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

Is everything an MLM

annehelen.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 297 posts

Re: Is everything an MLM

#231

Post by foxhop »

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #227
foxhop wrote: post #71

My goal is to extract as much money as I can out of the tech industry, without compromising on my values. While I'm doing that I'm trying to build up a small food forest which will help me avoid the pyramid altogether. My only hope for humanity is for at least 30% of the population to do the same, but I'm not holding my breath.

I don’t understand. You want 30% of the population of earth to farm their own food? Does economy of scale not apply to food production?

Yes I want at least 30% of the population on Earth to farm their own food.

I want the food system to become localized which will prevent a crisis which makes people starve and stops "food islands" where people in certain locations only have access to junk food and fast food.

Re: Is everything an MLM

#232

Post by tdhoot »

UweSchmidt wrote: post #77
seibelj wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry that this is your world view, because it is deeply flawed and focusing on such cynicism leads to depression. Most of HN lives in a tech bubble where everyone is focused on building semi-useless software like you describe. However the majority of society still does “normal” things like construction, manufacturing, sales, etc. and some sort of fundamental reorganizing of society on non-market principles doesn…

The economy that you describe, is the simplified econ 101 version. The market fixes everything, and the invisible hand steers everything to optimality. The human being you describe in your last paragraph is from the same economics textbook: A perfectly rational human being making rational decisions 24/7. Both are simplified models that help doing some undergrad economics...but are absolutely insufficient to explain t…

What are the alternatives that are credible and widely accepted? No offense meant, but your comment as is just reads as talking down to someone without actual attempting to educate.

Re: Is everything an MLM

#233

Post by ericd »

orthecreedence wrote: post #155
ericd wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely they should be willing to walk away. This is why scrimping and saving until you have some form of emergency fund is so important.

And you should be born with a trust fund and not have let people convince you to take on overwhelming debt when you were 17 and naive. It's all very simple. Granted, I agree with you about emergency saving, but a lot of people don't have the extra laying around when they're shackled to debt.

Come on, don't be hyperbolic. You don't need a trust fund to do just fine. No one I knew growing up had a trust fund afaik.

What is this victim complex my generation seems to have bought into wholesale? Who tricked you into taking on debt? Was in-state tuition not an option?

As for the saving not being an option, are you sure you've cut your expenses as far as you can? If you eat out more than once per month or pay more than $30/mo for your cell phone, the answer is no.

Sorry if this comes off as harsh, but people oftentimes complain about not being able to save due to student loans or whatever, and then it turns out they're being ridiculously bad with their money in so many other ways.

Re: Is everything an MLM

#234

Post by anticensor »

ben_w wrote: post #11
speedplane wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My expectation is that the ratio of productive workers for each retiree will be approximately constant, and the retirement age will be adjusted to match… This isn't necessarily a problem as long as the number of productive workers continues to increase.

Is there any circumstance where adjusted retirement age would not be sufficient? Even in extremis, if there were zero births and zero or negative immigration, would setting it to 130 not be sufficient?

You would retire beneath your grave. Human lifespan is 120 years maximum.

Re: Is everything an MLM

#235

Post by dnautics »

rectang wrote: post #112
seibelj wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alternative to letting the individual determine what they want is to let someone else choose for them. I’m arguing on fundamental principles because the parent commenter is advocating a reorganization of market-based economies. I don’t care how complex the system is. If you aren’t letting me, the individual, determine what is best for my life, then you are coming from a place of superiority and belief that you kn…

> The alternative to letting the individual determine what they want is to let someone else choose for them. In real-world "free" markets, the poor have their choices made for them by the wealthy.

I'd say it's more like the poor have their choices made for them by the polity.

For example, if you are poor and living in the tenderloin in SF, any give California assembly person has way more exertion on your quotidian economic choices than Jeff bezos.

Re: Is everything an MLM

#236

Post by soVeryTired »

johnisgood wrote: post #115
rleigh wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not entirely voluntary. It's a necessity to live. I might be able to pick and choose between several employers, but ultimately I'm going to have to choose one of them. There's a power imbalance between employee and employer, and that will translate into a negotiating disadvantage; the future employee is at a disadvantage here.

> No, it's not entirely voluntary. In this case, it is not entirely voluntary for the employers either as they need employees for their business to function. > but ultimately I'm going to have to choose one of them No, you can become your own employer, for example. > There's a power imbalance between employee and employer, and that will translate into a negotiating disadvantage It depends on the state of the market.…

> Employers are offering to trade their money in exchange for other people doing some task they want done. If you do not think it is fair trade, then do not do it. You are allowed to grow your own food, or pick berries.

You're also free to die in the gutter, don't forget that one.

Re: Is everything an MLM

#237

Post by dnautics »

atoav wrote: post #197
throwawaytoday5 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If one dollar equal one vote, you can't honestly say markets are free because by design they favor those with wealth and power. There is nothing "free" about a system that favors the wealthy.

Except if you are wealthy, or at least a momentarily embarrassed bilionaire that soon expecta wealth and fortune

Well by that token armchair politicians who make social choices on forums on behalf of the dispossessed, in lieu of actually rolling up their sleeves and doing social work are merely momentarily embarrassed 'benevolent' dictators.

Re: Is everything an MLM

#238

Post by ericd »

cheerlessbog wrote: post #176
ericd wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're not disagreeing with the parent. Yes, a carbon tax would be the way to account for that externality while maintaining individual choice.

That part yes, but not this, "Are you suggesting it's better to ban individual choice ...". That's not a fair characterization.

Ah I see, looks like you guys cleared it up/agreed in a sibling post.

Re: Is everything an MLM

#239

Post by hellot848 »

p1esk wrote: post #230
hellot848 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. People's desires shape marketing. Not the other way around. Marketing caters to people's pre existing desires to convince them. Desires have always existed and always will.

You didn’t want to drive that bmw until you saw that ad. Perhaps you didn’t want to drive at all. Now you do.

No one wants to drive a BMW. Everyone wants to a) Travel from point A to point B b) Have fun c) Impress people with status symbols. BMW created something that satisfies those needs.

Re: Is everything an MLM

#240

Post by ehmish »

teucris wrote: post #200
zdragnar wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disposal already costs; either you pay directly, through taxes if your local municipality organizes it, or your rent if your property owner organizes it. The cost of disposal varies by where it is disposed, not where it is purchased or made. It makes no sense to add an arbitrary cost to a product when the receiver of that money is not the one dealing with the externality in the first place. The same goes for carbon e…

Except that disposal costs are highly distorted - depending on where you are, it’s much cheaper than it should be because of cheap land for landfills, cheap shipping to shift the problem away, etc. Proposals to add cost to disposal are meant to correct for these distortions - to really represent the collective cost to the world. This absolutely should not be done arbitrarily - massive, ongoing research should be done…

Depends what you burying, if it's paper and food waste, it is sequestering. Paper and food contain carbon pulled from the atmosphere, and by preventing it from decomposing by excluding oxygen (e.g most landfills) you get carbon sequestration
Post reply on HN