41–50 of 108 posts
I was open minded when I saw the title of this piece, but now I still don't understand what it was trying so hard to say. The author seems to be mad at reality and is hard at work promoting envy. Inequality is a legitimate concern, but this sort of emotional agitation is helping no one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm worried about the form of the redistribution. In France, we have small taxes in many places. Just one example: We dealt with copyright issues by creating a tax on storage mediums, from a few cents to 20-40€ depending on the container, the size and the volatility - more than 40 different tax levels (see tables here [1]). Obviously they included the bureaucracy feature, where if you're a company you can send back a…
Re-distribution?? Ex-cuse-me?? These aren't YOUR cookies, you bum! Make your own cookies and THEN worry about re-distribution! When someone else has made the cookies, YOU DON'T GET A SAY in how they are distributed, do you get that?
My view is that the industrial revolution devised machines which, whilst increasing the efficiency of production, helped to increase the efficiency by which states and key individuals were able to extract wealth from others. In that case, as time progressed, the people started to become aware of the inequality and the leaders and states started to see the result (in Russia and other countries) of this inequality bein…
Remember that inequality was huge way before the industrial revolution. You know how feudalism worked, right? A few dozen filthy-rich noble families + 99% of population in abject misery, was the rule for most of Europe in the best part of the previous couple millennia. Situation improved with the ascension of bourgeoisie, but even that was limited to a small fraction of population that lived in big cities, in a time where almost everyone still worked the fields. The industrial revolution replaced old methods of economic exploitation with new methods, no big change for better or worse. Competition forced the bulk of industrial efficiency to benefit consumers; suddenly a good overcoat was not a luxury for the rich, etc. which started a virtuous economic cycle - and also meant that profit margins were NOT so fantastically big for capital owners. It's sure big fortunes were made by the barons of early factories and railroads etc., but the elites were already making tons of money before any new tech.
"people started to become aware of the inequality and the leaders and states started to see the result (in Russia and other countries) of this inequality being challenged."
People were always aware of inequality and injustice. The real change in the industrial revolution is that exploited workers were concentrated in cities, and even more, in companies / factories, so they could organize easily and fight for better working conditions, which was almost impossible for peasants living in tiny groups miles away from each other.
"What I believe has yet to be achieved is a balancing of the externalisation of costs with the need to build a system that is able to sustain itself. For the current system to survive, those who have need to find ways to increase the comfort and conditions of those who have not."
Agreed here. This balance is a never-ending struggle, any economic model is only sustainable when the bulk of society have disposal income to drive demand.
I was open minded when I saw the title of this piece, but now I still don't understand what it was trying so hard to say. The author seems to be mad at reality and is hard at work promoting envy. Inequality is a legitimate concern, but this sort of emotional agitation is helping no one.
Might I ask why your name appears green? I have seen some green names on HN, but never know what it means.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Re-distribution?? Ex-cuse-me?? These aren't YOUR cookies, you bum! Make your own cookies and THEN worry about re-distribution! When someone else has made the cookies, YOU DON'T GET A SAY in how they are distributed, do you get that?
That is incorrect. In the typical modern liberal democracy, the right to vote and other such forms of political expression is not tied to how much wealth one generates.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm worried about the form of the redistribution. In France, we have small taxes in many places. Just one example: We dealt with copyright issues by creating a tax on storage mediums, from a few cents to 20-40€ depending on the container, the size and the volatility - more than 40 different tax levels (see tables here [1]). Obviously they included the bureaucracy feature, where if you're a company you can send back a…
Re-distribution?? Ex-cuse-me?? These aren't YOUR cookies, you bum! Make your own cookies and THEN worry about re-distribution! When someone else has made the cookies, YOU DON'T GET A SAY in how they are distributed, do you get that?
Aren't we supposed to work smart instead of working long hours? Aren't we supposed to improve ourselves spiritually and emotionally once we have reached a plateau of physical and social security?
My view is that the industrial revolution devised machines which, whilst increasing the efficiency of production, helped to increase the efficiency by which states and key individuals were able to extract wealth from others. In that case, as time progressed, the people started to become aware of the inequality and the leaders and states started to see the result (in Russia and other countries) of this inequality bein…
Today, disruption is so easy. Starting a app/website/platform involves almost no fixed costs and variable costs scale easily. We are now seeing century-old corporations being disrupted by university students. Technology has helped this situation, not hindered it.
(fixed spelling)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Re-distribution?? Ex-cuse-me?? These aren't YOUR cookies, you bum! Make your own cookies and THEN worry about re-distribution! When someone else has made the cookies, YOU DON'T GET A SAY in how they are distributed, do you get that?
If you don't share your cookies, we will revolt and take your cookies, and everything else you have while we're at it.
I was open minded when I saw the title of this piece, but now I still don't understand what it was trying so hard to say. The author seems to be mad at reality and is hard at work promoting envy. Inequality is a legitimate concern, but this sort of emotional agitation is helping no one.
Might I ask why your name appears green? I have seen some green names on HN, but never know what it means.