4 ms·

Because that de-incentives people, entrepreneurship, and stifles innovation and growth. @pavlov per your profile, you work at Facebook (which I assume making we

Because that de-incentives people, entrepreneurship, and stifles innovation and growth. @pavlov per your profile, you work at Facebook (which I assume making well over $250k a year) and yet your pushing for a socialist agenda? Seems very hypocritical. I've said this before here on HN, but Naval Ravikant (of AngelList) nailed the problem with government pay subsidies and universal basic income on a podcast with Joe Rogan. "The moment you start having a direct transfer mechanism like that in democracy, you're basically doing away with capitalism which is the engine of economic growth. You're also forcing the entrepreneur out, or telling them not to come here." "People who are down on their luck, they're not looking for handouts. It's not just about money, it's also about status and meaning. The moment I start giving money to you, I've lowered your status and made you a second class citizen.”

esrauch 6y ago
If it's hypocritical for rich people to advocate socialism, and just self-serving theft for a poor person to advocate socialism, then no one can advocate it in good faith? I think your quotes are a bit strawmanning: they are good responses to someone is advocating for no private property. There's a large spectrum in the middle that includes single payer insurance and free college that are still very far away from "there's no incentive for anyone to make money anymore!"
sebastien_b 6y ago
People being “down on their luck” is usually through something else than “bad luck” - it’s far more often because of systemic problems (like how Black people have historically been marginalized, and continue to be).
- nodesocket 6y ago
  So then people who have built wealth completely on their own (self-made) and built great US companies did so because they were not marginalized? That's nonsense.
  - sebastien_b 6y ago
    LOLs way to twist my words out of context. I was specifically referring to people less fortunate, usually given far less opportunities, often due to their race, religion or something similar. And if you don’t believe that’s true, then that is nonsense.
  - trowawee 6y ago
    No one has “built wealth completely on their own”. Every rich person, in every country on earth, has in some way been assisted in building their wealth, whether that’s directly, like Bezos getting $250k from his parents (nearly half a million in 2020 dollars), or indirectly, like Buffet building a substantial amount of his holdings on monopolies in an era when the federal government was aggresively downsizing its anti-trust investigation and enforcement efforts, or the modern internet giants building fortunes on the bones of the federal and state research that created and maintain the physical infrastructre of the web.
  - craftinator 6y ago
    No one builds wealth entirely on their own. And the people who are the most "self-made", as in were born into poverty and ended up in upper middle class or higher income levels, the numbers of people like that are so low that they fall into the noise you'd see in any random distribution. There's no difference between these people and millions of others, other than just getting lucky.
pavlov 6y ago
> "per your profile, you work at Facebook (which I assume making well over $250k a year) and yet your pushing for a socialist agenda?" I'm originally from Finland. Now that I've been living in America for a while, I can compare both. The modest success I've had in life is largely thanks to Finland's safety net and accessible opportunities. I received free college education in a specialist field (film post-production). When I started a little software startup in said field, the Finnish government gave me small grants and loans to help me along. I didn't have to worry about healthcare during those "ramen profitable" years. The company wasn't a big success by any measure, but it helped me build a network. Thanks to so-called socialism, I didn't have student debt and didn't need rich relatives to go into business on my own. But that's not a story that fits the American idea of entrepreneurship, I guess. Although my current job at $BIGTECH pays well, the expenses are also calibrated very differently. Preschool for my kid costs close to $3k/month, which is more than 10x what anyone pays in Finland. The quality of the education is similar. I plan to move back to Finland when the kids are a bit older. It's just a more stable place to raise a family.
- nodesocket 6y ago
  Thanks for the thoughtful and honest reply. However don't you agree without US capitalism ($BIGTECH) you wouldn't be as financially successful? I.E. if you stayed in Finland what would you professional and financial situation be?
  - pavlov 6y ago
    Yes, certainly. Although I was doing fine by Finnish standards working remotely for a foreign startup and doing a bunch of other stuff, with a great degree of freedom. It wasn’t a bad life. There are many things to admire about American capitalism. When I was growing up in the ‘80s, it held an almost mythical appeal. But reinvention is also part of the American myth, and it might be time for another round of that.
  - robjan 6y ago
    Wealth and success aren't only measured in dollars

esrauch 6y ago

If it's hypocritical for rich people to advocate socialism, and just self-serving theft for a poor person to advocate socialism, then no one can advocate it in good faith? I think your quotes are a bit strawmanning: they are good responses to someone is advocating for no private property. There's a large spectrum in the middle that includes single payer insurance and free college that are still very far away from "there's no incentive for anyone to make money anymore!"

sebastien_b 6y ago

People being “down on their luck” is usually through something else than “bad luck” - it’s far more often because of systemic problems (like how Black people have historically been marginalized, and continue to be).

nodesocket 6y ago
So then people who have built wealth completely on their own (self-made) and built great US companies did so because they were not marginalized? That's nonsense.
- sebastien_b 6y ago
  LOLs way to twist my words out of context. I was specifically referring to people less fortunate, usually given far less opportunities, often due to their race, religion or something similar. And if you don’t believe that’s true, then that is nonsense.
- trowawee 6y ago
  No one has “built wealth completely on their own”. Every rich person, in every country on earth, has in some way been assisted in building their wealth, whether that’s directly, like Bezos getting $250k from his parents (nearly half a million in 2020 dollars), or indirectly, like Buffet building a substantial amount of his holdings on monopolies in an era when the federal government was aggresively downsizing its anti-trust investigation and enforcement efforts, or the modern internet giants building fortunes on the bones of the federal and state research that created and maintain the physical infrastructre of the web.
- craftinator 6y ago
  No one builds wealth entirely on their own. And the people who are the most "self-made", as in were born into poverty and ended up in upper middle class or higher income levels, the numbers of people like that are so low that they fall into the noise you'd see in any random distribution. There's no difference between these people and millions of others, other than just getting lucky.

pavlov 6y ago

> "per your profile, you work at Facebook (which I assume making well over $250k a year) and yet your pushing for a socialist agenda?" I'm originally from Finland. Now that I've been living in America for a while, I can compare both. The modest success I've had in life is largely thanks to Finland's safety net and accessible opportunities. I received free college education in a specialist field (film post-production). When I started a little software startup in said field, the Finnish government gave me small grants and loans to help me along. I didn't have to worry about healthcare during those "ramen profitable" years. The company wasn't a big success by any measure, but it helped me build a network. Thanks to so-called socialism, I didn't have student debt and didn't need rich relatives to go into business on my own. But that's not a story that fits the American idea of entrepreneurship, I guess. Although my current job at $BIGTECH pays well, the expenses are also calibrated very differently. Preschool for my kid costs close to $3k/month, which is more than 10x what anyone pays in Finland. The quality of the education is similar. I plan to move back to Finland when the kids are a bit older. It's just a more stable place to raise a family.

nodesocket 6y ago
Thanks for the thoughtful and honest reply. However don't you agree without US capitalism ($BIGTECH) you wouldn't be as financially successful? I.E. if you stayed in Finland what would you professional and financial situation be?
- pavlov 6y ago
  Yes, certainly. Although I was doing fine by Finnish standards working remotely for a foreign startup and doing a bunch of other stuff, with a great degree of freedom. It wasn’t a bad life. There are many things to admire about American capitalism. When I was growing up in the ‘80s, it held an almost mythical appeal. But reinvention is also part of the American myth, and it might be time for another round of that.
- robjan 6y ago
  Wealth and success aren't only measured in dollars