Is it the Wealth Gap that's bad or the Empathy Gap that comes with it? • Hacker News Board

Re: Is it the Wealth Gap that's bad or the Empathy Gap that comes with it?

#61

Post by cnfjejfnfjsjd » Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 9:50 PM UTC

paulpauper wrote: post #38

Maybe we need to come to terms with the fact that the http://greyenlightenment.com/the-meritocracy-we-dont-underst... meritocracy is one stratified by IQ, with some having the cognitive potential to produce more merit than others, and those smarter people will tend to rise to the top socially and economically, too. But the benefit is we get new technologies, job creation, and higher standards of living. That doesn't…

I anticipate that you had a comfortable childhood, yes?

Not that it would affect your superior meritocratic status or anything...

Re: Is it the Wealth Gap that's bad or the Empathy Gap that comes with it?

#62

Post by vinceguidry » Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 9:51 PM UTC

iphoneseventeen wrote: post #50

vinceguidry wrote: post #40

I don't understand the point he makes about forced discretionary spending. I have never bought a round of drinks at a bar, except in foreign countries where a round cost me less than $5. I don't ever feel like there's discretionary spending I'm forced to take. I either can afford it or I can't, and if I can't, I don't buy it and I don't feel guilty about it. I buy other's drinks all the time. Never a whole round. Tha…

"More generally, as you rise up the social ranks, you have to get more and more comfortable with gross differences in wealth and learn to be able to be comfortable with and accommodate socially those with so much more or so much less than you. This guy never seemed to learn that trick." I am struggling with this as my income increases. My friends are looking at me like I am Bill Gates. Any advice?

Talk frank about money with them, and build up good boundaries. If you need help learning how to say no, go hang out at a daycare sometime. There's a difference between being well-off and being loaded, loaded people can comfortably pay for the whole group's tab, the merely well-off can just buy his and his date's.

The main thing to keep in mind is to not take it personally. Also try to be more generous than you're used to being. It is a good thing to spread your wealth around, so long as you can keep it within the bounds of reason. It makes your life better in more ways than you can keep track of.

Another thing you might do is playfully adopt the alpha role. If they ask you to buy another round, you could sit back and be like, "sorry boys, daddy's all out of money, maybe you kids could go make your own," and have a good laugh about it.

Re: Is it the Wealth Gap that's bad or the Empathy Gap that comes with it?

#63

Post by twelvechairs » Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 9:55 PM UTC

twoquestions wrote: post #3

This guy put into much better words what I've been thinking for a while. It doesn't matter to me at all that Bill Gates has more money than God, because he's empathetic to people who aren't as rich and aren't as great as he is, and wants to continue to use his strength to lift people up instead of feathering his own nest even more. It's when people get the idea that "I'm better, so I deserve better than Them!" that r…

Its not the 'gap' or the 'upper end' which is important in itself though. Its the lower end - whether someone here has a reasonable life and ability to reach their potential. One way of raising this lower end is to redistribute from the rich which takes away very little of their potential for the above

Re: Is it the Wealth Gap that's bad or the Empathy Gap that comes with it?

#64

Post by dsmithatx » Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 9:55 PM UTC

The wealthy are getting huge raises and big golden parachutes. The workers are lucky to be getting a 3% raise in good years. Some of us have even taken pay cuts as they take bigger pay increases. The execs are basically stealing away our extra spending money and our kids college education. I'd argue the Wealth Gap follows a gap of empathy. Then look at how the wealthy use politics to misappropriate and destroy social security. They don't even care about the middle class workers as they become elderly.

Re: Is it the Wealth Gap that's bad or the Empathy Gap that comes with it?

#65

Post by lukasm » Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 9:58 PM UTC

beat wrote: post #36

sharemywin wrote: post #10

Capitalism works best when two parties have similar information, resources, etc. Cell phone contracts are a perfect example. They've had teams of lawyers, arbitration and everything thing else on their side and lobbyists to write the laws to fit them. I can sign it or leave it. I also remember democracy isn't two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner. So I'm not saying socialism's the answer either. I think t…

Read Peter Thiel. The perfect capitalism of frictionless competition and complete transparency is the enemy of its own intent. In highly competitive and transparent markets, profits are driven asymptotically to zero. Groceries, gasoline, airline tickets... these are extremely low-margin industries. Capitalism succeeds only when capitalism fails - when monopolies (global or local) appear that permit high-friction (and…

> The perfect capitalism of frictionless competition and complete transparency is the enemy of its own intent. In highly competitive and transparent markets, profits are driven asymptotically to zero. Groceries, gasoline, airline tickets... these are extremely low-margin industries

Correct, assuming no extra wealth is created e.g. innovation

> At any rate, capitalism where everyone has similar information and resources works quite poorly.

For capitalists. I think parent meant it works best for the rest.

Re: Is it the Wealth Gap that's bad or the Empathy Gap that comes with it?

#66

Post by rayiner » Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 10:00 PM UTC

harryh wrote: post #41

rayiner wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even leaving aside rich using their status to solidify their position, consider this: are the policies that maximize GDP and lead to high wealth inequality the same policies that maximize the prosperity of the middle 50% of the population? No economic rule I know of guarantees that to be the case. Wealth isn't created in a vacuum. Wealth can only be created in places with a high level of social order. That social ord…

> No economic rule I know of guarantees that to be the case. Certainly there is no economic rule, however, I think that most people generally believe that for most of human history it has been the case that at least in the medium-to-long-term, top line growth does accrue pretty cleanly to the middle 50%. There are certainly some people that are starting to wonder if this is no longer the case but personally I'm alway…

I agree that top-line growth accrues to the middle 50%, but I think the proper question is: what policies maximize the prosperity of the middle 50% (as opposed to maximizing the top-line number)? That said, I expect the answer to that question is more or less what the developed democracies are already doing.

Re: Is it the Wealth Gap that's bad or the Empathy Gap that comes with it?

#67

Post by jkyle » Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 10:02 PM UTC

VLM wrote: post #51

danharaj wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If wealth weren't power, then wealth wouldn't be wealth.

There's also the utility argument. If I'm the best farmer its probably in the entire cultures best interest if I get the most farmland because we'll share in the utility of an average increase in production despite the unfair concentration. If, people earn their pile of wealth by providing the most utility, then them having it is naturally great news. On the other hand if they got their pile via less than fair means,…

> If I'm the best farmer its probably in the entire cultures best interest if I get the most farmland because we'll share in the utility of an average increase in production despite the unfair concentration.

This is probably little consolation to out of work farmers unable to purchase food for lack of employment.

The question is at what point do such concentrations cease to enough of the culture/population to be worth the negative consequence?

It may be more beneficial, over all, for more to have jobs within an industry and thus able to afford essential goods than for maximum efficiency at the cost of fewer able to earn a living.

Re: Is it the Wealth Gap that's bad or the Empathy Gap that comes with it?

#68

Post by beat » Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 10:07 PM UTC

lukasm wrote: post #65

beat wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read Peter Thiel. The perfect capitalism of frictionless competition and complete transparency is the enemy of its own intent. In highly competitive and transparent markets, profits are driven asymptotically to zero. Groceries, gasoline, airline tickets... these are extremely low-margin industries. Capitalism succeeds only when capitalism fails - when monopolies (global or local) appear that permit high-friction (and…

> The perfect capitalism of frictionless competition and complete transparency is the enemy of its own intent. In highly competitive and transparent markets, profits are driven asymptotically to zero. Groceries, gasoline, airline tickets... these are extremely low-margin industries Correct, assuming no extra wealth is created e.g. innovation > At any rate, capitalism where everyone has similar information and resourc…

Innovation is friction, I think. It's a sort of local monopoly - I have this benefit that my competitors do not have.

Re: Is it the Wealth Gap that's bad or the Empathy Gap that comes with it?

#69

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 10:08 PM UTC

paulpauper wrote: post #54

rayiner wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even leaving aside rich using their status to solidify their position, consider this: are the policies that maximize GDP and lead to high wealth inequality the same policies that maximize the prosperity of the middle 50% of the population? No economic rule I know of guarantees that to be the case. Wealth isn't created in a vacuum. Wealth can only be created in places with a high level of social order. That social ord…

I've heard of this argument. 'Why do the rich need so much money? Why not just create a 'wealth cap'? The problem is, capitalism is about incentives. When you create a negative incentives, it creates externalities, possibly in the form of companies moving overseas, job loss, and economic stagnation. Second, is it fair for someone or some entity to confiscate what is not theirs, beyond taxes? Third, capitalism is expe…

[deleted]

Re: Is it the Wealth Gap that's bad or the Empathy Gap that comes with it?

#70

Post by erbo » Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 10:11 PM UTC

mattzito wrote: post #59

tomp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> buy back their own stock so they make themselves rich while screwing ordinary investors and employees and companies I'm not sure how this is valid reasoning... Aren't stocks "bought-back" on the public market? If so, then buybacks would push up the stock price, which would benefit arbitrary investors directly (those who were willing to sell at a slightly higher price) and all investors indirectly.

I'm not 100% sure this is what the GP was referring to, but a common (and totally legal!) technique to prop up a flat or trending downward company is to start a share buyback program. You take cash that you have no idea what to do with anyway, and rather than return it to investors through a dividend, you start buying back shares. That props up your EPS, since there are fewer shares on the market, and you continue to…

The downside of that strategy, of course, is that if you incur losses after the buyback, those losses, on a per-share basis, are magnified to the same degree as your earnings were. The sword cuts both ways.