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

Golden Rules for Making Money (1880)

fourmilab.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 186 posts

Re: Golden Rules for Making Money (1880)

#111

Post by Retra »

StephenConnell wrote: post #90
marcosdumay wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The moral is that redistribution won't bring prosperity Except that it does - up to a certain point. That's one of the few repeatable, tested, and validated economical principle from the XX century. Counter intuitive as it is, there's just no point denying it.

If prosperity is "having wealth", then redistributing wealth does bring prosperity. But then you could also say that stealing brings prosperity. Could you not?

You could, but you should be aware that "stealing" is not an act per se, but a moral qualification of some other act. Namely, the redistribution of goods.

The only difference between theft and charity is your personal moral inflection.

Re: Golden Rules for Making Money (1880)

#112

Post by sanoli »

anaolykarpov wrote: post #98
chc wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK places with high rates of crime don't tend to be very prosperous on average. The same is not true for places with systems that help the poor.

Like north Korea, venezuela and Vietnam?

I counter your three with Denmark, Sweden and Norway. Now for the next round you hit me with three countries that have better standards of living than mine and that don't help the poor. 5 bucks a round?

Re: Golden Rules for Making Money (1880)

#113

Post by flyinglizard »

BWStearns wrote: post #101
jameslk wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've thought about this a lot on a philosophical level. A person goes through life repeating the same mistakes their parents made and their grandparents made before them, and so on. We spend so much time re-learning things that have already been learned. And doing things that have already been done. Imagine how life could be different if we didn't have to start over each time.

I listened to a talk on counterinsurgency given by David Kilcullen (I am about 90% sure, it could have been Nagl), but he asked the audience about whether it was better to learn from experience or from academics. The audience was about evenly split but with a lot of abstainers, and he said academia was the better choice of course, because no on ever died from reading a book. While "teachable moments" in most contexts…

It's a completely different matter between learning from theory and learning in practice. What's sorely missing from theoretical teaching is context - knowing when and how to apply this knowledge - and the actual experience of using it, which is critical to remembering what was taught.

From my experience on this planet, purely theoretical teachings tend to be forgotten in favor of things you've actually used and done.

Re: Golden Rules for Making Money (1880)

#114

Post by 77pt77 »

WavingThe44 wrote: post #30

From Frenzied Finance (1905): First, there is a fundamental law, from which no one—neither the great nor the small—is exempt. In substance it is: "Every 'Standard Oil' man must wear the 'Standard Oil' collar." This collar is riveted on to each one as he is taken into "the band," and can only be removed with the head of the wearer. Here is the code. The penalty for infringing the following rules is instant "removal."…

> 5. Never put "Standard Oil" trades in writing

This is good advice?

Re: Golden Rules for Making Money (1880)

#115

Post by Joeri »

Retra wrote: post #66
kjksf wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Don't mistake your vocation" doesn't mean "follow your passion". Paraphrasing, it means "do what you you're naturally good at" "Unless a man enters upon the vocation intended for him by nature, and best suited to his peculiar genius, he cannot succeed".

You'll still end up moving around until you find out what you're great at. Unless by some freak accident you know from the start. For instance, there's _something_ that I'm probably a world-class genius at - I have enough experience being me to suspect that - but I have a very hard time putting it into words what I do, and an even harder time trying to monetize it.

If you're not naturally good at any particular thing, then just doing something enjoyable is a good second. Perseverance is the key to success, and it cannot exist without passion.

Re: Golden Rules for Making Money (1880)

#116

Post by atmosx »

clishem wrote: post #21

The author of 'So Good They Can't Ignore you' ( http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13525945-so-good-they-can... ) basically argues that the first rule he mentions ("Don't mistake your vocation") is a false myth: "In this eye-opening account, Cal Newport debunks the long-held belief that "follow your passion" is good advice. Not only is the cliché flawed-preexisting passions are rare and have little to do with how mos…

Quoting a very wise Math professor I had: "The right answer to 99% of the questions you'll receive in my oral exam is: 'it depends' ".

Re: Golden Rules for Making Money (1880)

#117

Post by atmosx »

I've read only the first chapter yet, but will read the rest because it got me.

However there's a hidden idea which equals wealth to happiness which I dislike heavily. That said we can rest assured that while wealth is not connected to happiness (too many things into play to achieve that state), debt sure as hell leads to miserable.

Re: Golden Rules for Making Money (1880)

#118

Post by sgt101 »

anaolykarpov wrote: post #98
chc wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK places with high rates of crime don't tend to be very prosperous on average. The same is not true for places with systems that help the poor.

Like north Korea, venezuela and Vietnam?

I suppose you are pointing out that these are socialist countries and that poor people in them suffer a lot. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I think that they aren't really socialist countries, I would point to places like Sweden and France as closer to actual socialism than North Korea, which is really a Fascist dictatorship explicitly modelled on pre-second world war Japan.

Vietnam is an odd one out here because having suffered a total catastrophe in the years running up to 1975 (as in the complete physical destruction of the state, mechanisms of production and the labour force via being killed in large numbers) the Vietnamese state has made huge progress to become relatively prosperous. There is a lot to be admired in terms of economic gain, although not much to be admired about freedom and safety for those with contrary views.

Re: Golden Rules for Making Money (1880)

#119

Post by arethuza »

wildmusings wrote: post #11
lr4444lr wrote: post #8

I love this part: The poor spendthrift vagabond says to a rich man: "I have discovered there is enough money in the world for all of us, if it was equally divided; this must be done, and we shall all be happy together." "But," was the response, "if everybody was like you, it would be spent in two months, and what would you do then?" "Oh! divide again; keep dividing, of course!"

Reminds me of one of my favorite Maggie Thatcher quotes: "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."

A bit ironic then that the overall tax burden was rather higher than the previous Labour government for most of her time as PM:

"The tax burden (measured by the Institute for Fiscal Studies in the form of total government receipts as a share of national income) started at just above 40 per cent in 1979, peaked at 45.4 per cent in 1982, then fell below 40 per cent in 1990."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/10-things-you-...

What she did do was reduce the silly taxes on higher level of income - but those taxes were just imposed on poorer people.

Re: Golden Rules for Making Money (1880)

#120

Post by tuttifrutti »

ezequiel-garzon wrote: post #24

SNL made a wonderful infomercial in 2006 about point 3: avoid debt. Depending on your location you should be able to watch it in [1] or [2]. During my years in the US it always puzzled me that, upon reaching my credit limit, it would not just increase without any interaction, but sometimes double! American "plastic", as hailed in "The Graduate", was a significant lesson for me. [1] http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-l…

I was always puzzled how people in the US are quick to spend on credit, and not worry too much...
Post reply on HN