5 ms·

even the relatively intelligent and contrarian crowd on HN doesn't like hearing this. there's no way we're not screwed in the long term.

ars 17y ago
The parent post was modded down to -1, but had no replies. That is NOT appropriate on this site. You only downmod for spam and stupid comments. If they are wrong they go to 0. If you disagree then reply, but you don't downmod just because you disagree.
- nazgulnarsil 17y ago
  he was at -3 when i originally responded. I can understand why a comment like that gets downvoted. to the other side it sounds like pretty bald rhetoric. unfortunately the broken window fallacy is very much with us. most people don't grasp the underlying difference between money and wealth, which is why I'm constantly handing out PG's essays.
- tokenadult 17y ago
  You only downmod for spam and stupid comments. That is still under discussion. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 (The linked comment is not the most current comment on the issue, I'm pretty sure, but one that came up readily by searching.) An older comment by pg http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 appears now to be superseded in part. I will follow the group culture here where pg (the site founder) and the moderators take it.
  - nazgulnarsil 17y ago
    in reality people will always vote in accordance with making the thread look more like they think the thread should look.
baguasquirrel 17y ago
As others have pointed out, we were screwed in the long term anyway. We (1) ran deficits through the previous decade, (2) we left the interest rates too low for too long and (3) we went on a spending binge in all levels of society (consumers bought too much, banks lent too much). The time for making the correct choices has long passed. Now there are only bad choices and worse choices. If we hadn't done (1) and (3), then running deficits right now would be a good option. After a certain point, increases in debt begin to dampen growth in GDP, which means that the gov't won't be able to stimulus away the problem anymore. In that light, the current administration is merely doing what makes sense. Spend whatever amount of stimulus makes sense during their tenure because the economy will need it whether it's now or later. Not spending it will mean that whoever is the challenger in 2012 may well win, and whoever the challenger is will probably dish out stimulus money in some form or another anyway.
rms 17y ago
The world still has a lot of wealth and is continually generating more wealth. The financial system is imaginary enough that our best macroeconomists can probably sort out the collapse of US government debt. It won't be pretty, but it won't be the end of the world or even the end of the USA.
- nazgulnarsil 17y ago
  yes, humans run a surplus. but what do they use that surplus for? I'm concerned about the underlying lack of critical thinking when it comes to basic economics. finance majors shouldn't be the only people to understand marginal utility, preference ranking etc. these things impact everyone every day of their lives. I used to rage at all the ignorance on display even among the more thoughtful/non-violent libertarian types. But I've lately become apathetic. The same arguments have been going around and around since the time of Cato the Younger. The more history I study the more I believe that humans are not going to save themselves by virtue of critical thinking about social engineering. It's basically technology or bust. And that is a dangerous game. Sorry for the melodrama. It's late.
  - rms 17y ago
    I graduated from college 3 months ago and didn't get a real job and I haven't been looking for a real job. My Tim Ferris-like businesses pay the bills so I've had a lot of time to read on the internet. I also figured out how to keep up with the comments on Less Wrong, and it feels like being able to comment there without getting downmodded for being wrong has really changed my thought patterns. I'd really recommend trying to read the recent comments page and reply whenever you can say something that isn't wrong, even if you need to minimize yourself by adding lots of phrases like "I think." I've basically given up on politics. I self-identify as a left-libertarian, but I think most left-libertarians are deeply misguided, just like most right-libertarians. Most right-libertarians can't even see that they have a great deal of shared beliefs with left-libertarians. Anarchism is just my favorite political utopia; not a pragmatic ideology. Some hybrid of left and right libertarianism would be much better in practice than either extreme. Political discourse needs a healthy dose of meta-discussion. An example reason why I've given up on politics: We know exactly what is happening with global warming, the IPCC report from 2007 is basically correct. Global warming is happening, and thousands and thousands of animal species are going to go extinct, and hundreds of millions of people are going to have more trouble getting food and water. That's bad, and we should be doing a lot to stop it, but it's basically too late to stop. The current argument about global warming will just preserve the scenarios outlined by the IPCC in 2007. So the left misses that global warming has absolutely no chance of bringing the end of human civilization. And the right misses that global warming is certainly happening and is still really bad, even though it isn't going to bring about the downfall of human civilization. My private discussions since my Less Wrong post about the Craigslist Revolution have actually lead to some very interesting private discussions about saving humanity with social engineering, but you're right, it's basically technology or bust. I'm an optimist.
wooster 17y ago
The US government debt is all in US dollars. Who controls the value of the US dollar? Yeah. Do the math.
- sailormoon 17y ago
  Oh yeah. Drop the value of the USD by 50%, I dare you. So tell me, what doesn't the USA import?
  - torial 17y ago
    For the most part, our politicians. Notable exceptions being gov of California. Not sure that we import many weapons, since we make so much at home. We have lots of corn and pigs. So what's the point?
    - sailormoon 17y ago
      My point is that the sudden doubling of the price of oil and every other import would have a profound effect on the USA. It might be desirable anyway, despite the cost, but it is not something that can be done on a whim without any consequences, as the parent to my comment seemed to suggest.
ninguem2 17y ago
"In the long term, we are all dead." J. M. Keynes

ars 17y ago

The parent post was modded down to -1, but had no replies. That is NOT appropriate on this site. You only downmod for spam and stupid comments. If they are wrong they go to 0. If you disagree then reply, but you don't downmod just because you disagree.

nazgulnarsil 17y ago
he was at -3 when i originally responded. I can understand why a comment like that gets downvoted. to the other side it sounds like pretty bald rhetoric. unfortunately the broken window fallacy is very much with us. most people don't grasp the underlying difference between money and wealth, which is why I'm constantly handing out PG's essays.
tokenadult 17y ago
You only downmod for spam and stupid comments. That is still under discussion. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 (The linked comment is not the most current comment on the issue, I'm pretty sure, but one that came up readily by searching.) An older comment by pg http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 appears now to be superseded in part. I will follow the group culture here where pg (the site founder) and the moderators take it.
- nazgulnarsil 17y ago
  in reality people will always vote in accordance with making the thread look more like they think the thread should look.

baguasquirrel 17y ago

As others have pointed out, we were screwed in the long term anyway. We (1) ran deficits through the previous decade, (2) we left the interest rates too low for too long and (3) we went on a spending binge in all levels of society (consumers bought too much, banks lent too much). The time for making the correct choices has long passed. Now there are only bad choices and worse choices. If we hadn't done (1) and (3), then running deficits right now would be a good option. After a certain point, increases in debt begin to dampen growth in GDP, which means that the gov't won't be able to stimulus away the problem anymore. In that light, the current administration is merely doing what makes sense. Spend whatever amount of stimulus makes sense during their tenure because the economy will need it whether it's now or later. Not spending it will mean that whoever is the challenger in 2012 may well win, and whoever the challenger is will probably dish out stimulus money in some form or another anyway.

rms 17y ago

The world still has a lot of wealth and is continually generating more wealth. The financial system is imaginary enough that our best macroeconomists can probably sort out the collapse of US government debt. It won't be pretty, but it won't be the end of the world or even the end of the USA.

nazgulnarsil 17y ago
yes, humans run a surplus. but what do they use that surplus for? I'm concerned about the underlying lack of critical thinking when it comes to basic economics. finance majors shouldn't be the only people to understand marginal utility, preference ranking etc. these things impact everyone every day of their lives. I used to rage at all the ignorance on display even among the more thoughtful/non-violent libertarian types. But I've lately become apathetic. The same arguments have been going around and around since the time of Cato the Younger. The more history I study the more I believe that humans are not going to save themselves by virtue of critical thinking about social engineering. It's basically technology or bust. And that is a dangerous game. Sorry for the melodrama. It's late.
- rms 17y ago
  I graduated from college 3 months ago and didn't get a real job and I haven't been looking for a real job. My Tim Ferris-like businesses pay the bills so I've had a lot of time to read on the internet. I also figured out how to keep up with the comments on Less Wrong, and it feels like being able to comment there without getting downmodded for being wrong has really changed my thought patterns. I'd really recommend trying to read the recent comments page and reply whenever you can say something that isn't wrong, even if you need to minimize yourself by adding lots of phrases like "I think." I've basically given up on politics. I self-identify as a left-libertarian, but I think most left-libertarians are deeply misguided, just like most right-libertarians. Most right-libertarians can't even see that they have a great deal of shared beliefs with left-libertarians. Anarchism is just my favorite political utopia; not a pragmatic ideology. Some hybrid of left and right libertarianism would be much better in practice than either extreme. Political discourse needs a healthy dose of meta-discussion. An example reason why I've given up on politics: We know exactly what is happening with global warming, the IPCC report from 2007 is basically correct. Global warming is happening, and thousands and thousands of animal species are going to go extinct, and hundreds of millions of people are going to have more trouble getting food and water. That's bad, and we should be doing a lot to stop it, but it's basically too late to stop. The current argument about global warming will just preserve the scenarios outlined by the IPCC in 2007. So the left misses that global warming has absolutely no chance of bringing the end of human civilization. And the right misses that global warming is certainly happening and is still really bad, even though it isn't going to bring about the downfall of human civilization. My private discussions since my Less Wrong post about the Craigslist Revolution have actually lead to some very interesting private discussions about saving humanity with social engineering, but you're right, it's basically technology or bust. I'm an optimist.

wooster 17y ago

The US government debt is all in US dollars. Who controls the value of the US dollar? Yeah. Do the math.

sailormoon 17y ago
Oh yeah. Drop the value of the USD by 50%, I dare you. So tell me, what doesn't the USA import?
- torial 17y ago
  For the most part, our politicians. Notable exceptions being gov of California. Not sure that we import many weapons, since we make so much at home. We have lots of corn and pigs. So what's the point?
  - sailormoon 17y ago
    My point is that the sudden doubling of the price of oil and every other import would have a profound effect on the USA. It might be desirable anyway, despite the cost, but it is not something that can be done on a whim without any consequences, as the parent to my comment seemed to suggest.

ninguem2 17y ago

"In the long term, we are all dead." J. M. Keynes