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

The world’s rich stay rich while the poor struggle to prosper

johnkay.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 138 posts

Re: The world’s rich stay rich while the poor struggle to prosper

#61

Post by tptacek »

rayiner wrote: post #41
FD3SA wrote: post #12

I've always been baffled by the investment choices of billionaires. If you accept an empirical view of the universe, no matter what you do, you will eventually die. Your experiences of the world will cease to exist. Therefore, the only rational investment would be in life extension technologies (SENS, advanced prosthesis, etc.). At first, this might sound repulsive. The idea of a group of elites discovering and hoard…

You're defining rationality pretty narrowly. You're assuming that the only thing that is rational is living as long as possible. People invest for the happiness it brings them while they're alive. If I were a billionaire, I would derive much more joy, in the present, from seeing the real reduction in suffering and increase in human joy that can be achieved with my investment, than I would from spending that same mone…

Give it a few years. Paralyzing fear of death sinks in at age 32.5.

Re: The world’s rich stay rich while the poor struggle to prosper

#62

Post by jonmrodriguez »

FD3SA wrote: post #12

I've always been baffled by the investment choices of billionaires. If you accept an empirical view of the universe, no matter what you do, you will eventually die. Your experiences of the world will cease to exist. Therefore, the only rational investment would be in life extension technologies (SENS, advanced prosthesis, etc.). At first, this might sound repulsive. The idea of a group of elites discovering and hoard…

I think most billionaires are not scientists and don't realize that life extension is any more possible than magic.

Once some steps toward life extension start happening without billionaire's help, and start to become part of popular culture, then billionaires will realize it's a thing.

Also, inertia. You probably strive to live a similar lifestyle as your parents and your friends, rather than (for example) selling your possessions and spending your life backpacking the world, even if the latter might rationally be a better option if it occured to you.

Re: The world’s rich stay rich while the poor struggle to prosper

#63

Post by Domenic_S »

bsbechtel wrote: post #46
old-gregg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think their disagreement stems from the difference in how they define "poor". Gates is certainly right (it just takes a bit of traveling to agree with him) that hungry-and-dying type of poor is rapidly disappearing all over the world. But if you look at living-hand-to-mouth poor, I can understand John's reasoning. Yes, average incomes (productivity) have gone up but you also see how prices on commodities are rapidl…

>Perhaps it's an inherent property of capitalism: some things always end up barely within reach of a lower class. I wouldn't say that's true, we just need to figure out ways to produce those things cheaply enough (through automation, other technologies) that everyone can enjoy them. Take a look at agriculture in the US...even the poorest people here have access to (not very healthy) food whereas just under 100 years…

> even the poorest people here have access to (not very healthy) food

I saw just a story yesterday (?) on I think KPIX news of a family bringing in less than $1700 a month (living in San Jose mind you) and they filmed her going to the food bank. Her grocery bags were filled with fresh produce! I thought that was pretty neat.

Maybe staged for the cameras or a lucky break.

Re: The world’s rich stay rich while the poor struggle to prosper

#64

Post by unclebucknasty »

bsbechtel wrote: post #46
old-gregg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think their disagreement stems from the difference in how they define "poor". Gates is certainly right (it just takes a bit of traveling to agree with him) that hungry-and-dying type of poor is rapidly disappearing all over the world. But if you look at living-hand-to-mouth poor, I can understand John's reasoning. Yes, average incomes (productivity) have gone up but you also see how prices on commodities are rapidl…

>Perhaps it's an inherent property of capitalism: some things always end up barely within reach of a lower class. I wouldn't say that's true, we just need to figure out ways to produce those things cheaply enough (through automation, other technologies) that everyone can enjoy them. Take a look at agriculture in the US...even the poorest people here have access to (not very healthy) food whereas just under 100 years…

>we just need to figure out ways to produce those things cheaply enough (through automation, other technologies) that everyone can enjoy them

But, therein lies a paradox, right? I mean, when you seek to lower the cost of production through automation, technology, etc. you wind up displacing human workers, reducing labor demand, and putting downward pressure on wages. BTW, I'll add that lower wages are another significant way that companies reduce costs/prices.

The net result is that profits increase, which benefits a relative few rich, while the quality of life for many is reduced or stagnant at best.

In other words, this "race-to-the-bottom" walmart-ization of our economy seems to be, in large part, responsible for the income disparity we see today. Perhaps the poorest who would otherwise starve are benefited (even if through entitlements or aid which can now go further), and of course that's a very good thing. But, on balance, the world's wealth is accumulating to a very small number of people at an accelerating pace.

Re: The world’s rich stay rich while the poor struggle to prosper

#65

Post by gnaritas »

enraged_camel wrote: post #48
dror wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Your experiences of the world will cease to exist. Therefore, the only rational investment would be in life extension technologies (SENS, advanced prosthesis, etc.)." No. You make a false assumption that everyone's main goal in to live as long as possible. Different people have different goals, and Gates clearly cares about making a major impact on other people.

If you live longer, you can make a bigger impact. Especially if you're someone like Bill Gates. Imagine if the great thinkers and inventors of past times were still alive today. Imagine if someone like Elon Musk could live forever. edit: gotta love it when drive-by downvoters just cast their vote without adding anything to the discussion.

People tire of life, not everyone would want to live longer. I would, as would many, but many wouldn't even if they could. I'm sure even billionaire’s get tired of life.

Re: The world’s rich stay rich while the poor struggle to prosper

#66

Post by mmxiii »

FD3SA wrote: post #12

I've always been baffled by the investment choices of billionaires. If you accept an empirical view of the universe, no matter what you do, you will eventually die. Your experiences of the world will cease to exist. Therefore, the only rational investment would be in life extension technologies (SENS, advanced prosthesis, etc.). At first, this might sound repulsive. The idea of a group of elites discovering and hoard…

Life extension is only rational in a very limited sense.

In the greater scope of the universe, all things must die. The rational outlook is to see our position in this context. Our mortality establishes the constraints in which we look for meaning and purpose, so that we may not be wearied by an incalculable infinite.

And then we may understand it is what we do and express about ourselves that imbues life with meaning, and not in the hope a monument may immortalize an empty phrase. For in all finite existence, the most we can say, and what we must say, is "we are here".

Re: The world’s rich stay rich while the poor struggle to prosper

#67

Post by tn13 »

quaunaut wrote: post #8

Y'know, I have seen Mr. Kay talk before, and I wouldn't regard him as an idiot. However, he's seemed to have missed the entire point Bill was making. > So what about China and India? Their recent growth performance has been exceptional, but both are still desperately poor countries by the standards set by Switzerland and Norway. The gap will take many generations to eradicate. Which Bill completely acknowledges? Howe…

When it comes to development rhetoric I think it is totally influenced by western thought. India is poor by western standards no doubt. But if India is poor and malnourished then how come its population continues to explode ?

We need to realize that what people think of "prosperity" may not be same everywhere.

Re: The world’s rich stay rich while the poor struggle to prosper

#68

Post by huherto »

The article was frustrating since it is not clear on what the disagreement is. My guess is that John Kay is referring to the first myth. "POOR COUNTRIES ARE DOOMED TO STAY POOR"

According to Gates, poor countries are making progress.

According to Kay, there is a ceiling on how much progress a country can make.

So really, the positions are not contradictory since there is a big space between the current state of poor countries (which are making progress) and the ceiling that Kay proposes. Furthermore the ceiling it self can move up overtime. And now I hate for Kay for not writing a clear article.

Re: The world’s rich stay rich while the poor struggle to prosper

#69

Post by wavefunction »

Domenic_S wrote: post #63
bsbechtel wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Perhaps it's an inherent property of capitalism: some things always end up barely within reach of a lower class. I wouldn't say that's true, we just need to figure out ways to produce those things cheaply enough (through automation, other technologies) that everyone can enjoy them. Take a look at agriculture in the US...even the poorest people here have access to (not very healthy) food whereas just under 100 years…

> even the poorest people here have access to (not very healthy) food I saw just a story yesterday (?) on I think KPIX news of a family bringing in less than $1700 a month (living in San Jose mind you) and they filmed her going to the food bank. Her grocery bags were filled with fresh produce! I thought that was pretty neat. Maybe staged for the cameras or a lucky break.

Food banks and their volunteers try to provide the healthiest food they can, but often-times are dependent on donations. I am lucky to volunteer with some folks at one and it's like Christmas morning for us when we've got fresh fruits and vegetables to handout to folks!

Most food banks are barely scraping by on whatever hard-work and good-will the volunteers and their community are able to muster.

I would prefer to see this family (probably working pretty hard right now) to make a living income, with their children seeing the rewards that their parent's hard work and discipline has brought them.

Maybe not spending $75,000 on artisanal strippers in one night, but a fulfilling life of self-agency.

Re: The world’s rich stay rich while the poor struggle to prosper

#70

Post by freshhawk »

xenophanes wrote: post #38
exratione wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jason Hope is demonstrating that you can generate status from funding SENS. More of this would be a good thing: http://www.jasonhope.com

FWIW I'm not convinced that more appeasement of status signaling stuff would be a good thing, even if that kind of compromise got SENS some more money in the short term. Living longer is great but living better is also very important. Social games waste so much of many people's lives.

"more appeasement of status signaling stuff", "Social games waste so much of many people's lives"

"appeasement"? Seeking social status is what primates do. It's not even "human nature", it's lower level than that. It's not cultural, it's primate genetics.

The disconnect in the conversations in this thread? Two groups talking past each other? It's because some people are talking about how homo sapiens behave and some people are talking about how homo economicus [1] behaves.

It's not like you are wrong, it's just two conversations happening at once. One is based in reality and another based in fantasy.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_economicus

Post reply on HN