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

NASA investigation finds Boeing hindering Americans' return to moon

flyingmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 413 posts

Re: NASA investigation finds Boeing hindering Americans' return to moon

#361

Post by BirAdam »

snapcaster wrote: post #308
BirAdam wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that’s just when the economy began financialization.

I assume you're saying because of the fed, but wouldn't it be more appropriate to mark JP Morgan's efforts to create monopolies throughout the economy a better start point?

Well, this is why I pointed out McKinley and also stated the process did start shortly after the founding. True financialization only after Morgan and his friends met and formed the Fed tho, which was 1913. Once the Fed was in place, they could vastly expand the amount of available credit, bribe and purchase without restraint, and start the type of economy to which we are all now accustomed. Importantly, this pattern is a direct inversion of “capitalism.” In capitalism, the present is leveraged for the future. In “financialism,” the future is leveraged for the present.

Re: NASA investigation finds Boeing hindering Americans' return to moon

#362

Post by AnimalMuppet »

practicemaths wrote: post #339
chii wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that would benefit everyone. no, it would benefit the shareholders. The regulations imposed by the gov't (which is meant to be representitive) would reign in the excess externalization. Everyone would benefit from competition, when it does happen.

I do not understand the statement "Everyone would benefit from competition". How is that not an oxymoron? Surely those that do not win in a competition are losers. How is that a benefit to them?

"Everyone" meaning "everyone as a whole", not absolutely every individual.

If there's more than one grocery store, I probably get better prices. (Or, negatively, if there's only one then I probably get worse prices.) And so with every other aspect of the economy.

Re: NASA investigation finds Boeing hindering Americans' return to moon

#363

Post by mrguyorama »

pc86 wrote: post #286
Aldipower wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this ironic?

The problem is that the Venn diagram of a) people who say things like "Financists" unironically and speak of a cabal of people with "usurary (sic) schemes" designed to bankrupt entire civilizations and b) actual, legitimate anti-Semites looks like a blurry circle unless you're right up against it. It doesn't mean there aren't people in (a) who aren't anti-Semites and who have legitimate grievances. But they're virtua…

No this is a HUGE miss on your part. Those people speak of "a cabal of bankers" or "Globalists". They also blame the people involved, not the ideas they are implementing.

Re: NASA investigation finds Boeing hindering Americans' return to moon

#364

Post by wormlord »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #177
School-Cotton wrote: post #23

Does anyone actually seriously believe the U.S. will land a person on the moon in 2025? This is the country that takes decades to open a new subway station.

That was always a bullshit date. No different than elder Bush's Mars in 2030. 2028, maybe if everything goes well with Starship, and the suits. Their lunar variant is still a disaster waiting to happen without a better design. We've seen how Starship destroys a launch pad with ill-conceived flame diversion. How is it going to land on unprepared regolith without toppling in its own crater or destroying the engines wit…

Why is this being downvoted? These are all valid concerns.

Re: NASA investigation finds Boeing hindering Americans' return to moon

#365

Post by imtringued »

boppo1 wrote: post #350
elzbardico wrote: post #264

What MBAs and Financists destroyed so far: - Western Industry. - The blue-collar middle class - The Middle Class - Our health care system - Our education - Western Economic Leadership. - Social Mobility Now they are busy destroying western technology, science and innovation on their never-ending selfish wealth-extraction quest. They convinced us that our homes are investments, so they can fleece us with their usurary…

My undergrad is in finance. IMO the problem is that we don't really teach what wealth is as Adam Smith defined it. A wealthy nation is not the one with the greatest stockpile of gold, but the one with the most quality goods and services easily available to its average citizens (I'm paraphrasing a bit, but you understand). Smith really stresses that profit is a measurement of the good provided to society by an activit…

War is profitable in capitalism, because the dogma is that capital is productive and must net a positive return.

In the underutilized capital scenario, idle capital incurs costs, but no benefits. It must be destroyed. The easiest way to maintain the facade is to send the capital to war. If you acquire new land, congratulations, the "investment" paid off. If it doesn't, then the destruction of capital at least maintains the profitability of domestic capital.

War is really that simple. If you had a war for any other reason, everyone involved would see the stupidity after the first few skirmishes.

Re: NASA investigation finds Boeing hindering Americans' return to moon

#366

Post by nojvek »

IMO its a huge opportunity cost for humans to land on moon if it comes at cost of gazillions of dollars. We've been to moon, many countries have spent probes on the Moon. Humans are fragile blood bags covered in thin skin plastic. It takes a ton of other infrastructure around to sustain them. Even losing a single human is a disaster.

That money and time could be spent building better rovers. We could likely send 10 +rovers to different planets for exploration at the same time + cost factor.

Spirit & Opportunity spent ~21 years combined on Mars.

We could have an army of rovers for years on Moon and build habitable bases. It'd be cheaper than sending a few human astronauts to the Moon for a few hours of "we did it" videos.

Re: NASA investigation finds Boeing hindering Americans' return to moon

#367

Post by mrguyorama »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #205
toomuchtodo wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Collins Aerospace is offering $19/hr for third shift welding work on aircraft. It was referred to me by someone in the labor community, and I spoke with HR under the guise of a prospective candidate to confirm. They do $26B/year in revenue.

This should be a top level comment - it kind of reinforces the point of the whole article. I understand that 15/hr is the (planned) US minimum wage?

The federal minimum wage has zero chance of increasing unless we get a supermajority of Democrats in both wings of congress and the presidency. Republicans, voters included, largely do not want the minimum wage to go up.

Re: NASA investigation finds Boeing hindering Americans' return to moon

#368

Post by coliveira »

boppo1 wrote: post #355
Workaccount2 wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't even have to be like that. People want comfy WFH service jobs and college is basically just becoming 13th-16th grade at this point. America is an advanced economy and the advanced work is where the money and comfy life is. No one did anything wrong, really the problem is that too many are doing everything right. The only real answers to this is either immigrants (who undercut local workers) or some kind of…

>No one did anything wrong No, LIRP and ZIRP are totally responsible for fundamentally causing 'growth' businesses to be valued ridiculously higher than 'dividend' businesses. Basically any business that was "profitably make stuff now" had to compete with "no profit now, but we'll for sure change the world in 20 years" for capital and making the DCFV denominator's risk-free-rate term 0 tilted the table 90 degrees tow…

100% agree. No-profit high valuation businesses can easily borrow its way into existence, and profitable businesses in the real economy have to compete for the same pool of money.

Re: NASA investigation finds Boeing hindering Americans' return to moon

#369

Post by ASalazarMX »

BirAdam wrote: post #280
elzbardico wrote: post #264

What MBAs and Financists destroyed so far: - Western Industry. - The blue-collar middle class - The Middle Class - Our health care system - Our education - Western Economic Leadership. - Social Mobility Now they are busy destroying western technology, science and innovation on their never-ending selfish wealth-extraction quest. They convinced us that our homes are investments, so they can fleece us with their usurary…

No one really “let them” destroy things. This is one of the key dangers of majoritarian government. The moment that people can vote for representatives the representatives will be purchased, and later, the votes will purchased. Once this happens, money will be destroyed to allow the purchasing class to rob the wealth of the civilization, and this leads to financialization of economics. This pattern has been repeated…

It goes beyond voting, people actually empower their abusers by buying the cheapest option regardless of its context. People dislike monopolies, but will happily grow one if it costs less than local or more responsible alternatives. That monopoly eventually gains the power to change the game rules.

We are mostly ignorant, and we vote, consume, act and live that way. We choose to be that way, and so good things won't last long in our collective hands.

Re: NASA investigation finds Boeing hindering Americans' return to moon

#370

Post by imtringued »

boppo1 wrote: post #355
Workaccount2 wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't even have to be like that. People want comfy WFH service jobs and college is basically just becoming 13th-16th grade at this point. America is an advanced economy and the advanced work is where the money and comfy life is. No one did anything wrong, really the problem is that too many are doing everything right. The only real answers to this is either immigrants (who undercut local workers) or some kind of…

>No one did anything wrong No, LIRP and ZIRP are totally responsible for fundamentally causing 'growth' businesses to be valued ridiculously higher than 'dividend' businesses. Basically any business that was "profitably make stuff now" had to compete with "no profit now, but we'll for sure change the world in 20 years" for capital and making the DCFV denominator's risk-free-rate term 0 tilted the table 90 degrees tow…

I don't know why so many people on HN get ZIRP wrong.

The problem with ZIRP isn't the absolute level of interest. The problem is that the central bank thinks it can simulate negative interest through QE. The zero lower bound is ultimately a price guarantee by the government that it will offer an infinite quantity of bonds to the general public to prevent the interest rate from dipping negative.

Any form of lower price control will cause an oversupply. In this case (mostly rich) people are oversupplying capital to the government instead of simply spending it.

Since the money is concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people, their investment decisions are going to either be a random crap shot, since information is distributed in the economy and the people who have information to make informed purchasing decisions have no money, while the people with money have no idea what to do with it, or it will endlessly get cycled through more QE and government debt.

In a hypothetical scenario with negative interest, wealth deconcentrates so that money goes to where it needs to be.

Post reply on HN