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

Side Effects of the Growth of Wealth (1999)

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 25 posts

Re: Side Effects of the Growth of Wealth (1999)

#11

Post by dpark »

> As for Rule Three, it is for the non-Calvinists who reject Rule Two, "who are not paralyzed by guilt and who are too uneducated to express their resentment legally." For them "there is only one possible form of expression: to break the law, by engaging in criminal activities such as murder, armed robbery, violent assault, rape and the smoking of marijuana in pipes or home-made cigarettes." Followers of Rule Three end up in prison.

This feels really out of touch. Aside from the stilted language ("home-made cigarettes" in 1999, really?), lumping people who use marijuana with rapists and murderers is absurd. Might as well lump in people who jaywalk.

Re: Side Effects of the Growth of Wealth (1999)

#12

Post by fluxic »

>Using the Microsoft Corporation as his benchmark, Mr. Luttwak says that the new high-tech titans produce much capital but relatively few new jobs. The rich get richer, but those driven out of work by the computer revolution are forced to take lower-paying service jobs. The unskilled they displace turn rationally to criminal activity like drug dealing.

Prescient.

Facebook is a $400B corporation, one of the world's most valuable, and it employs, what, 15k people? Before, your bigcorps like Carnegie Steel and Standard Oil employed hundreds of thousands.

We no longer need labourers for factory work, to fight wars, to flip burgers or drive trucks. People say that automation will only create more jobs and freedom, but I have a hard time believing that. Automation is the ultimate triumph of capital over labour. The rich don't need Middle America any more, because most Middle Americans don't have any worthwhile skills. Americans in "flyover country" are increasingly unemployed, filing for disability, and dying of opioid overdoses. And people wonder why Trump got elected.

I'm parroting the points made in this delightful talk here, by a YC alum no less: https://www.facebook.com/antonio.f.garcia.martinez/posts/101...

Re: Side Effects of the Growth of Wealth (1999)

#13

Post by gragas »

fluxic wrote: post #12

> Using the Microsoft Corporation as his benchmark, Mr. Luttwak says that the new high-tech titans produce much capital but relatively few new jobs. The rich get richer, but those driven out of work by the computer revolution are forced to take lower-paying service jobs. The unskilled they displace turn rationally to criminal activity like drug dealing. Prescient. Facebook is a $400B corporation, one of the world's m…

I think you are right that "automation is the ultimate triumph of capital over labour," but I'd really like to point out that knowledge capital is a huge part of this. Having an employable skill these days is becoming more and more synonymous with having some sort of knowledge capital, because essentially everything that doesn't require knowledge capital can be automated away.

>Americans in "flyover country" are increasingly unemployed, filing for disability, and dying of opioid overdoses.

That's not true in general, and it implies that states like California don't face these same issues. If you look at the unemployment rate of states, the 25 states with the lowest unemployment rates are all "flyover country." [1]

I think the root of these problems are caused by structural unemployment. Living in a flyover state is a great predictor of these problems, but it is not the cause.

1. https://www.statista.com/statistics/200017/state-unemploymen...

Re: Side Effects of the Growth of Wealth (1999)

#14

Post by fluxic »

gragas wrote: post #13
fluxic wrote: post #12

> Using the Microsoft Corporation as his benchmark, Mr. Luttwak says that the new high-tech titans produce much capital but relatively few new jobs. The rich get richer, but those driven out of work by the computer revolution are forced to take lower-paying service jobs. The unskilled they displace turn rationally to criminal activity like drug dealing. Prescient. Facebook is a $400B corporation, one of the world's m…

I think you are right that "automation is the ultimate triumph of capital over labour," but I'd really like to point out that knowledge capital is a huge part of this. Having an employable skill these days is becoming more and more synonymous with having some sort of knowledge capital, because essentially everything that doesn't require knowledge capital can be automated away. >Americans in "flyover country" are incr…

[stupid comment, deleted]

Re: Side Effects of the Growth of Wealth (1999)

#15

Post by hawkice »

fluxic wrote: post #14
gragas wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are right that "automation is the ultimate triumph of capital over labour," but I'd really like to point out that knowledge capital is a huge part of this. Having an employable skill these days is becoming more and more synonymous with having some sort of knowledge capital, because essentially everything that doesn't require knowledge capital can be automated away. >Americans in "flyover country" are incr…

[stupid comment, deleted]

You have this backwards. New Mexico is #1 for unemployment only if you're going for a high score. Obviously, high unemployment should match low labor participation, which is what you see.

The numbers make a lot more sense than you think.

https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

compares well with your link,

https://www.expresspros.com/Newsroom/America-Employed/Expres...

Re: Side Effects of the Growth of Wealth (1999)

#16

Post by zeckalpha »

stefco_ wrote: post #2

"The god of the market-worshipers that celebrate the glories of turbo-capitalism is Adam Smith, but theirs is a devotion that crucially depends on not reading him." I found this amusing. It seems that fanatical devotion to dogmatic source texts is always predicated on not having read the source text to begin with. (Thinking the words in your head without digesting their meaning does not qualify as reading IMO.)

In fact, he warned of this very thing. No one listens.

Re: Side Effects of the Growth of Wealth (1999)

#17

Post by WalterBright »

jondubois wrote: post #4

There is definitely something in it when the article links turbo-capitalism to "the destruction of authenticity". I find that wealthy people lack authenticity and more often than not, they seem to be completely unaware of their predicament. They've seemingly lost their ability for self-reflection (if they ever had it) - That's why many of them trust financially-motivated personal growth gurus, success coaches, high-e…

> wealthy people lack authenticity

What is "authenticity"?

> seemingly lost their ability for self-reflection

???

Re: Side Effects of the Growth of Wealth (1999)

#18

Post by dredmorbius »

zeckalpha wrote: post #16
stefco_ wrote: post #2

"The god of the market-worshipers that celebrate the glories of turbo-capitalism is Adam Smith, but theirs is a devotion that crucially depends on not reading him." I found this amusing. It seems that fanatical devotion to dogmatic source texts is always predicated on not having read the source text to begin with. (Thinking the words in your head without digesting their meaning does not qualify as reading IMO.)

In fact, he warned of this very thing. No one listens.

Where, specifically?

(Genuinely curious, as I, too, strongly advocate actually reading Smith: https://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/4cyroa/adam_sm...)

Re: Side Effects of the Growth of Wealth (1999)

#19

Post by fallingfrog »

gragas wrote: post #13
fluxic wrote: post #12

> Using the Microsoft Corporation as his benchmark, Mr. Luttwak says that the new high-tech titans produce much capital but relatively few new jobs. The rich get richer, but those driven out of work by the computer revolution are forced to take lower-paying service jobs. The unskilled they displace turn rationally to criminal activity like drug dealing. Prescient. Facebook is a $400B corporation, one of the world's m…

I think you are right that "automation is the ultimate triumph of capital over labour," but I'd really like to point out that knowledge capital is a huge part of this. Having an employable skill these days is becoming more and more synonymous with having some sort of knowledge capital, because essentially everything that doesn't require knowledge capital can be automated away. >Americans in "flyover country" are incr…

I wouldn't feel too secure about my knowledge capital if I were you- companies regard skills you obtained in their employ as their intellectual property and they're doing whatever they can to retain it. Right now they can't perfectly do that but in the future, that might change. It might happen by specializing roles to the point that it's just button pushing, or by noncompete agreements, etc.

Re: Side Effects of the Growth of Wealth (1999)

#20

Post by averagewall »

jondubois wrote: post #4

There is definitely something in it when the article links turbo-capitalism to "the destruction of authenticity". I find that wealthy people lack authenticity and more often than not, they seem to be completely unaware of their predicament. They've seemingly lost their ability for self-reflection (if they ever had it) - That's why many of them trust financially-motivated personal growth gurus, success coaches, high-e…

From your tone, I would guess you feel offended that other people are richer than you so you're looking for ways to find faults with them to convince yourself that it's actually you who's superior.

Perhaps you should compare who is doing the most good to other people. To me, that's a more important quality than the nebulous ones you identified - "authenticity" and "self-reflection". You can always find some arbitrary trait that makes somebody you don't like look bad. Try "diligence", "humility", "intelligence", "motivation", "non-violence", "work ethic", "laziness" and see how your wealthy family members stack up then.

Post reply on HN