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

Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

david.newgas.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 457 posts

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#381

Post by throwitaway222 »

RandyRanderson wrote: post #272

In Canada this is a huge scam. The government advertizes that it's funding incubators. Great, right? The money doesn't go to the start ups - it all goes to large tech companies like IBM, etc, because, obviously, IBM knows about innovation. The cover is that the government doesn't know tech so it will give money to trusted partners and they will choose who to give the money to because they've been doing such a great j…

Governments should really get out of it's free money crap everywhere. Only people that care should be giving out money so that they can look at their investments and make sure they want to keep spending.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#382

Post by mannanj »

RandyRanderson wrote: post #272

In Canada this is a huge scam. The government advertizes that it's funding incubators. Great, right? The money doesn't go to the start ups - it all goes to large tech companies like IBM, etc, because, obviously, IBM knows about innovation. The cover is that the government doesn't know tech so it will give money to trusted partners and they will choose who to give the money to because they've been doing such a great j…

This happens in the US, too. Maybe with different drivers, though certainly money moves to people close to the problem.

Now wouldn't it be interesting to dive into how old the extortion tactic of creating the problem you solve goes?

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#383

Post by b40d-48b2-979e »

bit-anarchist wrote: post #373
b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was complicit when he knowingly made the choice that would have no accountability.

That presumes that it's their responsibility to hold them accountable or, at least, that the other option is free. Given that you haven't shown either of those, and the statements point to the contrary, it's fair to say they are not complicit.

    or, at least, that the other option is free
So morals only matter depending on how easy a decision is to make and how it won't affect you personally? This is coming back full circle to "has no morals".

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#384

Post by thaumasiotes »

vintermann wrote: post #166
ecshafer wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Per a friend, they are told to use more contractors in the government. Its also not clear if the contractor is actually making more money. Government benefits are significantly better than most contractors will give (I will be all of them).

The contractor has better take home pay. For them, it's maybe a wash whether they get the extra pay or the better benefits, but what they are paid is only a fraction of what the government pays to the contractor's company. For the government, giving those benefits is definitively a much better deal than using a contractor.

> For the government, giving those benefits is definitively a much better deal than using a contractor.

This is not necessarily the case. The large part of the benefits are to be paid in the future, and this makes it possible for the government to spend much more than makes sense on whatever the project is that the employee is assigned to. You can get into situations where the employee doesn't pass a cost-benefit test.

The contractor is less cost-effective; you get less work per dollar spent. But because you have to pay for the contractor at the same time they do the work, you aren't subject to this effect of being trapped by an illusion of cheapness.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#385

Post by KingMachiavelli »

cobbzilla wrote: post #253
GJim wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> whose failing businesses they bankroll Don't confuse a hobby business with a failing business. Plenty of people with independent means run loss making businesses for fun and/or support wives/children doing just that.

Semantics. If the hobby business never makes a profit and is capturing losses for tax benefits, that’s a failing business. It can be failing indefinitely as long as there’s money to support it, but you can’t call it a successful business.

Doesn't running consistent losses eventually cause tax issues with the IRS? If the losses are offsetting profit elsewhere, I would assume the IRS would become very interested in challenging the validity of the hobby business?

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#386

Post by kubb »

throwitaway222 wrote: post #381
RandyRanderson wrote: post #272

In Canada this is a huge scam. The government advertizes that it's funding incubators. Great, right? The money doesn't go to the start ups - it all goes to large tech companies like IBM, etc, because, obviously, IBM knows about innovation. The cover is that the government doesn't know tech so it will give money to trusted partners and they will choose who to give the money to because they've been doing such a great j…

Governments should really get out of it's free money crap everywhere. Only people that care should be giving out money so that they can look at their investments and make sure they want to keep spending.

But all those VC projects are crap too.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#387

Post by IIsi50MHz »

charcircuit wrote: post #177
idiotsecant wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congratulations. Your budget is now permanently smaller because your appeals are completely irrelevant to the machine and you get to do less. Forever. Maybe you have to fire some people.

If you don't need a big budget then yes you should continue onwards with a smaller budget. That's not a surprising conclusion.

I believe the intended meaning was "Now, regardless of any future considerations, your budget is permanently smaller.".

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#388

Post by molybd3num »

nekusar wrote: post #338
cogman10 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every non capitalist would force you to work in random job they assign Nope. Most non-capitalist systems have a competitive school environment. Students compete for education slots for the careers they want to work in. The only people who end up assigned work are those who have basically no aptitude for higher careers. > force you to obey some rule or law they wrote for their own interest. There is no society, capi…

> There's also plenty of famines caused directly by capitalism. The most infamous one being the Irish potato famine. Ireland is extremely fertile and at the peak of the famine they had bumper crops. The reason the famine happened is because poor irish citizens relied heavily on growing crops for personal sustenance in small gardens. Potatoes being one of the most calorie dense foods for a small patch of land. When bl…

isn't that what he said?

> Meanwhile, they'd be working giant grain fields and maintained cattle herds which were already sold to english markets.

> This famine was entirely from capitalism. The land and the people grew plenty of food, but the capitalists cared a lot more about the wheat and cattle and not the people so the Irish starved.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#389

Post by irishcoffee »

nekusar wrote: post #338
cogman10 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every non capitalist would force you to work in random job they assign Nope. Most non-capitalist systems have a competitive school environment. Students compete for education slots for the careers they want to work in. The only people who end up assigned work are those who have basically no aptitude for higher careers. > force you to obey some rule or law they wrote for their own interest. There is no society, capi…

> There's also plenty of famines caused directly by capitalism. The most infamous one being the Irish potato famine. Ireland is extremely fertile and at the peak of the famine they had bumper crops. The reason the famine happened is because poor irish citizens relied heavily on growing crops for personal sustenance in small gardens. Potatoes being one of the most calorie dense foods for a small patch of land. When bl…

> As a corollary, Irish are to Potatoes, as Black Americans are to chicken and watermelon. Its a massive racial insult, and similar in magnitude.

This is not accurate. We really need to stop getting offended on behalf of other people. Black people like fried chicken and watermelon, irish people like potatoes. In fact, black people like potatoes and irish people like watermelon and fried chicken.

Nothing about that is racist or offensive.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#390

Post by Wowfunhappy »

throwitaway222 wrote: post #381
RandyRanderson wrote: post #272

In Canada this is a huge scam. The government advertizes that it's funding incubators. Great, right? The money doesn't go to the start ups - it all goes to large tech companies like IBM, etc, because, obviously, IBM knows about innovation. The cover is that the government doesn't know tech so it will give money to trusted partners and they will choose who to give the money to because they've been doing such a great j…

Governments should really get out of it's free money crap everywhere. Only people that care should be giving out money so that they can look at their investments and make sure they want to keep spending.

Why can't we, like, hire good people to oversee this stuff? Pay them competitive wages. If they're corrupt, prosecute the corruption.

I feel like these discussions always devolve from "a government is doing a thing badly" → "governments always do things badly" → "governments should stop doing things". But governments are basically the only party that can act in the best interest of citizens rather than shareholders.

So, I would much prefer "a government is doing a thing badly" → "here are ways we could fix it". This should be perfectly achievable. Of course, no bureaucracy—public or private—will ever be perfectly efficient. That doesn't mean it can't be better, or produce a net good.

Also, I do think people tend to miss all the successful things governments fund, like science research.

Post reply on HN