3 ms·

It is very easy to understand the situation if you look at specific people and their motivations. We have a large group of people who are deeply insecure and u

It is very easy to understand the situation if you look at specific people and their motivations. We have a large group of people who are deeply insecure and unsatisfied with their lives. Their jobs price them out of property ownership, they have near zero chance of retirement and very faint perspectives in starting families. All those problems would go away with the raise of the purchasing power of their salary, but the corporate world has found a cheaper solution. People are told to follow their feelings, "bring entire themselves at work", etc. Instead of paying them more, we let it slide when they blow their steam off at someone they don't like. It keeps them busy and it costs zero on the balance sheet. A much better alternative to unionizing or starting competing co-ops, right? In long-term, this creates a massive divide in the society. Conservative-minded people that are happy with what they have find this childish. Emotional people feel that conservatives have some unfair advantage and try to attack them for it. The recent election is just a good indicator of the divide, since the conservative vs. emotional groups clearly have opposing opinions about it. The corporations are simply supporting the side that costs the less to them, it's business and nothing personal. In a longer term, it looks like the death of American Dream. You are no longer expected to achieve wealth and financial independence through hard work, and then do what YOU want. Instead, the role model is to dedicate your energy to endless bashing of your peers from the opposing political camp, while the corporations grab an unprecedented share of the economy.

troupe 6y ago
> In a longer term, it looks like the death of American Dream. You are no longer expected to achieve wealth and financial independence through hard work, and then do what YOU want. There are plenty of people who still expect to achieve success through hard work. The people who do achieve success through hard work usually tend to be from the set of people who have that expectation though.
- john_moscow 6y ago
  I am talking about popular culture. I consider myself moderately successful (I run a small business that I managed to build from scratch through trial and error after studying the "hot" fields and working in the industry). I am happy with my life and I'm trying to pass my mindset to my kids to make sure they can find what works for them. From what I can see, I am the only example of this in their life. The mainstream media talks about how we are privileged and should step back, not want anything, and let others have it. The role models of prosperity are Instragram celebrities and pop singers, that have a hard cap on their numbers by definition. Nobody takes the long road with rewards further down seriously, and this is saddening. Because the people I know that followed the instant gratification route years ago are not happy at all right now. And the trouble is that once you are the only person with this mindset in your neighborhood, and are wealthier than others, people with pitchforks will come for you. It won't help that you made your fortune through hard work if your neighbors think it's unfair. There have been historic precedents. Kulaks in early Soviet Union [0] is a very good example. Mccloskeys case from last year is another one. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dekulakization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dekulakization
dragonwriter 6y ago
> You are no longer expected to achieve wealth and financial independence through hard work, and then do what YOU want. Whatever dream people may have, “wealth and financial independence” has not been a reasonably expected outcome of a lifetime of hard work for most Americans, ever.
gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
The point is that the political economy of modern society has created a kindred service-economy elite. About half the country is blamed by cloistered, effete elites for any resentment, misfortune or despair created by a shifting economy. Nearly every "activist" concern is a hyper-specific rabbit-hole that serves to distract from larger forces of class warfare, while simultaneously justifying class superiority and morality.
benlivengood 6y ago
> In long-term, this creates a massive divide in the society. Conservative-minded people that are happy with what they have find this childish. Emotional people feel that conservatives have some unfair advantage and try to attack them for it. The recent election is just a good indicator of the divide, since the conservative vs. emotional groups clearly have opposing opinions about it. The corporations are simply supporting the side that costs the less to them, it's business and nothing personal. I think conservative/liberal and emotional/stoic are orthogonal. I think there's a lot of mis-identification of other people who don't match one on one or both of the spectrums with attribution of more difference than is warranted. For instance I am liberal and left-leaning but I think my best efforts are spent working hard and advocating for people less fortunate than me who haven't had the same opportunity that I have. Privilege has given me a pretty easy life and not everyone gets the same chances. You don't have to participate in social change if you don't want to, but at least don't hold it back out of fear that we'll destroy your prosperity. As I understand economics the only way everyone succeeds is if we grow the economy as a whole. That means giving people meaningful, well-paying jobs especially if they don't have the ability or desire to find a way for themselves. We can't let people starve or die of easily curable disease and so the cost will be there regardless of whether a person is doing low-value work or high-value work. Perhaps that is in a sense a mini-death of the American Dream? That particular dream never existed for everyone anyway; factory workers, miners, farmhands, and other laborers were never assumed to be part of it. That nature of production efficiency and capitol allocation requires a pyramid of workers, at least until automation takes over. This is especially true during the rapid rise of the middle class in the 40s and 50s. However, it was generally assumed that every citizen could at least have a pretty good life. If the economy starts to squeeze laborers into poverty then it's broken and needs to be fixed.

troupe 6y ago

> In a longer term, it looks like the death of American Dream. You are no longer expected to achieve wealth and financial independence through hard work, and then do what YOU want. There are plenty of people who still expect to achieve success through hard work. The people who do achieve success through hard work usually tend to be from the set of people who have that expectation though.

john_moscow 6y ago
I am talking about popular culture. I consider myself moderately successful (I run a small business that I managed to build from scratch through trial and error after studying the "hot" fields and working in the industry). I am happy with my life and I'm trying to pass my mindset to my kids to make sure they can find what works for them. From what I can see, I am the only example of this in their life. The mainstream media talks about how we are privileged and should step back, not want anything, and let others have it. The role models of prosperity are Instragram celebrities and pop singers, that have a hard cap on their numbers by definition. Nobody takes the long road with rewards further down seriously, and this is saddening. Because the people I know that followed the instant gratification route years ago are not happy at all right now. And the trouble is that once you are the only person with this mindset in your neighborhood, and are wealthier than others, people with pitchforks will come for you. It won't help that you made your fortune through hard work if your neighbors think it's unfair. There have been historic precedents. Kulaks in early Soviet Union [0] is a very good example. Mccloskeys case from last year is another one. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dekulakization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dekulakization

dragonwriter 6y ago

> You are no longer expected to achieve wealth and financial independence through hard work, and then do what YOU want. Whatever dream people may have, “wealth and financial independence” has not been a reasonably expected outcome of a lifetime of hard work for most Americans, ever.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago

The point is that the political economy of modern society has created a kindred service-economy elite. About half the country is blamed by cloistered, effete elites for any resentment, misfortune or despair created by a shifting economy. Nearly every "activist" concern is a hyper-specific rabbit-hole that serves to distract from larger forces of class warfare, while simultaneously justifying class superiority and morality.

benlivengood 6y ago

> In long-term, this creates a massive divide in the society. Conservative-minded people that are happy with what they have find this childish. Emotional people feel that conservatives have some unfair advantage and try to attack them for it. The recent election is just a good indicator of the divide, since the conservative vs. emotional groups clearly have opposing opinions about it. The corporations are simply supporting the side that costs the less to them, it's business and nothing personal. I think conservative/liberal and emotional/stoic are orthogonal. I think there's a lot of mis-identification of other people who don't match one on one or both of the spectrums with attribution of more difference than is warranted. For instance I am liberal and left-leaning but I think my best efforts are spent working hard and advocating for people less fortunate than me who haven't had the same opportunity that I have. Privilege has given me a pretty easy life and not everyone gets the same chances. You don't have to participate in social change if you don't want to, but at least don't hold it back out of fear that we'll destroy your prosperity. As I understand economics the only way everyone succeeds is if we grow the economy as a whole. That means giving people meaningful, well-paying jobs especially if they don't have the ability or desire to find a way for themselves. We can't let people starve or die of easily curable disease and so the cost will be there regardless of whether a person is doing low-value work or high-value work. Perhaps that is in a sense a mini-death of the American Dream? That particular dream never existed for everyone anyway; factory workers, miners, farmhands, and other laborers were never assumed to be part of it. That nature of production efficiency and capitol allocation requires a pyramid of workers, at least until automation takes over. This is especially true during the rapid rise of the middle class in the 40s and 50s. However, it was generally assumed that every citizen could at least have a pretty good life. If the economy starts to squeeze laborers into poverty then it's broken and needs to be fixed.