Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession • Hacker News Board

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#301

Post by DuskStar » Wed, Oct 23, 2019, 4:19 PM UTC

bsanr2 wrote: post #295

DuskStar wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why are they a problem? Look, there's two kinds of taxes. One is to raise revenue, one is to punish behavior we don't like. Once you start describing the rich as a problem , it makes me think that this is the second kind of tax, and I really don't think that accumulating wealth, and helping out everyone else along the way by growing the economy, is something we should be punishing. If you say "the uber-rich ($10m…

>accumulating wealth, and helping out everyone else along the way by growing the economy The latter doesn't follow the former. In fact, consolidation of wealth is a hindrance to volume of activity outside the bounds of the owner of that wealth's interests. Case-in-point: Wal-Mart has done gangbuster business over the last half century. They've grown our economy. Almost every community its touched has been devastated…

> The latter doesn't follow the former. In fact, consolidation of wealth is a hindrance to volume of activity outside the bounds of the owner of that wealth's interests. Case-in-point: Wal-Mart has done gangbuster business over the last half century. They've grown our economy. Almost every community its touched has been devastated by this, from the destruction of other businesses within its purview; to the flooding of the market with cheap goods that - in many cases - do nothing for society in their cheapness, and which actually create issues of overconsumption and waste; to the negative effects their influence has had on the shape of welfare. It's not about what Wal-Mart does; its very existence at its size is destructive. The only positive thing it did was grow the overall economy, which is like celebrating a tumor growing your overall lean mass.

I would highly disagree there. The ills you describe aren't caused by Wal-Mart being big, they're from the business model itself. 100 independent companies spread across the country would be similar.

> The over-aggregation of wealth is the problem. A wealth tax is the direct solution (it does not have to be permanent or perennial). Wealth flight is a fantasy, and for anyone who tries, the federal government has access to the resources necessary to make sure everyone pays their fair share.

Because I certainly trust the US government not to come back to the money spigot after using a wealth tax the first time. Not.

As for wealth flight - dafqu you mean it's a fantasy? Does "facebook exec renounces citizenship to avoid capital gains tax" not ring any bells?

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#302

Post by mumblemumble » Wed, Oct 23, 2019, 4:39 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #300

mumblemumble wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about market capitalism?

I think that answers both my issue and AstralStorm's. It's also the alleged status quo. I think I agree with AstralStorm that the current situation, if not full crony capitalism, at least has more crony capitalism in it than we generally think.

Which was more-or-less the point I was originally trying to make. Apparently really poorly, judging by the downvotes.

Well, that, and that there's really only so much practical difference between de facto intermingling of the public and private sectors and de jure intermingling of the public and private sectors. Both invite rampant corruption and abuse.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#303

Post by toomuchtodo » Wed, Oct 23, 2019, 5:40 PM UTC

DuskStar wrote: post #301

bsanr2 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>accumulating wealth, and helping out everyone else along the way by growing the economy The latter doesn't follow the former. In fact, consolidation of wealth is a hindrance to volume of activity outside the bounds of the owner of that wealth's interests. Case-in-point: Wal-Mart has done gangbuster business over the last half century. They've grown our economy. Almost every community its touched has been devastated…

> The latter doesn't follow the former. In fact, consolidation of wealth is a hindrance to volume of activity outside the bounds of the owner of that wealth's interests. Case-in-point: Wal-Mart has done gangbuster business over the last half century. They've grown our economy. Almost every community its touched has been devastated by this, from the destruction of other businesses within its purview; to the flooding o…

RE wealth flight, renouncing your citizenship comes with an exit tax. You can leave, but you'll have to pay up.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#304

Post by jimmywanger » Wed, Oct 23, 2019, 6:57 PM UTC

flmontpetit wrote: post #269

jimmywanger wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am a white, male software developer. I have absolutely nothing to complain about or envy others. Congratulations for your situation in life and happiness. Many people will never know that. > I am a white, male software developer. I have absolutely nothing to complain about or envy others. Then you must feel very privileged because of your ethnicity, your country of citizenship, and education. > Find something mor…

Either you're trying to gaslight me, or we're on completely separate levels. This will be my last attempt at interfacing with you. > Congratulations for your situation in life and happiness. Many people will never know that. Correct. > Then you must feel very privileged because of your ethnicity, your country of citizenship, and education. That's the point. My political ideology is not self-serving. I am part of thos…

> Either you're trying to gaslight me, or we're on completely separate levels.

See how trippingly accusations flow out of you. Seems like you're misinterpreting everything I'm saying, almost deliberately.

> This will be my last attempt at interfacing with you.

Can I have a written signed contract to that effect?

> You did not even allude to the "garbageman/artist" example. You insinuated that I was "complaining" and "feeling entitled to other people's money", which is trite conservative bullshit.

You misread that change "You have no right demanding that other people work to make things you're entitled to. Instead, you have to get it yourself. Learn to be a RN and figure out how to get the money, or stop complaining." I didn't think I had to clarify thatto "Nobody has a right...to make things one is entitled to." That doesn't flow as well.

Even though you're (I'm referring to you personally now) a white male (why does that matter) software engineer (which is a well paid professional job), you personally cannot demand a lear jet, just as a starving artist cannot demand that society supply him with supplies.

> If we keep "sanitation work" and other difficult, menial tasks to their minimum rather than putting people to work for profit first and foremost, then the people who DO clean toilets and collect garbage will have more time in their week to find purpose and actualization elsewhere.

If one (see how that works) keeps those tasks to a minimum, lots of people can't get the only job they're qualified to do. Either qualify for another job and demand more money, or make do.

They increased minimum wage at Target to 15 an hour. People are actually making less now because they cut hours, and they're absolutely dumbfounded. Or they'll automate more things.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#305

Post by Fjolsvith » Wed, Oct 23, 2019, 9:54 PM UTC

wayoutthere wrote: post #8

In the US, it's less active protest and more things like slacking off heavily at work because it's a treadmill we can't win. We have absolutely no incentive to work hard when doing so doesn't materially affect income. We as a nation have basically told people "no, you can't have a comfortable life or save for retirement because your parents' generation still needs to get 10% annual growth to make their retirement mat…

40 years ago, my father was a union carpenter on the construction of a big coal-fired electric generation plant in western Colorado. He worked for a big contractor and was the foreman for the carpenter crew. When they waited for the next task to be ready for them to work on, my dad did things like paint company vehicles and equipment, and clean the warehouses. He stayed busy instead of playing cards in the break room.

When that construction site started to wind down, he was the last carpenter to be laid off, and had many job offers at other places because of his conscientious work ethic.

I'd take any employee with that ethic in a heartbeat at my manufacturing business.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#306

Post by dragonsngoblins » Thu, Oct 24, 2019, 5:26 AM UTC

malvosenior wrote: post #178

tangent128 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Capitalism" is used as the label for the policy one might more precisely describe as "regulatory minimalism"; the philosophy that opposes minimum wage laws, that opposes collective bargaining by employees, that opposes safety and environmental regulation, that opposes universal health care, etcetera. This philosophy is associated with the term "capitalism" because its proponents tar any improvement of the social con…

It's funny because most of the things people are struggling with are a direct result of government regulation. High costs for education, housing and healthcare are caused by regulation, not helped by it. Let student loans be discharged in bankruptcy and watch the cost of education drop like a rock. Get rid of zoning restrictions and watch house prices fall. Health care costs would dramatically improve if health insur…

Healthcare and Education are both very affordable because of regulation in Australia where I live. It isn't regulation at all that is the problem with affordability you describe, it is the form the specific regulation you guys in the US have

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#307

Post by rswskg » Thu, Oct 24, 2019, 2:13 PM UTC

wool_gather wrote: post #119

rswskg wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The woke young programmers of the bay (and elsewhere) consider any form of border control racist. I've seen this queried for exceptions, eg for convicted rapists and the rabid blue hairs torn that suggestion apart as a 'racist straw man'.

Could you possibly rephrase your observation to avoid the derogatory description?

I would, but being in the middle of these two groups has left me mentally exhausted. I would delete the comment (I don't think it's helpful in hindsight), but I can't.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#308

Post by bsanr2 » Sun, Oct 27, 2019, 12:20 AM UTC

jtcruthers wrote: post #296

bsanr2 wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Logically-speaking, why would you create people who will be a burden to a society in need for a longer period than people you could bring in from outside? It's a very similar issue to the adoption vs birth debate, which is exceedingly simple before emotional matters come into play: it's much better for society for childless couples to adopt parentless children. Likewise, the answer to this immigration debate is excee…

Me having two children are not destined to be "burdens to society in need (sic?) for a longer period than people you can bring from outside". That is certainly not guaranteed. I'm not sure it's even statistically more likely than not. So I'm very hesitant to take that as gospel. And my personal beliefs about life and what it means to be human in my very finite time here goes far beyond "well the economics work out be…

>Me having two children are not destined to be "burdens to society in need (sic?) for a longer period than people you can bring from outside". That is certainly not guaranteed.

On balance, it pretty much is. Adult immigrants will generally be productive in a fraction of the time that children will take to even become legally eligible to be productive.

>And my personal beliefs about life and what it means to be human in my very finite time here goes far beyond "well the economics work out better if I'm barren forever and the government imports immigrants with higher birth rates due to being from a third world country". I strive to have a complete, well rounded life with a loving family. At the end of the day, my life goal is not to live an " economically logical" life void of emotions. I have 90 years here, if I'm lucky. I AM going to live a full life.

That's fine. Please explain why we should build policy around your sentimentality, especially since people like you are unmoved (at least, to the point of actual action) by appeals to the human rights of would-be immigrants.

Re: Think young people are hostile to capitalism now? Wait for the next recession

#309

Post by douglaswlance » Sun, Oct 27, 2019, 2:01 PM UTC

AstralStorm wrote: post #292

douglaswlance wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any investment can fail. You spent money to bet on the price going up and won. Someone else lost. The markets aren't exclusively available to the rich. Anyone can buy and sell stocks. Successful people get to live better than the poor. That is why we should do more to encourage more poor people to live better by contributing more. The economy is not zero-sum.

Second part is a lie. Tried managing stocks on your own? And having no leverage? It's not even close to competitive with hired specialists dedicated to the task. You cannot compete. It is not contributions not success that makes people live better or longer. It is ownership, diet, mental health (including low stress) access to medical care. Check out how many of successful people actually live shorter or painful live…

Managing stocks is easy. Buy winners and hold them. That's how Berkshire Hathaway earned their billions. They're not day-traders.

Contribution is the surest path to financial success. The more value you can contribute and capture, the more wealth our society will reward you with.

The Earth's resources are miniscule compared to the wider universe.

For example, there's a near earth asteroid that we discovered that has enough platinum to turn every person on earth into a billionaire at the current prices.

That's just one of tens of thousands of near earth objects.

Plus, there's millions of asteroids in the asteroid belt when we exhaust those.

Finally, we're already starting to mine them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_mining

So we are not restricted by resources.

Regardless, we live in an information economy that is mainly driven by credit and debt, not mining of resources.