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

Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

networked.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 134 posts

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#111

Post by nradov »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #104
nradov wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The focus on "Medicare for All" or single payer healthcare in general is so misguided. Commercial insurers are like the smallest problem in the whole messed up US healthcare system. Putting everyone on Medicare wouldn't solve any of the more fundamental problems. https://www.sensible-med.com/p/the-entire-healthcare-system-...

One of the most fundamental problems with the US healthcare system is the fee for service payment system. Another closely realted one is the abundance of bureaucrats and administrators. Obamacare created a pilot program to move medicare off fee for service and toward fee per patient, and m4a would likely expand that program. Combined with some sort of pharma reform and 3 of the biggest problems healthcare face could…

Commercial insurers are also moving from fee-for-service to value-based care payment models (with capitation being one approach). That isn't something unique to Medicare.

Increasing residency funding is a good idea, but I'm skeptical that it would reduce overall costs. With an aging population, demand for healthcare services is effectively infinite. The shortage of physicians is, paradoxically, one of the factors holding costs down today. If you can't see your doctor because appointments are backlogged for months then no insurance claim will be generated.

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#112

Post by hackeraccount »

gcanyon wrote: post #23

I've only read maybe 30 pages of the book, but I think the article misses the point (I hope) the book is making: there are regulations that serve a purpose, and regulations that don't, and we can, to at least some extent, tell the difference based on the regulations themselves or their impact on past projects. If that's true, then we can shed regulations, speed the process of government, and make it more effective at…

I've got the book on my reader but haven't started it yet.

I've heard a few interviews though with the authors and while I'd like to see their ideas succeed I am suspicious of the idea that we can just get rid of the regulations that don't work.

All regulations work. There's a reason they get codified; they're working for someone. People who own property are voting for things not to change. It's not that they mistakenly think that building more housing is against their interest - it is against their interest.

Look at housing prices in Texas and California. Which would rather own a house in? In California it's going to be expensive and get more expensive. There are no can't miss investments but a house in CA. is pretty close. Now if you're buying a house Texas might be a better bet but owners are the ones running the regulatory environment.

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#113

Post by nradov »

tptacek wrote: post #69
nradov wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why people keep harping on about morality. No one cares. What matters are votes. As for where you live, Illinois in general is particularly badly governed among US states. The entire state is a corrupt fiscal train wreck and serves mainly as an example of what not to do. Some other states have mechanisms to roughly equalize school district funding independent from local property taxes. My advice is…

No. The states you prefer resolve this problem not by convincing people to vote against their interests, but by denying individual homeowners the right to vote down new housing. I would welcome that approach too, but in the meantime, I work within the system I have. And, sorry, but I'm really not interested in your take on where I should live.

Suit yourself, but when the captain has steered the ship into an iceberg it's smarter to jump into a lifeboat instead of going down with the ship. The math doesn't work for Illinois any more. They have unsustainable public debt and employee pension obligations, a declining population, and no more room to raise taxes. Minor tweaks to state housing development policy or school district funding formulas won't prevent the inevitable drastic austerity program that's going to hit when the state becomes unable to pay its bills.

Other US states have their share of problems but overall Illinois is in the worst fiscal shape.

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#114

Post by nradov »

dragonwriter wrote: post #109
xnx wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that a property owner should be able to do what they want as long as excess noise, smells, or shadow doesn't leave their property. I wonder if zoning rules aren't just another form of HOA that people voluntarily opt into by moving to specific cities.

> I wonder if zoning rules aren't just another form of HOA that people voluntarily opt into by moving to specific cities. It's the other way around; HOA's are largely an outgrowth of the real estate industry stepping in to solve the problem of how racial discrimination in housing could be made formalized and still publicly enforced through the courts when explicit racial discrimination by local governments in racial…

If you're going to have common use areas like clubhouses or private roads or even shared roofs on townhouse buildings then an HOA (or something equivalent) is a necessity to deal with maintenance, insurance, and usage rules enforcement.

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#115

Post by xnx »

energy123 wrote: post #73
xnx wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would it reduce the value of their homes? My property would be a lot more if it were legal to tear it down and put up a 10 unit apartment building. I think the complaint is more than they don't want their neighbors houses replaced by apartment buildings.

It would, but I believe the cause and effect is roundabout. The first thing to go down will be rental yields, because those are more directly and immediately impacted by real market forces (number of renters versus available housing stock on the rental market), instead of speculation or the wealth effect or chasing a store of value, which are factors that drive the price of housing ownership but don't drive rents. Af…

It's weird, because some areas with the highest density also have the highest rents (e.g. New York City).

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#116

Post by [deleted] »

dralley wrote: post #110
tgma wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I gave a concrete example to the affirmative to a different commenter, so strictly speaking, yes. Arguably many European politicians don't say this but advocate for policies whose immediate logical conclusion is stagnation or decreasing growth. One example to demonstrate the point is banning fossil fuels (not debating the merits of it, but to demonstrate the point). In fact, the writing of Abundance is implicitly ack…

You're making a fantastic argument for why your earlier accusation that Ezra is advocating "the core ideas of the current administration" is completely ludicrous. All of MAGA's most core policies are fundamentally degrowth. Tariffs, cancelling the CHIPS act, cutting funding for medical research, pushing expensive fossil fuels like coal above cheaper renewables or even natural gas, pushing resource extraction and comm…

[deleted]

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#118

Post by HDThoreaun »

rr808 wrote: post #2

Lex Fridman did a good show with the authors last week. It just sounds like supply side economics? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTPSeeKokdo

Supply side economics also known to economists as economics. But yes, this whole movement is basically just democrats who are also interested in economics.

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#119

Post by HDThoreaun »

vvpan wrote: post #21

Another review: https://thebaffler.com/latest/whats-the-matter-with-abundanc...

> he last thing society needs is more stuff

The only people who say this are incredibly privileged trust fund leftists. Everyone else knows that more stuff=better life all else equal. Maybe someday that'll change but for now most people are still resource constrained. How did this become a popular take among the dem thought makers?

Re: Move fast, break things: A review of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson

#120

Post by tptacek »

nradov wrote: post #113
tptacek wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The states you prefer resolve this problem not by convincing people to vote against their interests, but by denying individual homeowners the right to vote down new housing. I would welcome that approach too, but in the meantime, I work within the system I have. And, sorry, but I'm really not interested in your take on where I should live.

Suit yourself, but when the captain has steered the ship into an iceberg it's smarter to jump into a lifeboat instead of going down with the ship. The math doesn't work for Illinois any more. They have unsustainable public debt and employee pension obligations, a declining population, and no more room to raise taxes. Minor tweaks to state housing development policy or school district funding formulas won't prevent th…

I'm really not interested in this kind of regional flamewar.
Post reply on HN