9 ms·

Most places with high per-capita GDP (Canada, Scandinavia, England, Germany etc) have found that they can make meaningful, consistent, incremental progress on a

by dlkf 7y ago

Most places with high per-capita GDP (Canada, Scandinavia, England, Germany etc) have found that they can make meaningful, consistent, incremental progress on a lot of the problems Krein is trying to address through introducing a public system in sectors like healthcare, education, and child care - probably literally the only tack Krein would never agree to. The problem isn't "billionaires" or "capitalism." I would probably rather billionaires lock up their money in Vangaurd stock - where its allocation is at least beholden to market forces - than spent it on misguided vanity projects. The problem is that market failure is a real thing. Every other country on the planet seems to have realized this.

frockington1 7y ago
I would rather live in a country where an individual can save and invest to become a billionaire. Look at America vs Canada, Scandinavia, England, and Germany the last decade. Where is the growth and innovation in those countries? Why do brilliant people flock to America to start their start up? I want to live in a country with opportunity, not one of equality. Thankfully with an American or EU passport you can choose where you want to live with relative ease.
- rustyboy 7y ago
  That's a false dichotomy. There is no reason that you can't have the opportunity to be a billionaire, while making sure that no one goes homeless or dies from a preventable disease. People love to point to FANNG but the reality is America did this for the boomers, union membership was over 30% and we still had super wealthy people. CEO to average employee income was around 80:1, now it's closer to 250:1. When 3 people own 50% of all wealth in America (1) it's not insane to say that we have a serious problem. I don't want everyone in America guaranteed a six figure salary but come on there's got to be a better balance. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahkirsch/2017/11/09/the-3-richest-americans-hold-more-wealth-than-bottom-50-of-country-study-finds/#411bc28f3cf8 https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahkirsch/2017/11/09/the-3-ric...
  - frockington1 7y ago
    I agree that there can be more equitable distribution. I struggle with why seizing wealth through taxes is the current war drum being beat. I think the most productive means to making wealth would be stressing the importance of investing and compound growth as part of the high school curriculum. Note: That's where my idea ends right now, I don't have a viable implementation path
    - squiggleblaz 7y ago
      How can you invest when you have to decide whether to fix the car or eat? The rules aren't fair, they're made by the rich. Learning how to follow them won't make you richer because they're designed to increase the wealth at the top. Almost no-one advocates seizing wealth hrough tax. Merely work (income). Since the rich have wealth and the poor work (earn income)
      - frockington1 7y ago
        Learning how to follow rules is exatly how to become rich. Entry level retail store now pays 15/hr. 60 hours at week equates to 48k/year. Hardly unfair
        i_haz_rabies 7y ago
        Try working for 60 hours a week at minimum wage with kids and let me know how much time you have left to spend managing investments.
        frockington1 7y ago
        So 30 hrs/week for each parent.... ? I personally work ~50-60 hours a week and have plenty of time for investments. It takes around 10 minutes a week to manage, could probably trim that to 10 minutes per quarter
        anigbrowl 7y ago
        Either you're trolling or extremely naive. $48k/year ain't shit when a) you'll pay some of that back in taxes and b) in places where you can get $15/hour for retail you also need to shell out $30k/year just to have a small studio apartment.
- dlkf 7y ago
  > I would rather live in a country where an individual can save and invest to become a billionaire. Steinbeck has a dynamite line about this. It's a goofy point at any rate because there is no evidence that you can realistically _save_ to become a billionaire. It's typically inherited. > Where is the growth and innovation in those countries? Literally everywhere? A fun exercise is to read about some burgeoning Canadian or European tech companies and contrast them with eg Uber or WeWork. > I want to live in a country with opportunity, not one of equality Without public schools and healthcare, most people get no opportunity.
  - whytaka 7y ago
    > Steinbeck has a dynamite line about this. I'd appreciate you quoting it.
    - steveklabnik 7y ago
      “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” It's often attributed to Steinbeck but in my understanding, it's not entirely clear if that's true or not.
      - whytaka 7y ago
        Ah right! Should've made the connection. Since I have you for a moment, let me just say I admire the work you do for Rust.
        steveklabnik 7y ago
        Thank you!
gpanders 7y ago
> The problem is that market failure is a real thing At least two of the examples you site (healthcare and education) are nowhere near being functional markets, so blaming market failure for poor outcomes in these sectors seems like a red herring.

by dlkf 7y ago

frockington1 7y ago

I would rather live in a country where an individual can save and invest to become a billionaire. Look at America vs Canada, Scandinavia, England, and Germany the last decade. Where is the growth and innovation in those countries? Why do brilliant people flock to America to start their start up? I want to live in a country with opportunity, not one of equality. Thankfully with an American or EU passport you can choose where you want to live with relative ease.

rustyboy 7y ago
That's a false dichotomy. There is no reason that you can't have the opportunity to be a billionaire, while making sure that no one goes homeless or dies from a preventable disease. People love to point to FANNG but the reality is America did this for the boomers, union membership was over 30% and we still had super wealthy people. CEO to average employee income was around 80:1, now it's closer to 250:1. When 3 people own 50% of all wealth in America (1) it's not insane to say that we have a serious problem. I don't want everyone in America guaranteed a six figure salary but come on there's got to be a better balance. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahkirsch/2017/11/09/the-3-richest-americans-hold-more-wealth-than-bottom-50-of-country-study-finds/#411bc28f3cf8 https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahkirsch/2017/11/09/the-3-ric...
- frockington1 7y ago
  I agree that there can be more equitable distribution. I struggle with why seizing wealth through taxes is the current war drum being beat. I think the most productive means to making wealth would be stressing the importance of investing and compound growth as part of the high school curriculum. Note: That's where my idea ends right now, I don't have a viable implementation path
  - squiggleblaz 7y ago
    How can you invest when you have to decide whether to fix the car or eat? The rules aren't fair, they're made by the rich. Learning how to follow them won't make you richer because they're designed to increase the wealth at the top. Almost no-one advocates seizing wealth hrough tax. Merely work (income). Since the rich have wealth and the poor work (earn income)
    - frockington1 7y ago
      Learning how to follow rules is exatly how to become rich. Entry level retail store now pays 15/hr. 60 hours at week equates to 48k/year. Hardly unfair
      - i_haz_rabies 7y ago
        Try working for 60 hours a week at minimum wage with kids and let me know how much time you have left to spend managing investments.
        frockington1 7y ago
        So 30 hrs/week for each parent.... ? I personally work ~50-60 hours a week and have plenty of time for investments. It takes around 10 minutes a week to manage, could probably trim that to 10 minutes per quarter
      - anigbrowl 7y ago
        Either you're trolling or extremely naive. $48k/year ain't shit when a) you'll pay some of that back in taxes and b) in places where you can get $15/hour for retail you also need to shell out $30k/year just to have a small studio apartment.
dlkf 7y ago
> I would rather live in a country where an individual can save and invest to become a billionaire. Steinbeck has a dynamite line about this. It's a goofy point at any rate because there is no evidence that you can realistically _save_ to become a billionaire. It's typically inherited. > Where is the growth and innovation in those countries? Literally everywhere? A fun exercise is to read about some burgeoning Canadian or European tech companies and contrast them with eg Uber or WeWork. > I want to live in a country with opportunity, not one of equality Without public schools and healthcare, most people get no opportunity.
- whytaka 7y ago
  > Steinbeck has a dynamite line about this. I'd appreciate you quoting it.
  - steveklabnik 7y ago
    “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” It's often attributed to Steinbeck but in my understanding, it's not entirely clear if that's true or not.
    - whytaka 7y ago
      Ah right! Should've made the connection. Since I have you for a moment, let me just say I admire the work you do for Rust.
      - steveklabnik 7y ago
        Thank you!

gpanders 7y ago

> The problem is that market failure is a real thing At least two of the examples you site (healthcare and education) are nowhere near being functional markets, so blaming market failure for poor outcomes in these sectors seems like a red herring.