Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us • Hacker News Board

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#241

Post by GOD_Over_Djinn » Sun, Jun 09, 2024, 6:37 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #203

fallingknife wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I have to spend 10 minutes finding a store employee to unlock a case for me to buy underwear and socks at Target when I didn't have to five years ago, I conclude that crime has gotten worse. When I see videos on the internet all the time of criminals just walking into stores and grabbing whatever they want while the security guard looks on and does nothing because the police will side with the criminal if he tou…

> When I see videos on the internet all the time of criminals just walking into stores and grabbing whatever they want while the security guard looks on and does nothing because the police will side with the criminal if he touches them, it is perfectly valid to assume that crime is worse. How many videos have you seen on the Internet of stores just calmly going about business with no shoplifting going on? The number…

I don’t see this stuff on YouTube, I see it in the real world in the course of my everyday life.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#242

Post by GOD_Over_Djinn » Sun, Jun 09, 2024, 6:39 PM UTC

dasil003 wrote: post #96

Forgeties79 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a pretty weird take to me. Crime stats and polling of people’s perception of crime show this as clearly the wrong approach for instance. Most studies show that no matter what direction crime is going in, a substantial majority of people think their neighborhoods are safer and that everywhere else is basically a war zone that is getting worse. There’s a total disconnect locally/nationally in perception that is…

It’s just a refutation of naive bias towards statistics, which is rampant in big organizations (see the McNamara fallacy). This is codified in the idea of being “data driven”, which is the right thing if your data is a true proxy for the thing you care about; in practice it often isn’t and you have to incorporate some more flimsy or subjective signal to better understand a problem.

Bingo. The obsession with quantification is a crutch that allows uncreative people to delegate their decision making to a mechanical analysis of raw data, rather than a first-principles understanding of their problem space.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#243

Post by gruez » Sun, Jun 09, 2024, 6:39 PM UTC

CPLX wrote: post #236

gruez wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I grew up in a family of social scientists and yet it still shocks me how much people actually believe the words “studies say” and “experts insist” when it comes to matters of human sentiment and opinion. But the question we're asking isn't "how people feel about the economy", it's "how the economy is actually doing". I don't think anyone here is seriously arguing that the public is wrong about their own "sentiment…

Do they get a reward for being "right" in the eyes of the survey company or something? They are being asked how the economy is doing and they are saying fuck this. I'm guessing people have a basic sense that when they answer a media survey they're contributing to the narrative that the media will use, and they want the narrative to be this sucks. It's really not that deep. As for "sentiment and opinion" it's the basi…

>Do they get a reward for being "right" in the eyes of the survey company or something? They are being asked how the economy is doing and they are saying fuck this. I'm guessing people have a basic sense that when they answer a media survey they're contributing to the narrative that the media will use, and they want the narrative to be this sucks. It's really not that deep.

They don't, but like I said earlier it's fair to question the veracity of their statements if they can't get objective questions right. Moreover, if it's really the case as you claim that they don't care about the object level question and only care about "the narrative", what makes you think that the "the narrative" stops at the economy and not at some high level like "the political system" or "society"? In other words what makes you think they actually think the economy is doing bad, and they're not answering dishonestly because they're disaffected about the government/politics/society as a whole?

>As for "sentiment and opinion" it's the basis for democracy. Of course we should give unlimited credence to it when deciding how to organize society, what's the other approach?

Again, you're conflating "how people feel about the economy" and "how the economy is actually doing". Moreover, "sentiment and opinion" might be "the basis for democracy", but it doesn't follow that when it comes to factual and objective questions it should get unlimited credence.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#244

Post by mptest » Sun, Jun 09, 2024, 6:43 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #206

ryandrake wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That’s an example of why the nihilism of MAGA is so appealing. The world is collapsing around many people. And this is what I don't get about current US politics. MAGA = Republicans. The Republican party is the party of generational wealth transfer. The Republican party is the party of elite businessmen lording over the working class. The Republican party is the party of all the economic forces that are unraveling…

You shouldn't confuse your stereotypes of people for actual people. > The Republican party is the party of generational wealth transfer. I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. The Republican party is half the country. "Demographic data compiled in the 2016 and 2020 elections showed that the top 40 percent of income earners preferred the Democratic candidate for president (Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden) over the R…

>> The Republican party is the party of generational wealth transfer.

>I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean.

They oppose estate or "death" taxes in general. That is what they mean.

>The Republican party is half the country.

They're half of voters. They haven't won the popular vote in how many years? 40? They're an obnoxiously loud minority.

>All of them?

Probably not all, but nearly all. The maga tariffs and then subsequent bailouts of farmers harmed comes to mind. reagan's austerity is another easy example.

>>Is the Culture War so important/motivating to these people that they are willing to help implement their own economic destruction? This is the culture war.

>You're doing it right now.

No, they aren't. The republicans bemoaning the 1% of people who identify as trans to distract their uneducated voters while banning books and attacking public education funding, libraries, women's rights, etc, are.

Don't fall in to the bothersider ism trap. Look at republican policy in a red state like texas[0] to see why the comment you replied to is the truth.

[0] https://www.chron.com/politics/article/texas-gop-2024-priori...

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#245

Post by GOD_Over_Djinn » Sun, Jun 09, 2024, 6:53 PM UTC

lotsoweiners wrote: post #204

mperham wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try to get an appointment to see a doctor. Food deserts.

> Try to get an appointment to see a doctor Done this literally dozens of times over the past couple of years for myself, kids, and wife and have never had an issue. Even been offered appointments same or next day. Am I missing something?

Good for you. I had to wait 5 months to see a specialist.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#246

Post by CPLX » Sun, Jun 09, 2024, 6:56 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #243

CPLX wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do they get a reward for being "right" in the eyes of the survey company or something? They are being asked how the economy is doing and they are saying fuck this. I'm guessing people have a basic sense that when they answer a media survey they're contributing to the narrative that the media will use, and they want the narrative to be this sucks. It's really not that deep. As for "sentiment and opinion" it's the basi…

>Do they get a reward for being "right" in the eyes of the survey company or something? They are being asked how the economy is doing and they are saying fuck this. I'm guessing people have a basic sense that when they answer a media survey they're contributing to the narrative that the media will use, and they want the narrative to be this sucks. It's really not that deep. They don't, but like I said earlier it's fa…

> Again, you're conflating "how people feel about the economy" and "how the economy is actually doing".

Indeed. And you're suffering from the delusion that there's some kind of distinction here that matters.

There isn't. The economy fucking sucks. It sucks because normal people feel trapped and helpless in the face of corporate power and constant, rampant unethical conduct and cheating that seems to permeate literally every daily commercial interaction. When you ask them about the economy they answer that it fucking sucks, because, it does, for them, daily. This is bad and it keeps making people's daily lives worse.

If you haven't experienced that then congratulations, you're either living a very isolated or minimalist life or you have financial resources that put you above this dynamic. Or maybe you don't live in the US. Or maybe you're building the tools and processes that are inflicting this misery on others. Who knows.

But my argument is that most readers of this article and comment thread should be able to look around and realize what's happening without resorting to regression analysis. I think most people here have cushy employment for the most part so you'll have to look elsewhere. Have you tried to interact with an airline lately? Healthcare billing? A bank?

It's a fucking horror show. Now, extraplolate what that experience would be like if it was every single part of your actual job. Like you actually worked for a company that treats you, the employee, the way Comcast treats you when you want to cancel service?

Ever tried getting someone from Uber to talk to you as a customer? You think they treat drivers differently? What if you're driving for them to feed your children? What kind of mood would you be in? How would you think "the economy" is going?

Did you know that you can apply, get hired, and actually start work at an Amazon warehouse without speaking verbally to a single human being ever? Like you literally go online and fill out forms, go to a building and use a kiosk to check in, and so on, and are on the job without a single conversation.

Can you try to actually really think about what being in this economy feels like to most people?

Now call them and ask them how the economy is doing. Do you think they trust you, an educated social scientist employed at faceless corporation that is calling them to publish some news report on what they think? Do you think they're interested in impressing you with their stock market fluency? To the extent they are willing to talk to you at all it's in the hopes that you'll fucking listen to them when they tell you to fucking do something about this for once.

For half a dozen cycles in a row voters have picked the person they thought was least in service of the assholes who are in charge and inflicting this on everyone, increasingly agitated that nobody actually fucking does anything about it. They'll be doing it again later this year.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#247

Post by tarsinge » Sun, Jun 09, 2024, 7:05 PM UTC

apsec112 wrote: post #101

Spooky23 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two Americas, the one that HN folks inhabit and the underclass. The former is doing great. The latter has grown and shifted. I grew up in a rural community that was in the process of unraveling from a prosperous farming and light industrial area to a rural slum. There are zero operational farms in that area today. The one I worked for as a teen was in continuous operation since the Dutch colonial period. Th…

Since 2016, real (inflation-adjusted) wages have risen quickly for people in the bottom quartile, while for upper-income workers they've been stagnant. Obviously, most people on HN are still better off than manual laborers, but the gap has narrowed substantially (a big reversal from 1995-2015) and that's a good thing. https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_pr...

The global inflation is exactly the kind of insufficient metric the parent is talking about. What about salaries compared to necessities like food and shelter? Global inflation is only meaningful for upper income workers that have significant disposable income.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#248

Post by vagrantJin » Sun, Jun 09, 2024, 7:23 PM UTC

rangestransform wrote: post #232

netbioserror wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Way to completely miss the anecdotal point about rural cultural decay. You can point to a chart showing rising wage growth all day, but if it's happening at the expense of long-lived communities being hollowed out, you're effectively celebrating peoples' destitution. It is incredible how Internet armchair technocrats will attempt to reduce human existence to a few equations and wonder why broader populations despise…

Rural existence is already subsidized by urban dwellers, I dunno what more they expect

Please elaborate further on what you mean by the phrasing of "Rural existence is already subsidized...."

I'm uncertain if I missed the sarcasm or perhaps more likely my lack of comprehension.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#249

Post by creer » Sun, Jun 09, 2024, 7:24 PM UTC

Forgeties79 wrote: post #57

raizer88 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The thing I have noticed is when the anecdotes and the data disagree, the anecdotes are usually right. There's something wrong with the way you are measuring it," - Jeff Bezos

That’s a pretty weird take to me. Crime stats and polling of people’s perception of crime show this as clearly the wrong approach for instance. Most studies show that no matter what direction crime is going in, a substantial majority of people think their neighborhoods are safer and that everywhere else is basically a war zone that is getting worse. There’s a total disconnect locally/nationally in perception that is…

That's fair that perception is often wrong - but that's a different issue.

Perception is also in large part the very thing that matters when it comes to crime. That is, do I get to live in peace or in constant worry? Do I get my property priced "fairly" when I sell or dramatically underpriced because of this perception that the area is unsafe? To summarize, in what you describe "crime stats" are ignoring half or two thirds of the problem.

In San Francisco, "crime stats" are further muddied because of massive underreporting and cherry picking the definition. So called quality of life crime might be considered irrelevant because it rarely causes massive loss of property or injury. But it does make life extremely stressful for the locals (depending on the neighborhoods where it might be "tolerated" i.e. left rampant, or might not be tolerated.) In this case, "crime stats" deliberately not measuring anything very relevant.

See also recent discussion of the squatting issue in Spain.

Re: Economic Termites: Monopolies not noticeable enough for most of us

#250

Post by creer » Sun, Jun 09, 2024, 7:33 PM UTC

braiamp wrote: post #182

spicyusername wrote: post #6

I very much agree with the premise that economists unduly focus on a few metrics of dubious quality - labor force participation, personal consumption expenditures, market capitalization, wage growth, etc - and overfit them to construct a coherent narrative about the "strength" of the economy and what the experience of living in that economy must be like. There's a story right now being peddled by all the talking head…

> economists unduly focus on a few metrics of dubious quality Which is funny, because as economist, half of the material is "these metric don't matter, if there's no benefit for the population, but you can't ignore them either". It can be summarized as something like "economic indicators are not perfect measures of general well-being, but you need the indicators to look good to be able to distribute well-being". The…

So perhaps economists need to work on this "comm" issue. At least the ones involved in government stats. "It's not their job" only if they actively make it not their job.

I ran into this with NASA. A NASA "scientist" insisted it was proper for them and their colleagues to ignore both valid and crackpot suggestions or questions on the rationale that "crackpots are gonna crackpot and they have limited time so the proper response was to just ignore everyone and everything except their (collectively) narrow research projects." - Which are each extremely specific and grounded in massive piles of internal assumptions as to what matters. There was zero interest in the idea that they were paid by the public and might want to improve their image now and then.