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

Choose your status game wisely

ofdollarsanddata.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 344 posts

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#311

Post by AussieWog93 »

pdonis wrote: post #310
AussieWog93 wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>pilfering pension funds, and then declaring bankruptcy That's a bit of a straw man there. The classic target for these corporate raiders is a business whose capital (real estate, equipment, IP etc.) is worth more than the total market cap of the business itself (which, for most established businesses is a proxy for profit). In this way, the typical corporate raider buys up a business who is using a valuable asset in…

> That's a bit of a straw man there. No, it isn't. See below. > In the process, they'll generally fuck over a whole lot of workers The only way they can do that, since the workers' pensions were an obligation of the company that got broken up, is to declare that company bankrupt and void the obligation. But bankruptcy is not supposed to be a way to make money by voiding a company's obligations and then selling off it…

It's a straw man because literally nobody here was arguing that there is value created in the nullification of employee pensions.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#312

Post by klyrs »

darkerside wrote: post #309
SubuSS wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why rule out the rich kids so glibly? Wealth preservation is something that doesn’t get talked about - imo this is what the rich kids should be schooled in assuming they aren’t good enough to multiply their wealth like Elon. They keep it together for a future generation to take advantage of.

Value that was created in the past is still value, is it not? Parent post created a conflated straw man of ancestors stealing wealth plus inheritance. So what if you are rich because your parents created value? Did the value they created die with them?

> Value that was created in the past is still value, is it not?

That's your claim, not ours. Cotton plantation owners made obscene profits from the literal blood of slaves. Did the plantation owners create the value? No, the slaves did. Did the slaves enjoy multiple generations of exponential growth of their net worth? No, the plantation owners were paid reparations, and the slaves got nothing. Descendents of plantation owners are strongly represented in Southern business and politics to this very day. Not because their ancestors made value but because they took it.

You seem to confuse "money" with "value."

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#313

Post by klyrs »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #311
pdonis wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's a bit of a straw man there. No, it isn't. See below. > In the process, they'll generally fuck over a whole lot of workers The only way they can do that, since the workers' pensions were an obligation of the company that got broken up, is to declare that company bankrupt and void the obligation. But bankruptcy is not supposed to be a way to make money by voiding a company's obligations and then selling off it…

It's a straw man because literally nobody here was arguing that there is value created in the nullification of employee pensions.

No, it's absolutely not a straw man. The destroyed pensions are theft, which must appear on the balance sheet when you claim that vulture capitalism creates value. The loss of pension has direct impact on those owed: they are being deprived of money that they earned by providing value.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#314

Post by eldenwrong »

lordnacho wrote: post #206
eldenwrong wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Plenty of people have a wide range of friends. It's not that often I run into someone that I think has social difficulties.

Yeah plenty as in the minority. And in tech its even rarer

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#315

Post by AussieWog93 »

klyrs wrote: post #313
AussieWog93 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a straw man because literally nobody here was arguing that there is value created in the nullification of employee pensions.

No, it's absolutely not a straw man. The destroyed pensions are theft, which must appear on the balance sheet when you claim that vulture capitalism creates value. The loss of pension has direct impact on those owed: they are being deprived of money that they earned by providing value .

>No, it's absolutely not a straw man.

I repeat: nobody was arguing that people losing their pensions was a good thing. Nobody. Absolutely nobody. Literally no-one.

I don't even know what you're referencing, or how it's even possible for Private Equity to pilfer workers' pension funds. If anything, it's the funds themselves that own/invest in Private Equity.

Yet still, you and the other poster have brought it up as if stealing pension funds (how?) is somehow "what Private Equity does".

You might as well be arguing that Private Equity destroys value because it's immoral to fuck a dog. I'm sure Carl Icahn-esque character has tried it before.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#316

Post by MrDresden »

leaflets2 wrote: post #300
Zababa wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Worship your intellect, being seen as smart, you will end up feeling stupid, a fraud, always on the verge of being found out. I wonder if this is an explanation for impostor syndrome. Every time I read about it, it comes from people working in intellectual professions. Those people probably value their intellect a lot, possibly more than money, status or things like that. Thus their insecurities manifest themselves…

Interesting thoughts. I think the impostor syndrome is more related to fear of failing the others trust, regardless of what field we have in mind. Let's say your friends want you in their ... volleyball team. They think you're good. And now you start worrying about making them disappointed. Although you're the best they know, for real. That'd be the impostor syndrome, but in this case unrelated to intelligence. Inste…

> "I think the impostor syndrome is more related to fear of failing the others trust..."

And why might one fear betraying the trust of others in ones intellect?

Could it have something to do with being viewed as less capable, less intelligent?

I think for some it could be. Earlier in my life I know it was for me (this exact circular spiral as described above)

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#317

Post by noisy_boy »

epgui wrote: post #294
8n4vidtmkvmk wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lol, i think that's why i failed my first interview or two. dressed down for my last one and got hired no problem

Am I the only person who thinks it’s very plausible that that was indeed a factor, and also that it’s crazy for that to be the case?

The suited look is usually common among management and that layer usually isn't highly respected by engineers. So that brings a bit of negative perception by association.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#318

Post by 411111111111111 »

contradistinct wrote: post #260
trh0awayman wrote: post #195

I think it's interesting how different people view status, like the "Harvard Professor or Homeless guy?" quiz that used to get passed around. I grew up in one of the last WASP strongholds in the US and the more money you had, the smaller the house you lived in (up to a point). People could afford insanely expensive cars, but would buy tasteful ones instead (excepting kids). Most people wouldn't be caught dead in a Ra…

> I think it's interesting how different people view status, like the "Harvard Professor or Homeless guy?" quiz that used to get passed around. This is counter-signalling. "I don't have to dress like a high-status individual, because I'm so high status that my high status is clear either way." It's why somewhat intelligent people use big words, but very intelligent people speak plainly: they are so intelligent their…

Intelligence is generally correlated with the size of their vocabulary thought.

This is obliviously just a rule of thumb but if you take a pool of 100 well spoken individuals and 100 ... Not well spoken and then give them all some kind of intelligence test, the first group will definitely score significantly higher then the latter.

Yes, I'm aware that non native speaker (I am one of these), but they'd be statistically irrelevant in the context of the general population

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#319

Post by darkerside »

klyrs wrote: post #312
darkerside wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Value that was created in the past is still value, is it not? Parent post created a conflated straw man of ancestors stealing wealth plus inheritance. So what if you are rich because your parents created value? Did the value they created die with them?

> Value that was created in the past is still value, is it not? That's your claim, not ours. Cotton plantation owners made obscene profits from the literal blood of slaves. Did the plantation owners create the value? No, the slaves did. Did the slaves enjoy multiple generations of exponential growth of their net worth? No, the plantation owners were paid reparations , and the slaves got nothing. Descendents of planta…

> Did the plantation owners create the value? No, the slaves did.

I am 100% against slavery, period.

Who invented the incandescent lightbulb and the iPhone? The mass market automobile? Who built the railroads? None of these things can be fully credited to the small number of people at the top of the corporations responsible, but we can say fairly confidently they wouldn't have happened without a visionary leader aggregating the efforts of many into a final product.

I agree slaves were deprived of freedom and wages, which is not right. And that wealth is stolen.

That is different from the fact that it's been passed down through generations. I don't quarrel with the children of entrepreneurs having wealth passed down in the same way.

Conflating two arguments makes discussion more difficult.

Money and value are directly related. Money is just score keeping for value created. People pay money for things they value. That's not always going to be the case, but I think treating it as a rule with exceptions is a better heuristic than... what is your definition of value versus money?

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#320

Post by leaflets2 »

burntoutfire wrote: post #188
hallway_monitor wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think maybe GP was talking about what Bill Gates chose to do with his money and influence once he had them. In terms of the number of lives saved and improved, Bill Gates has had more impact than most of us could ever hope to.

Whatever positive effect his philantropy has, it has to be offset by the damage he's done to the world, by slowing down progress (famous asshole predatory behaviour of MS of the nineties) in order to make his money in the first place. Only then we can try to assess if Bill Gates' overall impact on the world was actually positive.

Just noting that apparently you're assuming that another company, who had been there instead of MS, would have acted in better ways

Looking at Apple, Oracle, Google etc -- how likely does that seem

Post reply on HN