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

Why the Tech World Thinks the American Dream Is Dying

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–86 of 86 posts

Re: Why the Tech World Thinks the American Dream Is Dying

#81

Post by beeflet »

corranh wrote: post #75
beeflet wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is a moot question because UBI and automation will destroy society as we know it through uncontrolled, malthusian growth. I don't think we will last long enough to see what long-term culture that results in. With infinite welfare, the dominant culture will be the one that is able to reproduce as much as possible, perhaps through cloning? We are already seeing IVF, surrogate mothers and other sorts of cloni…

Population is declining in many parts of the world while productivity is increasing. That doesn’t sound like a world of scarcity. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/18/business/china-population...

We live in a world that is largely still pre-cloning and pre-surrogacy. It will take a couple generations for these new sexual strategies to propagate (for example https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/the-chinese-billionaire...).

I would describe the current state of disaster, where reproduction is limited by sexual competition and not by resources as similar calhoun's rat utopia. In the western world, it is also driven by market factors such as land ownership and cultural expectations around that. Whereas in china there are population limits resulting from the one-child policy (anti-malthusian policy). I maintain that my position in my previous comment is true in the large despite these local effects.

In countries where you have a welfare system, you tend to see new strategies emerge after a couple of generations. In the USA, a significant number of african-american households are dependent on EBT. In Israel, the population of "Haredi" ultra-orthodox subgroup is subsidized and has grown year over year (https://youtu.be/ST_eZwBIMDA). I suggest that it is largely a social effect, because it is effected by the rate of cultural diffusion between the welfare/reproduction maximizing subgroup and the broader society. But it still represents an adaptation.

Re: Why the Tech World Thinks the American Dream Is Dying

#82

Post by foltik »

beeflet wrote: post #80
foltik wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> UBI makes these criteria meaningless. No, it doesn’t. You’re just assuming this is the case because it destabilizes the hierarchy you’re implicitly attached to. Notice the pattern: women’s preferences are just artificial constraints, meaning and agency are hand waved away, and what’s left is a simplistic model of mindless replicators constrained only by available resources. The dynamics of human society reduced to…

Women's preferences aren't artificial constraints (I would stress that they are a fundamental regulating factor in human society), but in a UBI world they would be made artificial. In a world with cloning and surrogacy, they will become irrelevant constraints. If there are unlimited resources, there is no need to select for a suitable mate, so this skill will be unlearned. Humans don't reproduce like e. coli, but in…

Humans don’t have a single utility function like bacteria adapting to antibiotics do. When one constraint is relaxed, a fractal of others emerges. Behavior dominates any evolutionary effect. That’s exactly what we observe in rich societies.

You never articulate why reproduction would become the dominant axis of selection, except by assuming it from the start. People empirically do not behave that way when material constraints are relaxed.

> the process of evolution is necessarily actuated through suffering

That’s a quasi-religious claim. At that point you’re no longer arguing “this will happen,” but rather “this must not happen,” because abundance threatens a worldview where hierarchy and enforced struggle are what give life meaning. That’s not “the big picture,” it’s your big picture.

Look at the last thousand years. We’ve removed famine, plague, illiteracy, and constant violence, once considered inevitable and essential to discipline and social order. Society didn’t collapse into meaningless each time those went away; we simply gained more freedom to choose for ourselves what gives life meaning.

Re: Why the Tech World Thinks the American Dream Is Dying

#83

Post by VirusNewbie »

Pooge wrote: post #79
jgwil2 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But "using wealth" precisely means spending money, doesn't it? That is to say, the opposite of hoarding?

Exactly. And guess what would happen if 1 million was divided between 100'000 people ? This would mean 10k per person and it's fair to say that at least half would spend (some of) it. Therefore, the velocity has increased. A person having 200 billion is not spending a big percentage of their wealth nor using it. Yes it's not cash but it doesn't mean it's unusable. I'm not against the ability to be rich; I'm against t…

>A person having 200 billion is not spending a big percentage of their wealth nor using it

How is it not being used? Walk me step by step where you think this money 'is'. It really seems like you're not understanding here, or maybe i'm just not understanding, so please go slow, explain EXACTLY where you think the money is and why it's not being used like you say.

Re: Why the Tech World Thinks the American Dream Is Dying

#84

Post by Pooge »

VirusNewbie wrote: post #83
Pooge wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. And guess what would happen if 1 million was divided between 100'000 people ? This would mean 10k per person and it's fair to say that at least half would spend (some of) it. Therefore, the velocity has increased. A person having 200 billion is not spending a big percentage of their wealth nor using it. Yes it's not cash but it doesn't mean it's unusable. I'm not against the ability to be rich; I'm against t…

>A person having 200 billion is not spending a big percentage of their wealth nor using it How is it not being used? Walk me step by step where you think this money 'is'. It really seems like you're not understanding here, or maybe i'm just not understanding, so please go slow, explain EXACTLY where you think the money is and why it's not being used like you say.

If I have the equivalent of $100B in shares and keep them for a very long time, the $100B exchanged hands about 0 times. Therefore, the vast majority of the wealth did not move one bit (literally).

I don't know how you imagine that billionaires use their money but I think we have very different ideas.

Re: Why the Tech World Thinks the American Dream Is Dying

#85

Post by VirusNewbie »

Pooge wrote: post #84
VirusNewbie wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>A person having 200 billion is not spending a big percentage of their wealth nor using it How is it not being used? Walk me step by step where you think this money 'is'. It really seems like you're not understanding here, or maybe i'm just not understanding, so please go slow, explain EXACTLY where you think the money is and why it's not being used like you say.

If I have the equivalent of $100B in shares and keep them for a very long time, the $100B exchanged hands about 0 times. Therefore, the vast majority of the wealth did not move one bit (literally). I don't know how you imagine that billionaires use their money but I think we have very different ideas.

JFC do you not know how the modern banking system works? Do you understand how market caps are calculated??? (surely not, why am I even asking).

Do you not know how the fucking STOCK MARKET works? Why are you having this discussion about things waaaay over your head?

The only "money" that is not moving is the company cash they store in a vault somewhere. If Amazon has 40 million dollars in the bank, it is exchanging hand MANY times. It's being loaned out by the bank. This is fucking basic stuff that's embarrassing for people not to know.

Now onto stocks.

Let me explain really really simply: If I start a company and someone invests 10 million in the company, i'm. using that to hire some engineers and buy some servers, etc. The money is exchanging hands. My 'wealth' is now a billion dollars because I only gave up 1% of the company for that ten million. What money am I hoarding? That billion is literally created from nothing, there was no 'billion' before I took that investment. Do you understand something that basic?

Re: Why the Tech World Thinks the American Dream Is Dying

#86

Post by Pooge »

VirusNewbie wrote: post #85
Pooge wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I have the equivalent of $100B in shares and keep them for a very long time, the $100B exchanged hands about 0 times. Therefore, the vast majority of the wealth did not move one bit (literally). I don't know how you imagine that billionaires use their money but I think we have very different ideas.

JFC do you not know how the modern banking system works? Do you understand how market caps are calculated??? (surely not, why am I even asking). Do you not know how the fucking STOCK MARKET works? Why are you having this discussion about things waaaay over your head? The only "money" that is not moving is the company cash they store in a vault somewhere. If Amazon has 40 million dollars in the bank, it is exchanging…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN