3 ms·

Those have value, sure. We exchanging here are in the upper percentages already. I use US-based tech, and it's cool. You are talking about technical advances t

Those have value, sure. We exchanging here are in the upper percentages already. I use US-based tech, and it's cool. You are talking about technical advances that lower the price of services and enable the production of goods, all well and good. Can you explain how those close the gap? The wealthiest enjoy those just as much as the rest of us, while their accumulated control of resources is greater than the accumulated control of resources for the less wealthy. Real wages have declined for most while all the goodnesses you describe have been introduced.

robocat 2y ago
> The wealthiest enjoy those just as much as the rest of us You are thinking about it the wrong way around. The less wealthy get to enjoy many things as much as the most wealthy. Can the ultra-wealthy get better iPhones, iPhone Apps, gaming consoles or games? Movies? Can they get better friends? The ultra-wealthy might get 10% longer life (mostly due to preventative measures available to all but they get better advice; somewhat due to better healthcare). There's a lot in modern society that the most wealthy get little improvement over what the middle class get. The very wealthy can pay for improvements (better ping time, better training, better live seats, more choice). Many investments are available to the hoi polloi e.g. stock market on Robinhood. But often not private shares. Crypto is available to virtually everyone equally (a wild ride). In the past only the wealthy could enjoy the intellectual output of civilisation: music, theatre, art, science, even books for a while. Now the best works are often available to even the poorest in the world (pirating is cheap). The areas I think where the wealthy have advantages are: 1: avoiding time wastes, 2: spending their time however they choose, 2: customized services provided by people, 3: complex status games (owning a football club), 4: privacy, 5: private jets. I'm not part of the set so I'm not particularly sure. Elon rabbiting on about playing a game demonstrates that he isn't much better off for that particular measure than some poor basement dwelling cheating gamer. There are human areas where they get little marginal improvement over the middle class. Bad taste is difficult to fix. Wealthy status symbols don't help much, and often they want popular status symbols available to all. And it seems to me the wealthy proportional waste their money on their status games as much as anyone else. Superyachts? Property overcapitalisation? In-game diamonds or skins? The most important status symbol is association with high status individuals. There are many elite (regardless of their wealth or political status) that would be shunned by many celebrities. Personally I think having more money would mostly give me better booby prizes. I'm not chasing more because I have enough to do many human things that matter to me. In New Zealand my friends with less money don't have radically worse lives: they travel but travel less, they eat out but much less often, they waste more time dealing with financial issues. The working friends have to spend time working but they often seem to get heaps of personal satisfaction from their work. Some friends don't work (retired, jobless, sickness beneficiaries) and they mostly spend their time on whatever they want but perhaps can't afford enough hobby/sports supplies. The wealthy tech elite fawning over Trump publically demonstrates that the US government still has power over them. We're not yet ruled by those with the most money. I hope the US pulls finger and gets their government working more for the common good. It would be nice if it was the common world good (from the outside the US seems to trend towards sociopathic levels of selfish behavior - sorry for the label misuse).
- quantified 2y ago
  Thank you for your eloquent discussion, worthy of upvote. I'm thinking about it, I'm not convinced by your description alone, but it's a really good description. You're describing a mix of hedonic and practical matters. Hedonically, if someone is attuned to their situation appropriately, they can enjoy any economic level. Some people are probably earnestly thankful for one meal of meat or fish a week. Spending time as one chooses is noticeable. Also, in large part, where one chooses. Being able to entertain more than four guests at a time, perhaps eight, and being able to host a visiting family, requires more resources. Being able to simply own a home near family or friends requires more. Practically speaking, being able to have your local constabulary or maybe the state police take your side in disputes is only available if you work for them or have a lot of money. I'm sure you've noticed that having over USD 100mm gives you a different set of rules to play by, when you're not spending on the highest-quality interpretations of the rules. Wealth lets you influence the politicians. With Trump, ego matters a lot, but without your money or influence going towards his priorities, flattery gets you not far at all. I'm not sure how we can agree that we're not ruled by the ones with the most money- the one with the most money is definitely telling the executive departments how to run. We are not going to see this administration working for the common good of most of the citizens, of the world or of the US, and our citizens in the US have been successfully poisoned against each other. Parenthetical: I think we miss Norman Lear, Johnny Cash, Fred Rogers and Mel Brooks very much. They were relatively successful uniters. I don't see equivalents in the modern landscape.
  - robocat 2y ago
    > I'm sure you've noticed that having over USD 100mm gives you a different set of rules to play by I've heard about that. I do notice my less wealthy friends also use different rules. They tend to be more hands-on solving traditionally police matters. They also sometimes seem to be rather careless of liabilities. I've definitely considered using money to solve some of my worst problems. Not so many people in NZ with US100MM so I've never had much to do with them. We have 3 billionaires here. I have little knowledge of the people you mentioned.
- araes 2y ago

robocat 2y ago

> The wealthiest enjoy those just as much as the rest of us You are thinking about it the wrong way around. The less wealthy get to enjoy many things as much as the most wealthy. Can the ultra-wealthy get better iPhones, iPhone Apps, gaming consoles or games? Movies? Can they get better friends? The ultra-wealthy might get 10% longer life (mostly due to preventative measures available to all but they get better advice; somewhat due to better healthcare). There's a lot in modern society that the most wealthy get little improvement over what the middle class get. The very wealthy can pay for improvements (better ping time, better training, better live seats, more choice). Many investments are available to the hoi polloi e.g. stock market on Robinhood. But often not private shares. Crypto is available to virtually everyone equally (a wild ride). In the past only the wealthy could enjoy the intellectual output of civilisation: music, theatre, art, science, even books for a while. Now the best works are often available to even the poorest in the world (pirating is cheap). The areas I think where the wealthy have advantages are: 1: avoiding time wastes, 2: spending their time however they choose, 2: customized services provided by people, 3: complex status games (owning a football club), 4: privacy, 5: private jets. I'm not part of the set so I'm not particularly sure. Elon rabbiting on about playing a game demonstrates that he isn't much better off for that particular measure than some poor basement dwelling cheating gamer. There are human areas where they get little marginal improvement over the middle class. Bad taste is difficult to fix. Wealthy status symbols don't help much, and often they want popular status symbols available to all. And it seems to me the wealthy proportional waste their money on their status games as much as anyone else. Superyachts? Property overcapitalisation? In-game diamonds or skins? The most important status symbol is association with high status individuals. There are many elite (regardless of their wealth or political status) that would be shunned by many celebrities. Personally I think having more money would mostly give me better booby prizes. I'm not chasing more because I have enough to do many human things that matter to me. In New Zealand my friends with less money don't have radically worse lives: they travel but travel less, they eat out but much less often, they waste more time dealing with financial issues. The working friends have to spend time working but they often seem to get heaps of personal satisfaction from their work. Some friends don't work (retired, jobless, sickness beneficiaries) and they mostly spend their time on whatever they want but perhaps can't afford enough hobby/sports supplies. The wealthy tech elite fawning over Trump publically demonstrates that the US government still has power over them. We're not yet ruled by those with the most money. I hope the US pulls finger and gets their government working more for the common good. It would be nice if it was the common world good (from the outside the US seems to trend towards sociopathic levels of selfish behavior - sorry for the label misuse).

quantified 2y ago
Thank you for your eloquent discussion, worthy of upvote. I'm thinking about it, I'm not convinced by your description alone, but it's a really good description. You're describing a mix of hedonic and practical matters. Hedonically, if someone is attuned to their situation appropriately, they can enjoy any economic level. Some people are probably earnestly thankful for one meal of meat or fish a week. Spending time as one chooses is noticeable. Also, in large part, where one chooses. Being able to entertain more than four guests at a time, perhaps eight, and being able to host a visiting family, requires more resources. Being able to simply own a home near family or friends requires more. Practically speaking, being able to have your local constabulary or maybe the state police take your side in disputes is only available if you work for them or have a lot of money. I'm sure you've noticed that having over USD 100mm gives you a different set of rules to play by, when you're not spending on the highest-quality interpretations of the rules. Wealth lets you influence the politicians. With Trump, ego matters a lot, but without your money or influence going towards his priorities, flattery gets you not far at all. I'm not sure how we can agree that we're not ruled by the ones with the most money- the one with the most money is definitely telling the executive departments how to run. We are not going to see this administration working for the common good of most of the citizens, of the world or of the US, and our citizens in the US have been successfully poisoned against each other. Parenthetical: I think we miss Norman Lear, Johnny Cash, Fred Rogers and Mel Brooks very much. They were relatively successful uniters. I don't see equivalents in the modern landscape.
- robocat 2y ago
  > I'm sure you've noticed that having over USD 100mm gives you a different set of rules to play by I've heard about that. I do notice my less wealthy friends also use different rules. They tend to be more hands-on solving traditionally police matters. They also sometimes seem to be rather careless of liabilities. I've definitely considered using money to solve some of my worst problems. Not so many people in NZ with US100MM so I've never had much to do with them. We have 3 billionaires here. I have little knowledge of the people you mentioned.
araes 2y ago