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

/r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

tracingwoodgrains.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 566 posts

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#321

Post by quirino »

wonderwonder wrote: post #291
danenania wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One way to think about it: we already have a basic income in the US. Nobody starves to death in the US. Nobody is denied medical care in the emergency room. In many places (though not everywhere), there are shelters where a person can sleep inside. There are food stamps and a patchwork of welfare programs. However meager they may seem, things like this amount to a form of universal basic income. Does it prevent peopl…

I am not trying to disagree at all, in fact I think we very much need to do more for the poorest among us, especially the kids. Where does that 30k come from though? For 300 million people, that's 9 trillion dollars a year, ~half of GDP. Inflation would be out of control, essentially Venezuela / Zimbabwe levels.

This might be solved by a Negative Income Tax [1]:

> In economics, a negative income tax (NIT) is a system which reverses the direction in which tax is paid for incomes below a certain level; in other words, earners above that level pay money to the state while earners below it receive money.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax

Edit: I'm not economically literate enough to say I fully support this, but the idea is appealing

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#322

Post by b3morales »

isbvhodnvemrwvn wrote: post #297
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cut most of our bureaucratic social safety net (food stamps, disability, social security, etc) and replace it with a system where everyone gets enough for the bare basics. If you were smart, you'd fund it with a carbon tax. In all honesty I don't see UBI becoming a thing until we start automating ourselves into unemployment. People say this would increase inflation. Maybe. Let's trial it with 1% of the population…

That's a tad bit insane - disabled people won't be able to find jobs, whether you want it or not. You are pushing them deeper in poverty by giving them the same amount of money as you give to someone who chooses not to work.

Continuing to have additional assistance for people who need more is not ruled out by what parent said.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#323

Post by wonderwonder »

loceng wrote: post #313
wonderwonder wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not trying to disagree at all, in fact I think we very much need to do more for the poorest among us, especially the kids. Where does that 30k come from though? For 300 million people, that's 9 trillion dollars a year, ~half of GDP. Inflation would be out of control, essentially Venezuela / Zimbabwe levels.

Automation technology has allowed a machine to create 100,000s to millions of a product with very little input from a human to put in the raw resources into it. GDP grows instantly by at least 13% (in the US) if doing a $1,000/month UBI, for example. Etc. Andrew Yang has looked into this a lot - his last two books: “The War On Normal People: The Truth About America's Disappearing Jobs and Why Universal Basic Income I…

"GDP grows instantly by at least 13% (in the US) if doing a $1,000/month UBI, for example"

That really does not track though, sure GDP will go up if the money is spent, but its just spending money that we either borrowed or just printed. Not to mention a ton of that money would be saved, essentially removing it from circulation. Inflation would go out of control. If not, then why not just print 100,000 for each person?

12k a year for 300 million people is ~3.6 trillion. ~20% of gdp a year being printed.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#324

Post by JSavageOne »

sol_invictus wrote: post #178
JSavageOne wrote: post #156

I remember stumbling upon /r/antiwork a few years ago and being so happy I'd stumbled upon a thriving movement that so effectively criticized one of the core principles of society that everyone takes for granted - that everyone must effectively sell their labor to someone else (unless they're rich enough to opt out, or clever enough to create some business or invest their way out). To me anti-work is the recognition…

So what exactly is the alternative for selling your labour to someone else - and more importantly, one that is scalable to the general populace?

Let people work on whatever they want.

People can still get jobs if they want. In fact, most people probably still will. Otherwise nobody would be working in countries where welfare isn't capped, which obviously isn't the case.

Also just think back to all the rich trust fund kids and financially independent people you know (eg. multimillionaires). What percentage of them don't work anymore? In my experience, most continue to work even though they could just live off of their savings/investments. That's because they are free to work on what they themselves enjoy, rather than simply having to sell their labor to make ends meet.

I wish everyone had that freedom. If it were not possible, then at the least it should be a goal we strive towards.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#325

Post by BitwiseFool »

iso1210 wrote: post #92
wsb_mod2 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The site itself leans left, I wouldn't call that manipulation, simply people voting on content they like. However, you are onto something. Almost every single post on r/MurderedByAOC is made by u/LrlOurPresident, and those posts hit the front page on a nearly daily basis.

The world itself leans left - at least compared with the US Left/Right divide, and younger people (who are more likely to be on reddit) lean left. Obviously the site itself leans left.

>"Obviously the site itself leans left."

There's a difference between a large amount of users who lean left making posts and comments that align with their views and what looks to be an obviously coordinated effort from a few dozen powermods and powerusers who seem to work 365 days a year to shape the content and discourse of the site through what appears on the frontpage and in the default subreddits.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#326

Post by ellyagg »

gavinray wrote: post #182
JSavageOne wrote: post #156

I remember stumbling upon /r/antiwork a few years ago and being so happy I'd stumbled upon a thriving movement that so effectively criticized one of the core principles of society that everyone takes for granted - that everyone must effectively sell their labor to someone else (unless they're rich enough to opt out, or clever enough to create some business or invest their way out). To me anti-work is the recognition…

>Universal basic income I'm going to sound like I'm being snarky here, and I promise I'm not. How exactly is this supposed to work? The government prints money and gives it away for free, nobody has to work? I don't say this from a place of privilege. I grew up lower class trailer trash and have been homeless. Maybe I don't understand the concept fully but it seems a bit absurd and unfeasible

Not absurd at all and it doesn't need to be framed as a handout either.

The US should have a single land tax and every American should be paid a citizen's dividend out of that. A "UBI" easily emerges from this fair and rational tax system.

Economists across the political spectrum have advocated a single land tax. How we would force politicians to enact it is left as an exercise for the reader.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_tax

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#327

Post by willcipriano »

diogenesjunior wrote: post #171
UnpossibleJim wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you eat the cake, you can no longer possess it EDIT: Let me make it more clear, as English may not be your first language, if you're asking this question in truth (I sometimes miss sarcasm online, sorry). Cakes can be beautiful things which people (of a certain time period, especially) wanted to show off as a sign of their wealth, as refined sugar was expensive. Once it was eaten, you could no longer display suc…

i hate how americans always assume we are from there and understand everything they say

Ey up duck, ever since I was cut and carried to me British trouble and strife, I've had to learn lots of slang it's done my lump of lead in.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#328

Post by wonderwonder »

quirino wrote: post #321
wonderwonder wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not trying to disagree at all, in fact I think we very much need to do more for the poorest among us, especially the kids. Where does that 30k come from though? For 300 million people, that's 9 trillion dollars a year, ~half of GDP. Inflation would be out of control, essentially Venezuela / Zimbabwe levels.

This might be solved by a Negative Income Tax [1]: > In economics, a negative income tax (NIT) is a system which reverses the direction in which tax is paid for incomes below a certain level; in other words, earners above that level pay money to the state while earners below it receive money. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax Edit: I'm not economically literate enough to say I fully support this,…

So we are going to raise taxes on the middle class to give free money to people that choose not to work? Every single family would then do a calculation to see if its worth the second earner working or if they make more just staying home and getting a UBI. I would not be ok going to work to pay people that have decided that they are fine living on the UBI and don't want to work anymore. Seems like a pretty antagonistic solution to the problem.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#329

Post by dogleash »

zqfm wrote: post #72
kvuj wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's the very force of the reddit hivemind. I have no interest in /r/antiwork nor their ideologies, but they kept popping up on /r/all, so they get a constant influx of people aligned with the reddit mean opinion, which in turn changes the original community. That's what I like about 4chan. In a sea of ungodly acidic garbage lies a golden heart of contrarianism. The posters will argue for a side one day, and 2 ho…

I used to love the 4chan-style contrarian attitude until, in high school people I knew were killed in Iraq. Then I started to realize that those kinds of nihilist attitudes have real-world consequences. Since then, that attitude has become mainstream (or perhaps just my awareness of it) and following has been a constant trail of death and misery. I can't not take it seriously anymore when my friends and loved ones ar…

iPhone September filled the internet up with people that never had "don't believe a single thing you read there" driven into their skulls. 4chan posting was and is a performance act. The attitude isn't the problem, pretending like context isn't a thing is the problem.

When the internet media and regular media merged one of two things had to happen. Either expose how much of a performance act the old school media was from jump street. Or make the idea of believing everything online at first pass a reasonable position to have.

Q anon grew and continues to exist precisely because it is in the best interests of "respectable" media outlets to not teach media literacy to their consumers.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#330

Post by Besticle »

belval wrote: post #16
Besticle wrote: post #5

It takes one bad experience to ruin a reputation. Guy went on Fox news (against the communities) wishes and made millions of people's first impression of r/AntiWork to be negative. In the modern world optics are EVERYTHING and that cannot be understated. Imho the first thing they need to change (which they have with their move to the new subreddit) is renaming it from r/AntiWork to r/WorkReform. Most of the sub (I'd…

It's against the rule to say that you did not read the article, so I won't say it, but: > In the modern world optics are EVERYTHING and that cannot be understated. Imho the first thing they need to change (which they have with their move to the new subreddit) is renaming it from r/AntiWork to r/WorkReform. /r/WorkReform exists already. > Most of the sub (I'd wager >80%) are Americans asking for workers rights that ar…

don't care didn't read
Post reply on HN