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

Degrees of Wealth

jaapgrolleman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–87 of 87 posts

Re: Degrees of Wealth

#81

Post by CPLX »

bluGill wrote: post #59
CPLX wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Otherwise you get the Europe situation I love when people use this as an argument. As far as I can tell “the Europe situation” is the most successful model for social and economic governance the world has produced so far.

That is a matter for debate. Europe generally doesn't have a bad life. However depending on what you personally value you might find it could be better. Would you be willing to compromise the lower work hours for more money - that might be the better choice for some people.

Well, of course. But I think any list of well-run countries, societies, and so on that doesn't have places like Scandinavia and Switzerland tied for first is a little bit confused.

Re: Degrees of Wealth

#82

Post by red-iron-pine »

heaney-555 wrote: post #60

>In broad strokes, the Netherlands is a small-scale, low-tech society. Small-scale in that the city hall here has just one window open to queue at, whereas Shanghai has hundreds of citizen service centres, each with dozens of desks. There’s one ATM I know of, and a small library (which, I must say, had a lot of visitors, from young to old). It sounds a lot like the author is comparing their small town in the Netherla…

Shanghai is a global mega city, in the top 5 largest, #5 after Tokyo and Delhi

no comparison, really. estimated population for the Shanghai metro area is more than many first world countries.

Re: Degrees of Wealth

#83

Post by a34729t »

CPLX wrote: post #25
a34729t wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree: Re happiness is greatly increased by not having stress of worrying about paying bills. Re wealth distribution, that works for a generation or two maybe, but you do need people to actually work eventually. Otherwise you get the Europe situation where everybody wants benefits, 6 weeks of vacation and a 30 hour work week. That's great, but when China and the US are slobbering to take over every industry (or obs…

> Otherwise you get the Europe situation I love when people use this as an argument. As far as I can tell “the Europe situation” is the most successful model for social and economic governance the world has produced so far.

How long will it last though?

Re: Degrees of Wealth

#84

Post by phyzix5761 »

hackyhacky wrote: post #61
bluGill wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about billionaires, but I do know couples who between the two are earning nearly a million dollars per year - yet because their spending has grown to match their income they are stressed about having enough food to eat the last few days of every month - even worse than poor people I know who have almost nothing. Sure they both are driving new cars, living in a large house (near mansion?), their kids are…

I don't understand the point of your comment. Am I supposed to feel sorry for the irresponsible upper middle class who spent themselves into debt? Do you think that equates at all to actually poverty?

You're trying to villainize people just because of their net worth. They're human just like everybody else and as such they have desires and aversions which lead them to stress and suffering like everyone else.

Like the commenter you're replying to I know people who live in poverty who are very happy and lead fulfilling lives. I also know people who are millionaires who are constantly stressed for multiple reasons; including financial and non-financial reasons.

Re: Degrees of Wealth

#85

Post by woopah »

smallnamespace wrote: post #80
woopah wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it's true that a lot of China's conveniences come from essentially labor market arbitrage and rural/urban inequality, the fact that the Netherlands can afford to attempt to reduce wealth inequality is a sign itself that it's a very wealthy country. I would also prefer the pace of life in the Netherlands, but I wonder to what extent you also have to buy more fairness and a slower pace of life?

> attempt to reduce wealth inequality is a sign itself that it's a very wealthy country Poor countries also reduce wealth inequality. In fact, China went through a Communist revolution where all private landowners’ wealth was taken from them. This happened from the 1930s through the 1950s and was a fairly bloody, violent process, involving lots of revolutionaries inciting peasants to forcibly occupy land and building…

Good point, I guess another way to reduce inequality is by your ruling party having an extremely ideological stance, pragmatics be damned, although I imagine most people wouldn't prefer this method

Re: Degrees of Wealth

#86

Post by hackyhacky »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #84
hackyhacky wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the point of your comment. Am I supposed to feel sorry for the irresponsible upper middle class who spent themselves into debt? Do you think that equates at all to actually poverty?

You're trying to villainize people just because of their net worth. They're human just like everybody else and as such they have desires and aversions which lead them to stress and suffering like everyone else. Like the commenter you're replying to I know people who live in poverty who are very happy and lead fulfilling lives. I also know people who are millionaires who are constantly stressed for multiple reasons; i…

> they have desires and aversions which lead them to stress and suffering like everyone else.

That's the point: they don't stress "like everyone else." Stressing over whether you'll be able to afford your fifth home is not the same as stressing over whether you're going to lose your only home.

When you're rich, stress is a lifestyle choice. Some people thrive on that kind of pressure. But the actual, real-world risks between the rich and the poor are not comparable.

Re: Degrees of Wealth

#87

Post by hackyhacky »

bluGill wrote: post #72
hackyhacky wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the point of your comment. Am I supposed to feel sorry for the irresponsible upper middle class who spent themselves into debt? Do you think that equates at all to actually poverty?

No. You are supposed to understand them, and why despite having so much more wealth they often really do feel like they are in real poverty. I don't have sympathy for them either. I'm working hard enough to make my own [slightly] more modest life balance and wishing I had some of the toys they do, but I can't afford.

> why despite having so much more wealth they often really do feel like they are in real poverty.

Why are you so concerned about the feelings of the rich who choose feel stress despite suffering little to no actual risk to their lifestyle, and so unconcerned about the poor, who suffer very real material risks?

Post reply on HN