7 ms·

I kept reading .. and reading .. .. and reading .. .. and still no point made, so I gave up.

teekert 6y ago
I just read the title, imho it is probably this: No god > No afterlife > These X years are it > Best invest in becoming happy > Happiness is not joy or money > Most Human happiness is in rich social interactions and feeling safe > Rich social interactions and a big family means dying with a lot of grand children, this would make most people happy > Feeling safe is about not leaving your relatives in debt or having to cook meth to pay for cancer treatment > Socialism (which I would argue is the American word for what most "socialist" countries call "common sense" -society).
- andydavieswork 6y ago
  That escalated quickly.
  - teekert 6y ago
    Yeah, I just loved the American dream that Breaking Bad portrays, I feel like Walter White's actions are justified and his slow corruption seems almost inevitable. Can we blame the man? He starts out as a victim, then heads down a path of power induced corruption. What a story.
    - maeln 6y ago
      I just re-watched breaking bad and I really don't think the show justify at any point Walter actions. From the beginning Walter has solutions, people offer him several ways. But he decline all of them because of his ego and turn more and more to criminality to satisfy his hunger for power. Their is a harsh criticism of the US medical insurance system since every time someone need care in the show, either insurance decline coverage or provide a subpar one. But thats about it, Walter slow descent into a evil power junky is mostly describe as a result of his own character and decision. A simple chemical-teacher that missed his big break and live a fairly bland suburban life and finally get to break this and feed the frustration he had all along.
      - teekert 6y ago
        You'd accept money from friends? Where does that stop? At some point he wields real power. It corrupts him, I wonder how many people would not be corrupted and just pay their cancer bills and move on (like any normal person would think they would do.)
        WalterSear 6y ago
        > You'd accept money from friends? Where does that stop? Before I start a meth lab.
- jacobush 6y ago
  Feeling safe is about selling bone density scanners and drag your kid to a homeless shelter and sleep on the floor of a restroom.
- perceptronas 6y ago
  Article argues that capitalism should be abolished completely instead of being altered. So it is socialism, not "American common sense society"
  - splintercell 6y ago
    It would be obvious why OP is purposefully misreading the article and calling it "Common sense society".
  - teekert 6y ago
    In that case, I disagree! I love capitalism, I'd argue it's just ill and it's illness is called "lobbying, misinformation and companies' involvement in politics". We can, as free humans, choose to build a society where one is helped when one needs help.
    - aloisdg 6y ago
      So instead of right wing liberalism and authoritarian left, something in the libertarian left. Freedom, decentralization, support for all. Whoever you are, you are welcome to the anarchy movement. No capitalism here though, you are no going to pay for the help you need.
  - slowmovintarget 6y ago
    Because no where in the article does the main thrust of religion--personal responsibility for doing good in the world--enter into the discussion. It begs the question by trying to show that obviously doing good to get to Heaven is really about the community, therefore we should all be Marxists. Being a good person will have a positive effect on the community in which you live, but the point is not about how high your utility to the community is. The point of being a good person is that it reduces suffering, or at the least makes it meaningful. But individualism, in this formal sense, is anathema to such discussions.
- gridlockd 6y ago
  The only issue is that even "common sense" socialism doesn't work in the long run. All generous welfare systems run on unfunded liabilities. That amounts to a Ponzi scheme, which will collapse along with the birthrate. If all these goals were attainable at the same time, capitalism would happily sell it to people. Keep in mind, in the US, there's neither capitalism nor socialism. There's the worst of both worlds. Virtually all political reform can be sabotaged by crying "socialism!", but corporate welfare goes through unchallenged.
  - Spearchucker 6y ago
    There's a halfway house. Give everybody a basic living wage. If somebody wants to do more, sich as being a doctor, engineer or farmer, then pay them commensurately more. Change taxation to suit.
    - gridlockd 6y ago
      I'm all in favor of a negative income tax. In turn, get rid of all the entitlements and all the red tape.
    - uk_programmer 6y ago
      No. It is wrong to take from those who want to work to give to those that don't want to. I already pay almost good portion of my earnings to the government to see it squandered on nonsense (e.g. look up the HS2 project in the UK). I am just about to buy property (I've been working now for 20 years and 15 as a software engineer), If I hadn't been paying as much tax I could have bought a property years ago. Having a form of UBI will increase the tax burden on medium to high earners such as myself. I simply don't believe it is ethical to offer UBI i.e. you are taking my earnings to fund those that unwilling to work, even if it is a tiny percentage it is still wrong on principle. I don't mind my taxes providing a support mechanism for those that are unable to work due to a disability, illness or simply becoming too old to work or have become unemployed for no fault of their own (e.g. business foreclosed).
      - gridlockd 6y ago
- hiddenAgenda 6y ago
  I think that one needs to be careful to use names that describe political systems to refer to things that are philosophical. Systems are judged historically and empirically, and that is why communism is bad. Ask people who grew up in the USSR, especially from their "republics". Similarly, one should be careful to parade your philosophy under the umbrella of "socialism". No God, no afterlife, time being important has absolutely nothing to do with political systems. If it has, then you have a hidden agenda.
gridlockd 6y ago
The fundamental problem with these essays is that their authors don't get paid for the words they didn't write.
waingake 6y ago
Try the audio version :) the reviewer here does take the slow burn approach on this, but it's worth it. I'm reading the book currently and am really enjoying it so was excited to see it get such a comprehensive and ultimately glowing review. But tbh I was a bit annoyed at how long this review takes to get going :)
dang 6y ago
Ok, but please don't post unsubstantive comments here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I just read the title, imho it is probably this: No god > No afterlife > These X years are it > Best invest in becoming happy > Happiness is not joy or money > Most Human happiness is in rich social interactions and feeling safe > Rich social interactions and a big family means dying with a lot of grand children, this would make most people happy > Feeling safe is about not leaving your relatives in debt or having to cook meth to pay for cancer treatment > Socialism (which I would argue is the American word for what most "socialist" countries call "common sense" -society).

andydavieswork 6y ago
That escalated quickly.
- teekert 6y ago
  Yeah, I just loved the American dream that Breaking Bad portrays, I feel like Walter White's actions are justified and his slow corruption seems almost inevitable. Can we blame the man? He starts out as a victim, then heads down a path of power induced corruption. What a story.
  - maeln 6y ago
    I just re-watched breaking bad and I really don't think the show justify at any point Walter actions. From the beginning Walter has solutions, people offer him several ways. But he decline all of them because of his ego and turn more and more to criminality to satisfy his hunger for power. Their is a harsh criticism of the US medical insurance system since every time someone need care in the show, either insurance decline coverage or provide a subpar one. But thats about it, Walter slow descent into a evil power junky is mostly describe as a result of his own character and decision. A simple chemical-teacher that missed his big break and live a fairly bland suburban life and finally get to break this and feed the frustration he had all along.
    - teekert 6y ago
      You'd accept money from friends? Where does that stop? At some point he wields real power. It corrupts him, I wonder how many people would not be corrupted and just pay their cancer bills and move on (like any normal person would think they would do.)
      - WalterSear 6y ago
        > You'd accept money from friends? Where does that stop? Before I start a meth lab.
jacobush 6y ago
Feeling safe is about selling bone density scanners and drag your kid to a homeless shelter and sleep on the floor of a restroom.
perceptronas 6y ago
Article argues that capitalism should be abolished completely instead of being altered. So it is socialism, not "American common sense society"
- splintercell 6y ago
  It would be obvious why OP is purposefully misreading the article and calling it "Common sense society".
- teekert 6y ago
  In that case, I disagree! I love capitalism, I'd argue it's just ill and it's illness is called "lobbying, misinformation and companies' involvement in politics". We can, as free humans, choose to build a society where one is helped when one needs help.
  - aloisdg 6y ago
    So instead of right wing liberalism and authoritarian left, something in the libertarian left. Freedom, decentralization, support for all. Whoever you are, you are welcome to the anarchy movement. No capitalism here though, you are no going to pay for the help you need.
- slowmovintarget 6y ago
  Because no where in the article does the main thrust of religion--personal responsibility for doing good in the world--enter into the discussion. It begs the question by trying to show that obviously doing good to get to Heaven is really about the community, therefore we should all be Marxists. Being a good person will have a positive effect on the community in which you live, but the point is not about how high your utility to the community is. The point of being a good person is that it reduces suffering, or at the least makes it meaningful. But individualism, in this formal sense, is anathema to such discussions.
gridlockd 6y ago
The only issue is that even "common sense" socialism doesn't work in the long run. All generous welfare systems run on unfunded liabilities. That amounts to a Ponzi scheme, which will collapse along with the birthrate. If all these goals were attainable at the same time, capitalism would happily sell it to people. Keep in mind, in the US, there's neither capitalism nor socialism. There's the worst of both worlds. Virtually all political reform can be sabotaged by crying "socialism!", but corporate welfare goes through unchallenged.
- Spearchucker 6y ago
  There's a halfway house. Give everybody a basic living wage. If somebody wants to do more, sich as being a doctor, engineer or farmer, then pay them commensurately more. Change taxation to suit.
  - gridlockd 6y ago
    I'm all in favor of a negative income tax. In turn, get rid of all the entitlements and all the red tape.
  - uk_programmer 6y ago
    No. It is wrong to take from those who want to work to give to those that don't want to. I already pay almost good portion of my earnings to the government to see it squandered on nonsense (e.g. look up the HS2 project in the UK). I am just about to buy property (I've been working now for 20 years and 15 as a software engineer), If I hadn't been paying as much tax I could have bought a property years ago. Having a form of UBI will increase the tax burden on medium to high earners such as myself. I simply don't believe it is ethical to offer UBI i.e. you are taking my earnings to fund those that unwilling to work, even if it is a tiny percentage it is still wrong on principle. I don't mind my taxes providing a support mechanism for those that are unable to work due to a disability, illness or simply becoming too old to work or have become unemployed for no fault of their own (e.g. business foreclosed).
    - gridlockd 6y ago
hiddenAgenda 6y ago
I think that one needs to be careful to use names that describe political systems to refer to things that are philosophical. Systems are judged historically and empirically, and that is why communism is bad. Ask people who grew up in the USSR, especially from their "republics". Similarly, one should be careful to parade your philosophy under the umbrella of "socialism". No God, no afterlife, time being important has absolutely nothing to do with political systems. If it has, then you have a hidden agenda.

gridlockd 6y ago

The fundamental problem with these essays is that their authors don't get paid for the words they didn't write.

waingake 6y ago

Try the audio version :) the reviewer here does take the slow burn approach on this, but it's worth it. I'm reading the book currently and am really enjoying it so was excited to see it get such a comprehensive and ultimately glowing review. But tbh I was a bit annoyed at how long this review takes to get going :)

dang 6y ago

Ok, but please don't post unsubstantive comments here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html