Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Who tricked you into taking on debt? Nobody tricked me, I'm debt-free. But most of the people I grew up with went to college, and most of them are riddled with debt now. Was it their personal responsibility not to go into debt? Technically, yes! Did they have all the information available to them about what this debt would mean for their lives? No. Would they have made this decision if we didn't live in a society t…
I agree that the college system is messed up. I think it's largely because of the government's push to make it accessible to everyone, even if it's not a good fit for them. Non-dischargeability was arguably part of that - it makes it so that people who wouldn't otherwise be able to get loans have that option, and for everyone else, the interest rate is lower than it might otherwise be. But I think non-dischargeabilit…
Is everything an MLM
281–290 of 297 posts
Re: Is everything an MLM
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did not intend to come off snarky. I did read your comment as a little bit pro-capitalist (although not strongly). I think the thing that did it was "The grass is always greener on the other side" which I read as "why bother changing when another system will have just as many problems." > am I misreading the, "But, gee, that's fine because those people earned that money...nevermind that's it's economically ineffect…
Mine was a comment on the failure of systems. I came to Hacker News from a functional programming (somewhat, not pure) background, and that tends to be how I view large systems in general. Government systems seem to be these old school, monolithic systems who are pretty resistant to change. And, to be honest, a large part of that seems to come from the populace. I don't really care if it's capitalism, socialism, or c…
Which is a huge interest of mine as well. I have no formal training in "systems" but have picked apart quite a bit about them just from observation.
> Government systems seem to be these old school, monolithic systems who are pretty resistant to change. And, to be honest, a large part of that seems to come from the populace.
Right, the larger the system, the more slowly it evolves. I think a lot of this comes out of the requirement for stability. Evolution requires testing of theories and sometimes just the act of trying something breaks other parts of the system. It's hard to determine how one thing affects another until it's actually done, so things tend to be conservative.
> I don't really care if it's capitalism, socialism, or communism; once a system reaches a certain size, it becomes unstable and corrupt and starts to fold in upon itself through manipulation by people or groups who survive solely through that manipulation.
Completely agree. I always roll my eyes when people on HN blather on and on about cryptocurrencies, but I actually think government is a perfect candidate. If all government holdings and all government buying/selling happened on a public ledger, the amount of corruption and "back scratching" would likely decrease significantly. I'm not naive enough to think it would solve all problems of corruption (of course, there's always a way to navigate around it) but it would certainly combat it more significantly.
I think one of the biggest problems with corruption in large systems is the lack of transparency. Corruption generally occurs around money, so if you make the flow of money transparent, you at least shine a light on the inner operations of the government.
But good luck getting the federal, or even a municipal, government to implement this!
> But, people are weird, machines are easy.
Yeah, true. It would be incredible if changing the world was as easy as forking it and changing whatever variables you wanted to try out and running it in a new test. Maybe one day we'll have the computational power to do something like this.
You saying that ("machines are easy") reminds me of a strange computer I had. It always froze whenever I shut it down (like, hung before the Windows 98 "It's now ok to turn off your computer" message). Over time, I made a number of changes to it. I replaced all the hard drives. I reinstalled the OS. I installed a new motherboard, new CPU, new video card. New memory. New power supply. In essence, the only thing about the machine that was the same after years of changes was the case. But it still froze whenever I tried to shut it down.
It made me wonder if even machines have an essence, and maybe are also corruptable. Who knows.
Re: Is everything an MLM
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that the college system is messed up. I think it's largely because of the government's push to make it accessible to everyone, even if it's not a good fit for them. Non-dischargeability was arguably part of that - it makes it so that people who wouldn't otherwise be able to get loans have that option, and for everyone else, the interest rate is lower than it might otherwise be. But I think non-dischargeabilit…
Thanks for the response, these are great perspectives. And you're right, some of the sentiment is probably fueled by media stoking the flames. And you're also right, saving is huge. I'm a big proponent of it and practice it quite a bit.
Re: Is everything an MLM
#284Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
My point was that the added cost should be reflected in the collection of waste, not the point of sale, because there aren't any externalities yet, and so there isn't anything to calculate. As for landfills being cheap, that isn't a bad thing. That means the externalities at those sites are low. I live near an old one that was turned into a 50 acre prairie restoration space with about 2 miles of walking paths and ful…
> As for landfills being cheap, that isn't a bad thing. That means the externalities at those sites are low.
No, that means that most of the actual price is not accounted for and is dumped on the public instead.
Re: Is everything an MLM
#285While there is more going on, the subtle comment about hustle culture resonates with me. Cheap labor exploitation called "hustling", and currently everyone seems to want to have a hustle. It's because we are getting screwed at our day jobs, folks, and those same employers are exploiting you again when you leave and start your hustle.
Re: Is everything an MLM
#286Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
"Market forces" is just another way of saying "individual choices". Restricting individual choices has certainly been practised across a number of political and economic systems but there is always a question - who decides what to restrict?
Re: Is everything an MLM
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
"Market forces" is just another way of saying "individual choices". Restricting individual choices has certainly been practised across a number of political and economic systems but there is always a question - who decides what to restrict?
This is false because my individual choice matters infinitesimally less in the market than the choice of Coca-cola or any other large big corporation. In the other hand, I have a lot more power in the market than a homeless for example. So the right answer is that market forces are "weighted individual choices", and when a few of these individuals have billions in their bank account my individual choice is worth close to zero.
Re: Is everything an MLM
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> "food islands" where people in certain locations only have access to junk food and fast food. Surely they also have access to the food that they can buy at the store and cook themselves?
Re: Is everything an MLM
#289Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe. In countries with socialized medicine, access to healthcare services is usually more equal than countries without socialized medicine. So if some equality can be created in such an important choice, maybe it could be achieved in the less important choice of counter tops, if someone we're to bother.
Why would "equal" matter though? E.g. if noone has access to medicine (probably some African countries), they're all "equal". But... The point is, "equal" is just a buzzword that needs to be deconstructed and analysed in each specific scenario. In medicine in particular, extremes are usually bad (completely private => expensive, completely public => inefficient), and middle ground (public & private) seems to be decen…
Re: Is everything an MLM
#290Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
OH. I see, so you want hundreds of millions of people to starve to death - got it.