortable.

Easy times, so they never have to get pushed to learn to take themselves higher. Symptom of privilege and an easy, unchallenged life to have these armchair opinions that success is meted out by powerful forces outside the ken of individuals and their choices.

If one comes from adversity, one is more likely to learn their own power. But the easy-rich-country folk can choose to give themselves adversity to make up for this. Sad to see delusions like the above story. This delusion is the poverty of privilege, a sickness of the easy-riding armchair theorists content to coast through effortless existence.

Adversity does crush, and does demoralize, but I bet you 10 folk from "low income countries" have twice the mettle, grit and heart that 100 folks from easy-riding "high income countries" with their easy excuses, and zero-cost "regrets" can afford. Give me 10 of the first lot anyday, better than the whining mewling of ne'er-do-wells too lucky to know how impoverished they really are in spirit, and how much they could have accomplished had they wanted it more.

Heavy sigh. All these loser excuses the above "story" describes here pathetic and not the stuff that these "Musks and Jobses" would let get in their way. I think from the way you write about it, you have no idea. I think you, and many others, are blind to the absolute smug arrogance (and waste via consoling thinking) of telling yourself sure that guy could be as good as Musk but he didn't set it up that way, and made all these mistakes he couldn't recover from, is blaming externalities when he had choices. How dare you take that from them. How dare you take that from yourself. What you chose.

Musk's hardships: awful father, abusive father-son relationship, no SA support network, social anxiety, had to leave SA over "crippling mistake"

Jobs hardships: didn't know his real father, never felt belonged to the adoptive family, no support network had to go his own way, had child early and paid for the "crippling mistake" of abandoning that family, no money in 1976

Bezos hardships: didn't know his real father, bullied in high school, had kids early, made plenty of mistakes

Others: Keanu Reeves, Meghan Markle, you think you can take these people and just say, "they had it easy, the cream floats to the top", any woman who's been successful (has to have 10x the grit of men to move through all the shit they get), any person who gets successful (has to have 10x the grit of non-successful people to get there, and stay there).

Again, I'm sorry this is not at you, but this story that poor stops people, is such a broken story.

Re: Just Be Rich

#993
post #989
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That new technology benefited someone besides the entrepreneur. All the consumers of that technology benefited from it. Some of that technology was directed to providing services for the wealthy but a lot benefited people widely. That is blindingly obvious: smart phones, covid vaccines, cheap screens, etc... A wealth tax of 100% has been tried before. That definitely disincentivized wealth creation. We have run that…

When technologies like my example come about, we get to choose how widely people benefit from it. Automation replacing factory workers certainly could and should benefit people besides the factory owners, but my entire thesis is that the American economy is currently set up to almost entirely benefit the factory owners and shareholders, while being unbelievably heartless to the people being replaced. Sure, prices mig…

Suppose you tax wealth at 70% for anything over say 4 million. Now do that annually or at least periodically. What ends up happening is that unless that person’s wealth grows at greater than 70% for that period, you end up taking all their wealth above the 4 million. Your 70% tax is really a 100% tax minus 4 million.

It’s just math. .30^n as n goes up approaches 0. Do it once and you take 70%. Do it twice and you take 91%. Do it 5 times and you have taken about 99.75% of their wealth.

The factory system as you call it is generating most of the growth in the economy. The rest of the system is increasingly inefficient. Go look at education, healthcare, media, etc... Those are where costs have increased the most for decreasing benefits.

Your approach slows down the growth of the pie and reallocates it into leeches in the system, entrenching them further.

Notice how there is suddenly zero talk of decreasing healthcare costs or making education work better as a whole? Those industries hopped onto the bandwagon and are all for printing money which indirectly go to them.

I am actually for some UBI. My opinion is you create an AMT on revenue and use that to fund UBI. Also, I am for a higher estate/death tax. It resets the playing field but keeps the incentive structure for people to create wealth.

Re: Just Be Rich

#994
post #821

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also not everyone can be good looking, a great singer or a professional basketball player. But you are right communism solves all equality problems by making everybody (except a few select and their families) miserly poor, prevents people (again except a select few) with talent to stand out and kills everyone else who is too unhappy with how things are.

The most hilarious thing about "a few select and their families" being rich is that it's not even true. Having a roomish (1 room per person + a living ropm) flat, a car with the personal driver, a small villa, and access to "closed for others" food and clothing stores was pretty much the most one could achieve -- and non of those things could be bought by money. Heck, that car and the villa? State-owned and attached…

>> Heck, that car and the villa? State-owned and attached to the position, you lose your place -- your successor gets them

What country are you describing, pal? In Soviet Union it was "вольнодумство" ("freethinking"), which was a bad thing, to own personal cars / dachas by the highest members of partocracy only. Because that raised questions concerning their loyalty and belief in the system. But even they bought all that under the name of their wives and children. We've got plenty of memoirs of their scions to stop perpetuating the lies.

Re: Just Be Rich

#995
post #993
post #989

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When technologies like my example come about, we get to choose how widely people benefit from it. Automation replacing factory workers certainly could and should benefit people besides the factory owners, but my entire thesis is that the American economy is currently set up to almost entirely benefit the factory owners and shareholders, while being unbelievably heartless to the people being replaced. Sure, prices mig…

Suppose you tax wealth at 70% for anything over say 4 million. Now do that annually or at least periodically. What ends up happening is that unless that person’s wealth grows at greater than 70% for that period, you end up taking all their wealth above the 4 million. Your 70% tax is really a 100% tax minus 4 million. It’s just math. .30^n as n goes up approaches 0. Do it once and you take 70%. Do it twice and you tak…

One flaw to UBI is that it advantages people who have more children.

Re: Just Be Rich

#996
post #993
post #989

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When technologies like my example come about, we get to choose how widely people benefit from it. Automation replacing factory workers certainly could and should benefit people besides the factory owners, but my entire thesis is that the American economy is currently set up to almost entirely benefit the factory owners and shareholders, while being unbelievably heartless to the people being replaced. Sure, prices mig…

Suppose you tax wealth at 70% for anything over say 4 million. Now do that annually or at least periodically. What ends up happening is that unless that person’s wealth grows at greater than 70% for that period, you end up taking all their wealth above the 4 million. Your 70% tax is really a 100% tax minus 4 million. It’s just math. .30^n as n goes up approaches 0. Do it once and you take 70%. Do it twice and you tak…

Actually their wealth has to grow at much greater than 70% to just maintain their wealth. It has to grow .7/.3 = 233%.

Re: Just Be Rich

#997

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you are building wealth, you are likely to be young (so often healthy) and there is so much information online, libraries cost nothing. So I don't think this is a valid argument.

Note that when you're poor your surroundings are usually also poor. So even if you are young and not yet burdened by health care costs and maybe even have free/good education you might need to drop out or at least spend a lot of your time and money to take care for your relatives. Only when everybody you care about has a stable health/housing/food/(work) situation you get a chance to do something for yourself. Only i…

The majority here don’t understand the downward pull of poverty. Entrepreneurship could work with UBI or a similar solution where those at the bottom are allowed stakes. Currently they are not. They are exhausted working 40 hour weeks on ten dollars with no healthcare.

Re: Just Be Rich

#998
Wealth is not a comparative measure. This is fundamental flaw in wealth-inequality concerns. Me being more wealthy does not make you less wealthy, but that's unfortunately how our covetous monkey brains interpret the world around us.

Wealth at its core is a proxy for quality of life. Today, as compared to 30 years ago, here's what even most low-income households can afford: * airline flights that cost a small percentage of what they used to * immediate access to any information via the internet * vastly improved medical care & surgical procedures, ranging from cancer treatment to lower infant mortality rates * the ability to easily keep in touch with loved ones wherever they are in the world * high definition flat-screen TVs and the ability to watch any any show or movie as soon as desired * online videos to learn how to do almost anything, for those motivated enough to learn * digital cameras in our pocket that allow us to always be ready to capture an amazing moment or scene for our memories

Wealth disparity is only a problem if it is due to theft.

Re: Just Be Rich

#999

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I personally don't believe that an unskilled worker in the US deserves to be paid 10X... A full-time worker deserves to be paid enough to live, period. Unskilled or not. They deserve a roof over their head, food on the table, and basic healthcare. Cost of living varies greatly based on locale, and comparing that number to the poverty wage in Bangladesh is what the invisible hand does, yes, but it's absolutely not w…

Ah yes, a common refrain these days! It feels nice, but as I think carefully about it there are problems. The biggest one is: what's "enough to live"? Enough so you don't die of deprivation of something? That's not enough. But people in America would claim that millions and millions of Americans don't have "enough to live". And yet, I promise you they do. Our poor are fat. I think the basic issue is: people will disa…

> What's "enough to live"? Enough so you don't die of deprivation of something? That's not enough.

It'd be a decent start. Yes, America's destitute have enough food, and yes, the "enough-to live" line is arbitrary: if you're poor in France, the government will provide you with a computer and an internet connection. I'd be happy to have a debate about whether we as a society want to pay for something like that.

But providing all citizens with basic shelter and healthcare should be non-negotiable in the richest nation on earth.

Re: Just Be Rich

#1000

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you might not like this, but 2k was over 2 decades ago, nobody gives a fuck about it now except some HNers and Linux people recent fake news about Bill Gates connections to covid/vaccines probably caused more PR damage to him than all of you combined

Seriously. Every time I read a post like the parent you are replying to, my eyes roll back a little farther in my skull. It's like they teleported from the slashdot comment sections from 2 decades ago and decided to carry on without missing a beat.

I was talking about events from almost two decades ago. Did you think Bill Gates became a philanthropist yesterday?
Post reply on HN