4 ms·

This zeitgeist on the topic is ridiculous; nobody can even detect wealth inequality. And historically people knuckle under when there is a huge status discrepan

by roenxi 2y ago

This zeitgeist on the topic is ridiculous; nobody can even detect wealth inequality. And historically people knuckle under when there is a huge status discrepancy between them and someone else. It is insane that with all the problems and successes in the world today people are arguing that the problem is that some people are very well off. It can't possibly be a problem and the people pushing that it is are hurting their and others ability to organise usefully. If there is a systemic problem, it is almost certainly either living standards in the absolute or the rate of change of living standards. If my living standards are consistently improving I really don't care about anyone else and I suspect more people work that way than admit to it.

mcphage 2y ago
> It can't possibly be a problem Oh, well then you must be right. > If my living standards are consistently improving I really don't care about anyone else And if they are not?
stetrain 2y ago
The wealth inequality leads to a power inequality in a system where money can influence politics and policy, which is most of them. This leads to politicians and policies that mostly bend to the wealthy investor class instead of the working class. The working class feels (correctly) that they aren’t being well represented. The wealth inequality in isolation may not be a huge problem, but there are many second and third order effects of this. We aren’t just talking about “own a mansion” wealthy, we’re talking about “buy an election” and “prevent reasonable healthcare reform” wealth and power.
franceschina 2y ago
"people are arguing that the problem is that some people are very well off" most people don't really care that some others are "very well off"... people care that corporations have become a massive part of the citizen's everyday lives and wellbeing, but corporations' only responsibility is to maximize profits for shareholders, and when the food is poison and the healthcare is unusable and there are greedy humans running those companies, THAT is what is pissing people off
wmf 2y ago
If there is a systemic problem, it is almost certainly either living standards in the absolute or the rate of change of living standards. Duh? 25 year olds today cannot afford the house their parents had at 25.
- cafard 2y ago
  Boomer here: at 25, I was living in a group house with three other men. I strongly suspect that men of 25 working at dead-end white collar jobs can still afford to share a group house. There seems to be a belief among some on HN that the prior generations went from college to law school to partnership track in a white-shoe law firm. Some did, and a knew a couple of them. Most of us didn't.
- bastage 2y ago
  And insanely rich people somehow (not new .. but work with me) having access to control politics (and everyones lives globally) by just "buying in".
- roenxi 2y ago
  You say "duh", but the article disagrees. It is talking about inequality.
FranzFerdiNaN 2y ago
> in the world today people are arguing that the problem is that some people are very well off. Of course it is. Look at someone like Musk. Because he is VERY well off hey could literally buy an election, and before that he bought the biggest social media platform and turned it into a right-wing propaganda site.

by roenxi 2y ago

mcphage 2y ago

> It can't possibly be a problem Oh, well then you must be right. > If my living standards are consistently improving I really don't care about anyone else And if they are not?

stetrain 2y ago

The wealth inequality leads to a power inequality in a system where money can influence politics and policy, which is most of them. This leads to politicians and policies that mostly bend to the wealthy investor class instead of the working class. The working class feels (correctly) that they aren’t being well represented. The wealth inequality in isolation may not be a huge problem, but there are many second and third order effects of this. We aren’t just talking about “own a mansion” wealthy, we’re talking about “buy an election” and “prevent reasonable healthcare reform” wealth and power.

franceschina 2y ago

"people are arguing that the problem is that some people are very well off" most people don't really care that some others are "very well off"... people care that corporations have become a massive part of the citizen's everyday lives and wellbeing, but corporations' only responsibility is to maximize profits for shareholders, and when the food is poison and the healthcare is unusable and there are greedy humans running those companies, THAT is what is pissing people off

wmf 2y ago

If there is a systemic problem, it is almost certainly either living standards in the absolute or the rate of change of living standards. Duh? 25 year olds today cannot afford the house their parents had at 25.

cafard 2y ago
Boomer here: at 25, I was living in a group house with three other men. I strongly suspect that men of 25 working at dead-end white collar jobs can still afford to share a group house. There seems to be a belief among some on HN that the prior generations went from college to law school to partnership track in a white-shoe law firm. Some did, and a knew a couple of them. Most of us didn't.
bastage 2y ago
And insanely rich people somehow (not new .. but work with me) having access to control politics (and everyones lives globally) by just "buying in".
roenxi 2y ago
You say "duh", but the article disagrees. It is talking about inequality.

FranzFerdiNaN 2y ago

> in the world today people are arguing that the problem is that some people are very well off. Of course it is. Look at someone like Musk. Because he is VERY well off hey could literally buy an election, and before that he bought the biggest social media platform and turned it into a right-wing propaganda site.