4 ms·

Article chooses the slant that its a bad thing that there is disparity. One could claim that in a true dystopia the rich would just make it so insufferable that

Article chooses the slant that its a bad thing that there is disparity. One could claim that in a true dystopia the rich would just make it so insufferable that the poor leave as economic refugees. While I would love for everyone to be "rich" today, it seems that eventual wealth is a good deal, if kind of harsh emotionally. Many of the "poor" (i know there are extreme cases) are richer than kings 1000 yrs ago. I would guess that in 1000 yrs the "poor" of then will be richer than our 1% today.

webappsecperson 10y ago
Thank you for your comment. I think your argument that inequality is the logical extension of humanity's ambition is very common in the tech-sector. How would the mercy of not "making it so insufferable that the poor leave as economic refugees" actually work out? Don't millionaires need non-millionaires to clean their houses, cook their meals, and walk their dogs?
- sp332 10y ago
  Not if the millionaires are just barely affording super-high-rent tiny apartments. And buying their food from billion-dollar-valuation food delivery services.
  - webappsecperson 10y ago
    But those food delivery services would employ part time wage workers. This problem is usually sidestepped by the argument that teachers, policemen, sanitation workers, etc, can't live in the communities they serve and that that's fine as a result of a wider services market, better transportation etc, etc, etc. But at some point you do have to concede that most of the people driving their beat-up 1996 Hondas to bring you fresh sashimi aren't valued in the six figures - and you have to acknowledge and design for it.
    - sp332 10y ago
      Yup, and instead of having a cook per millionaire or so, you have a few people making and delivering food for a bunch of millionaires. So the number of lower-wage people needed is still relatively low.
chdivjdx 10y ago
So the argument of "at least we're not sending them to concentration camps" is supposed to justify the neglect and mistreatment of the less wealthy?
nkrisc 10y ago
The "poor" you know are richer than kings of 1000 years ago? Well sure if you're measuring in dollars they are. Otherwise, what on Earth are you talking about?
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  They can mostly not worry about starvation, and have internet access, and they have some access to flush toilets and showers. What are you talking about? Incan kings slept on stone shelves and covered themselves with poorly tanned animal pelts, and were at the mercy of insects and crop fluctuations. They didn't have modern sewage systems or vaccinations.
  - sp332 10y ago
    They have notoriously poor access to showers. http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/04/01/san-jose-approves-mobile-showers-for-homeless-looks-to-new-housing-projects-2/ http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/04/01/san-jose-approves-mobi...
    - jimmywanger 10y ago
      Hence "some access". A king 1000 years ago would have no conception of what a shower is. They would take baths, but even then, that'd be a seasonal/yearly thing.
      - sp332 10y ago
        Maybe Incan kings were just not very good. European cities had massive public baths right through the middle ages, "and private domestic baths... were hardly unknown to the Romans". https://books.google.com/books?id=KKrhJ9BbMkkC&lpg=PA63&ots=ABGJkGhS4k&dq=bathing%20in%201000%20AD&pg=PA61#v=onepage&q=bathing%20in%201000%20AD&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=KKrhJ9BbMkkC&lpg=PA63&ots=...
- ajss 10y ago
  Modern medicine, access to all the world's knowledge on a handheld device in your pocket, cheap clean/safe water and food from every corner of the world, entertainment (music/films/tv/youtube) cheap/safe transport over thousands of miles in a matter of hours. There's not a chance in hell I'd want to swap places with a king of 1000 years ago.
kLeeIsDead 10y ago
> One could claim that in a true dystopia the rich would just make it so insufferable that the poor leave as economic refugees. that is literally happening right now.
- maerF0x0 10y ago
  I meant it in an absolute sense. "that <all> the poor would leave..." Many choose to stay.
  - kLeeIsDead 10y ago
    so..... if 200 people decide to stay (out of the millions that left), then you're right and i'm wrong. guess i can't argue with that logic.

webappsecperson 10y ago

Thank you for your comment. I think your argument that inequality is the logical extension of humanity's ambition is very common in the tech-sector. How would the mercy of not "making it so insufferable that the poor leave as economic refugees" actually work out? Don't millionaires need non-millionaires to clean their houses, cook their meals, and walk their dogs?

sp332 10y ago
Not if the millionaires are just barely affording super-high-rent tiny apartments. And buying their food from billion-dollar-valuation food delivery services.
- webappsecperson 10y ago
  But those food delivery services would employ part time wage workers. This problem is usually sidestepped by the argument that teachers, policemen, sanitation workers, etc, can't live in the communities they serve and that that's fine as a result of a wider services market, better transportation etc, etc, etc. But at some point you do have to concede that most of the people driving their beat-up 1996 Hondas to bring you fresh sashimi aren't valued in the six figures - and you have to acknowledge and design for it.
  - sp332 10y ago
    Yup, and instead of having a cook per millionaire or so, you have a few people making and delivering food for a bunch of millionaires. So the number of lower-wage people needed is still relatively low.

chdivjdx 10y ago

So the argument of "at least we're not sending them to concentration camps" is supposed to justify the neglect and mistreatment of the less wealthy?

nkrisc 10y ago

The "poor" you know are richer than kings of 1000 years ago? Well sure if you're measuring in dollars they are. Otherwise, what on Earth are you talking about?

jimmywanger 10y ago
They can mostly not worry about starvation, and have internet access, and they have some access to flush toilets and showers. What are you talking about? Incan kings slept on stone shelves and covered themselves with poorly tanned animal pelts, and were at the mercy of insects and crop fluctuations. They didn't have modern sewage systems or vaccinations.
- sp332 10y ago
  They have notoriously poor access to showers. http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/04/01/san-jose-approves-mobile-showers-for-homeless-looks-to-new-housing-projects-2/ http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/04/01/san-jose-approves-mobi...
  - jimmywanger 10y ago
    Hence "some access". A king 1000 years ago would have no conception of what a shower is. They would take baths, but even then, that'd be a seasonal/yearly thing.
    - sp332 10y ago
      Maybe Incan kings were just not very good. European cities had massive public baths right through the middle ages, "and private domestic baths... were hardly unknown to the Romans". https://books.google.com/books?id=KKrhJ9BbMkkC&lpg=PA63&ots=ABGJkGhS4k&dq=bathing%20in%201000%20AD&pg=PA61#v=onepage&q=bathing%20in%201000%20AD&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=KKrhJ9BbMkkC&lpg=PA63&ots=...
ajss 10y ago
Modern medicine, access to all the world's knowledge on a handheld device in your pocket, cheap clean/safe water and food from every corner of the world, entertainment (music/films/tv/youtube) cheap/safe transport over thousands of miles in a matter of hours. There's not a chance in hell I'd want to swap places with a king of 1000 years ago.

kLeeIsDead 10y ago

> One could claim that in a true dystopia the rich would just make it so insufferable that the poor leave as economic refugees. that is literally happening right now.

maerF0x0 10y ago
I meant it in an absolute sense. "that <all> the poor would leave..." Many choose to stay.
- kLeeIsDead 10y ago
  so..... if 200 people decide to stay (out of the millions that left), then you're right and i'm wrong. guess i can't argue with that logic.