4 ms·

You could also, idk, try to improve the system so that luck isn't so heavily weighted.

by Inityx 5y ago

nickstinemates 5y ago
Those who can, do. Those who can't try to change the system to favor them.
- monoideism 5y ago
  Entirely logical. My only problem with those engaging in such behavior comes from the subset of them who have much more privilege than vast majority of Americans - like say upper middle class and wealthy minorities. They often tilt the system even more in their favor over other poor, struggling Americans of whatever color or creed. Many highly educated, wealthy female Brahmin Indian-Americans (2nd+ gen) are particularly adept at manipulating the system in this way to benefit them as "POCs" who grew up in exclusive neighborhoods with wealthy parents, and end up at Ivies. And yet constantly leverage their "oppression".
- lisper 5y ago
  Everyone tries to change the system to favor them. Those who succeed try to distract from this by, for example, promulgating catchy aphorisms like the one above.
  - dionidium 5y ago
    I think it's important not to get too cynical about this. It's simply not true that everybody is out there trying to adapt the world to their narrow personal interests. I can think of all kinds of policy issues for which I support a position that is unlikely to benefit me directly.
    - lisper 5y ago
      Sure. There is a form of argument that I call "proof by aphorism" or proof-by-catchy-slogan. One of the best and ultimately most effective examples of this was Johnny Chochran's "if it doesn't fit you must acquit" during the OJ Simpson trial. That argument was more effective because it rhymed despite the fact that this is clearly a logical fallacy. "Those who can do..." is similar. It's catchy, and because it's catchy people are more likely to believe it, particularly those who are fortunate enough to enjoy the survivorship bias of success. But like Cochran's slogan, it is not true. But proof-by-aphorism is hard to counter with actual logic. I mean, look at the argument I am presenting right now. Don't you think it's starting to get a little tedious? Do you not find yourself tempted to tune out? Don't you think a lot of people probably already have? The sad fact of the matter is that the most effective counter to proof-by-aphorism is often another aphorism. If the counter-aphorism is not entirely true, well, that is just part of the point. And the other sad fact of the matter is that many people achieve success not by "doing" but by gaming the system. Not all, but a lot. So I think it's very disingenuous of anyone to get up on a high horse about less successful people trying to similarly tilt the odds in their favor.
- UncleMeat 5y ago
  And here I am, trying to change the system to favor others despite my wild success in a lucrative industry. Social equity is not just jealousy.
- Judgmentality 5y ago
  "Everybody wants to change the world, but nobody wants to change themselves."
- fungiblecog 5y ago
  Not everyone is as selfish as you are
zeusk 5y ago
Don't think that'll be doable. Luck plays a huge role, even the birth lottery - not just your parents, but your location. Which country you're born into can largely decide your fate as Immigration has been getting harder by the years.
- gonzo41 5y ago
  Effective taxes, socialized health and welfare and safer communities. Collective bargaining at work. Those things should level a lot of the big bumps out.
- ethanbond 5y ago
  Of course it can’t be solved, but it can be improved dramatically. E.g. guaranteed levels of healthcare, education, and shelter.
  - username90 5y ago
    It helps the poor be less poor but it doesn't help the poor become rich. Plenty of countries does those things and the poor still mostly remains poor, albeit with a better standard of living. A reason could be that when poverty hurts like it does in USA it motivates people to work hard to get a better job, while in countries where poverty isn't a big deal people can just choose to live the simple and easy life without much consequences. I know I do it, I live in such a country and choose to live on much less than the least paid workers gets. I don't need more, and the low spending lets me work almost nothing and still get by. I don't feel I lack anything, and neither do any of the poor people I see here. College was free, healthcare is free, entertainment is super cheap with free public parks with sports areas and cheap internet, transportation is cheap with public transit and most stuff you need is within walking distance anyway. If instead I was an American citizen I'd work a lot harder to avoid all the shit that can happen to you when you lack money there. I'd be richer on paper, but in practice I think I'd be worse off.
    - ethanbond 5y ago
      This is really not about getting a particular outcome (which is too subjective/relative to even have a meaningful conversation). This is about the reality and perception that there is some correlation between effort and outcome. You clearly feel that there is a correlation — whether you “utilize” it is your decision to make, as you explain, but you believe it is there. Many Americans dispute the existence of the correlation itself.
paulpauper 5y ago
That would require the US becoming more like Europe, in which the right-tail is thinner but the middle is fatter. Americans like the idea that they can join the right-side of the tail even if the odds are low. Germany has lower wages and higher taxes but more stability and security. It's a trade-off.
- epicureanideal 5y ago
  There are other ways to reduce the influence of luck other than the European safety model. For example, reduce regulation, improve education, enforce anti-trust laws (which I see as a different thing than general regulation that is regressive toward small business), increase access to capital, reduce legal and administrative costs of business, etc. Reduce the influence of crony capitalism.

You could also, idk, try to improve the system so that luck isn't so heavily weighted.

by Inityx 5y ago

You could also, idk, try to improve the system so that luck isn't so heavily weighted.

nickstinemates 5y ago

Those who can, do. Those who can't try to change the system to favor them.

monoideism 5y ago
Entirely logical. My only problem with those engaging in such behavior comes from the subset of them who have much more privilege than vast majority of Americans - like say upper middle class and wealthy minorities. They often tilt the system even more in their favor over other poor, struggling Americans of whatever color or creed. Many highly educated, wealthy female Brahmin Indian-Americans (2nd+ gen) are particularly adept at manipulating the system in this way to benefit them as "POCs" who grew up in exclusive neighborhoods with wealthy parents, and end up at Ivies. And yet constantly leverage their "oppression".
lisper 5y ago
Everyone tries to change the system to favor them. Those who succeed try to distract from this by, for example, promulgating catchy aphorisms like the one above.
- dionidium 5y ago
  I think it's important not to get too cynical about this. It's simply not true that everybody is out there trying to adapt the world to their narrow personal interests. I can think of all kinds of policy issues for which I support a position that is unlikely to benefit me directly.
  - lisper 5y ago
    Sure. There is a form of argument that I call "proof by aphorism" or proof-by-catchy-slogan. One of the best and ultimately most effective examples of this was Johnny Chochran's "if it doesn't fit you must acquit" during the OJ Simpson trial. That argument was more effective because it rhymed despite the fact that this is clearly a logical fallacy. "Those who can do..." is similar. It's catchy, and because it's catchy people are more likely to believe it, particularly those who are fortunate enough to enjoy the survivorship bias of success. But like Cochran's slogan, it is not true. But proof-by-aphorism is hard to counter with actual logic. I mean, look at the argument I am presenting right now. Don't you think it's starting to get a little tedious? Do you not find yourself tempted to tune out? Don't you think a lot of people probably already have? The sad fact of the matter is that the most effective counter to proof-by-aphorism is often another aphorism. If the counter-aphorism is not entirely true, well, that is just part of the point. And the other sad fact of the matter is that many people achieve success not by "doing" but by gaming the system. Not all, but a lot. So I think it's very disingenuous of anyone to get up on a high horse about less successful people trying to similarly tilt the odds in their favor.
UncleMeat 5y ago
And here I am, trying to change the system to favor others despite my wild success in a lucrative industry. Social equity is not just jealousy.
Judgmentality 5y ago
"Everybody wants to change the world, but nobody wants to change themselves."
fungiblecog 5y ago
Not everyone is as selfish as you are

zeusk 5y ago

Don't think that'll be doable. Luck plays a huge role, even the birth lottery - not just your parents, but your location. Which country you're born into can largely decide your fate as Immigration has been getting harder by the years.

gonzo41 5y ago
Effective taxes, socialized health and welfare and safer communities. Collective bargaining at work. Those things should level a lot of the big bumps out.
ethanbond 5y ago
Of course it can’t be solved, but it can be improved dramatically. E.g. guaranteed levels of healthcare, education, and shelter.
- username90 5y ago
  It helps the poor be less poor but it doesn't help the poor become rich. Plenty of countries does those things and the poor still mostly remains poor, albeit with a better standard of living. A reason could be that when poverty hurts like it does in USA it motivates people to work hard to get a better job, while in countries where poverty isn't a big deal people can just choose to live the simple and easy life without much consequences. I know I do it, I live in such a country and choose to live on much less than the least paid workers gets. I don't need more, and the low spending lets me work almost nothing and still get by. I don't feel I lack anything, and neither do any of the poor people I see here. College was free, healthcare is free, entertainment is super cheap with free public parks with sports areas and cheap internet, transportation is cheap with public transit and most stuff you need is within walking distance anyway. If instead I was an American citizen I'd work a lot harder to avoid all the shit that can happen to you when you lack money there. I'd be richer on paper, but in practice I think I'd be worse off.
  - ethanbond 5y ago
    This is really not about getting a particular outcome (which is too subjective/relative to even have a meaningful conversation). This is about the reality and perception that there is some correlation between effort and outcome. You clearly feel that there is a correlation — whether you “utilize” it is your decision to make, as you explain, but you believe it is there. Many Americans dispute the existence of the correlation itself.

paulpauper 5y ago

That would require the US becoming more like Europe, in which the right-tail is thinner but the middle is fatter. Americans like the idea that they can join the right-side of the tail even if the odds are low. Germany has lower wages and higher taxes but more stability and security. It's a trade-off.

epicureanideal 5y ago
There are other ways to reduce the influence of luck other than the European safety model. For example, reduce regulation, improve education, enforce anti-trust laws (which I see as a different thing than general regulation that is regressive toward small business), increase access to capital, reduce legal and administrative costs of business, etc. Reduce the influence of crony capitalism.