4 ms·

It's not that I don't like it. It's more that I think you're being lied to. Inequality has been going up in the US for a very long time, which means a lot of pe

by Herring 11mo ago

It's not that I don't like it. It's more that I think you're being lied to. Inequality has been going up in the US for a very long time, which means a lot of people are not being rewarded as much as they should. But they still buy into the system that is impoverishing them. The top 10% of income earners in the US account for 50% of consumer spending. LMK if you think that's part of the contract. https://www.marketplace.org/story/2025/02/24/higher-income-americans-drive-bigger-share-of-consumer-spending https://www.marketplace.org/story/2025/02/24/higher-income-a...

jeremyjh 11mo ago
Inequality going up means the situation is changing and that is what people are complaining about. There definitely has been a culture shift as MBAs took over executive leadership and their compensation packages skyrocketed. Companies were always for the share holders but there used to be more consideration of the longer-term value for the company that amounted to appreciation of and fairer treatment for both employees and customers. I also think though that individual experiences of this kind are more about specific companies maturing than a widespread culture shift. A lot of people on these forums worked in tech companies that are relatively young and have changed a lot over the past two decades.
alvah 11mo ago
"Inequality has been going up in the US for a very long time, which means a lot of people are not being rewarded as much as they should." The second part of your sentence is not necessarily true. It might be true in some or even many cases, but it's certainly not something you can just assert & move on, as if it's a physical law.
- Herring 11mo ago
  I'm just tired of re-litigating this issue. Discuss with your favorite frontier model. Roughly, productivity has been outpacing pay since the mid 1970s, and I wrote about this in another comment here. There's just so much confusion here. Some people like you don't get why a world where a handful of billionaires own everything is a bad idea. Madness. I think nothing less than another depression will get through to most.
  - knollimar 11mo ago
    Increased capital investment (e.g. software) could explain productivity not attributable to the employee. On its face, productivity vs pay isn't a faor metric. I agree that problem exists, but we shouldn't use it to benchmark
    - Herring 11mo ago
      > I own your tools therefore I own everything you do with them Like I said, madness. It's like slavery was technically outlawed but a lot of America strongly disagreed. And they're posting on HN.
      - knollimar 11mo ago
        If I lease tools that triple your productivity for the same cost as your wage, how much more do I pay you? My point is increases in productivity can be caused by capital investment, not totally attributable to the worker. That money has to come from somewhere. Ideally there's a fair balance. This isn't it but you can't look at the number you referenced blindly.
        Herring 11mo ago
        You're not thinking at a systems level. Check this out - https://data.worldhappiness.report/chart https://data.worldhappiness.report/chart. The US is increasingly a miserable place to live in - in large part because of pay not keeping up with housing/school/medical/etc. Correct systems-level answer to your question "how much do I pay you" is "as much as it takes to stabilize the US curve". Happiness correlates with financial security, which we won't get if the rich get richer from those capital investments then buy up all the housing. Fun fact: Fit 2 lines on that data and you can extrapolate by ~2030 China will be a better place to live. That's really not that far off. Set a reminder on your phone.
  - alvah 11mo ago
    I don't care if you are tired or not, it's not something you can just assert and move on. Also, you know nothing at all of my opinion on whether "a handful of billionaires own everything" is a bad idea or not. All you know about me is I don't agree with you that rising inequality AUTOMATICALLY means some people haven't been rewarded as much as they "should", whatever that means. Reading comprehension, combined with not assuming others' POV, for the win.

by Herring 11mo ago

jeremyjh 11mo ago

Inequality going up means the situation is changing and that is what people are complaining about. There definitely has been a culture shift as MBAs took over executive leadership and their compensation packages skyrocketed. Companies were always for the share holders but there used to be more consideration of the longer-term value for the company that amounted to appreciation of and fairer treatment for both employees and customers. I also think though that individual experiences of this kind are more about specific companies maturing than a widespread culture shift. A lot of people on these forums worked in tech companies that are relatively young and have changed a lot over the past two decades.

alvah 11mo ago

"Inequality has been going up in the US for a very long time, which means a lot of people are not being rewarded as much as they should." The second part of your sentence is not necessarily true. It might be true in some or even many cases, but it's certainly not something you can just assert & move on, as if it's a physical law.

Herring 11mo ago
I'm just tired of re-litigating this issue. Discuss with your favorite frontier model. Roughly, productivity has been outpacing pay since the mid 1970s, and I wrote about this in another comment here. There's just so much confusion here. Some people like you don't get why a world where a handful of billionaires own everything is a bad idea. Madness. I think nothing less than another depression will get through to most.
- knollimar 11mo ago
  Increased capital investment (e.g. software) could explain productivity not attributable to the employee. On its face, productivity vs pay isn't a faor metric. I agree that problem exists, but we shouldn't use it to benchmark
  - Herring 11mo ago
    > I own your tools therefore I own everything you do with them Like I said, madness. It's like slavery was technically outlawed but a lot of America strongly disagreed. And they're posting on HN.
    - knollimar 11mo ago
      If I lease tools that triple your productivity for the same cost as your wage, how much more do I pay you? My point is increases in productivity can be caused by capital investment, not totally attributable to the worker. That money has to come from somewhere. Ideally there's a fair balance. This isn't it but you can't look at the number you referenced blindly.
      - Herring 11mo ago
        You're not thinking at a systems level. Check this out - https://data.worldhappiness.report/chart https://data.worldhappiness.report/chart. The US is increasingly a miserable place to live in - in large part because of pay not keeping up with housing/school/medical/etc. Correct systems-level answer to your question "how much do I pay you" is "as much as it takes to stabilize the US curve". Happiness correlates with financial security, which we won't get if the rich get richer from those capital investments then buy up all the housing. Fun fact: Fit 2 lines on that data and you can extrapolate by ~2030 China will be a better place to live. That's really not that far off. Set a reminder on your phone.
- alvah 11mo ago
  I don't care if you are tired or not, it's not something you can just assert and move on. Also, you know nothing at all of my opinion on whether "a handful of billionaires own everything" is a bad idea or not. All you know about me is I don't agree with you that rising inequality AUTOMATICALLY means some people haven't been rewarded as much as they "should", whatever that means. Reading comprehension, combined with not assuming others' POV, for the win.