4 ms·

It almost seems as if you are trolling. Surely we can, at least, agree that the excesses you mention exist only because of those who produce.

bestouff 4mo ago
A society where just stating this is called trolling is such a sad society. I pity you and you brainwashed siblings.
- inigyou 4mo ago
  it's a very common trolling tactic to imply a controversial thing while overtly saying a less controversial thing
  - overfeed 4mo ago
    Anyone who thinks that it's "controversial" to discuss where the benefits from productivity gains go isn't worth talking to: they are either ideologues set in their ways, or underinformed on recent economic history.
    - inigyou 4mo ago
      > imply
Telaneo 4mo ago
Have I said anything to the contrary?
daishi55 4mo ago
They are not trolling. They are stating the simple, undeniable fact that there is more than enough to go around and if we had a more equitable distribution of resources, we could take care of everyone with disabilities 10x over with plenty to spare.
- AlexandrB 4mo ago
  > we could take care of everyone with disabilities 10x over with plenty to spare. Yes, like the 40%[1] of Stanford undergrads who have disabilities. The greatest long term impediment to what you're suggesting is folks who don't need the help taking advantage of the resource distribution. It both massively increases the costs and sours those who have to pay into the system on the whole thing leading to a backlash. If we could just solve this quirk of human nature, we'd be all set. [1] https://fortune.com/article/rise-in-elite-students-seeking-accomodation-gen-z-phenomenon-find-success-in-competitive-job-market-stanford-university-skills-based-hiring/ https://fortune.com/article/rise-in-elite-students-seeking-a...
  - NuclearPM 4mo ago
    This is an issue, but billionaires are a greater issue.
    - mrkstu 4mo ago
      You could take away 100% of billionaires capital to redistribute and end up in the exact same place in 4 years.
      - jjav 4mo ago
        You would not end up in the same place because then you'd be in a world without billionaires, so you would not have people who can too easily just buy every politician and law they wish for their own perpetuation. That alone would be a massive win.
        cucumber3732842 4mo ago
        It's not the ~50 billionares I'm worried about. They are human. You can appeal to Bill Gate's desire to leave a legacy he's proud of. You can appeal to Elon Musk's desire for technological progress. What worries me are the god knows how many "billionaire equivelent" entities and institutions that swing their dicks around in the same manner but do so with the sociopathic ruthlessness of corporations and governments. Peter Thiel may be evil but he'll almost certainly never knowingly instigate genocidal war in a foreign land for marginal benefit to his interests whereas that's exactly the kind of thing that nonhuman entities do because no person is singularly responsible.
throwaway173738 4mo ago
You’re missing the point of the article and of the post. Why do you assume that someone who reads and takes breaks is unproductive? Should we get a second job instead? I spend 8 hours sleeping. Would you like me to work those hours as well? I spend some of my day cooking and cleaning and raising my son. Would you rather I keep working instead? Maybe it’s time that we worked together to gain that time back for you instead of you fighting for us to lose our free time.
shepherdjerred 4mo ago
I think the key part of the parent was talking about disabled individuals. I don’t think anyone is advocating to provide a free ride for capable individuals Of course someone has to produce/work harder — and the parent is arguing that there is already more than enough extra
- overfeed 4mo ago
  > I don’t think anyone is advocating to provide a free ride for capable individuals Unless the capable individuals control a lot of capital - then free-riding is expected via the "Job-creator exception clause"
dostick 4mo ago
More than half of employment is “bullshit jobs” needed only for capitalism. There’s artificial scarcity but artificial scarcity in minds of people is much worse problem.
- nradov 4mo ago
  If you think capitalism is bad then wait until you see how many more "bullshit jobs" are needed for socialism.
  - afpx 4mo ago
    I think that’s what they call a ‘false dilemma’. Recently, I had a conversation with a bunch of people who have worked in the tech industry since the 90s. Someone asked which technologies have greatly improved our lives. Outside of some specific medical innovations, we struggled to agree on more than three.
  - dostick 3mo ago
    Why assume socialism?

bestouff 4mo ago

A society where just stating this is called trolling is such a sad society. I pity you and you brainwashed siblings.

inigyou 4mo ago
it's a very common trolling tactic to imply a controversial thing while overtly saying a less controversial thing
- overfeed 4mo ago
  Anyone who thinks that it's "controversial" to discuss where the benefits from productivity gains go isn't worth talking to: they are either ideologues set in their ways, or underinformed on recent economic history.
  - inigyou 4mo ago
    > imply

Telaneo 4mo ago

Have I said anything to the contrary?

daishi55 4mo ago

They are not trolling. They are stating the simple, undeniable fact that there is more than enough to go around and if we had a more equitable distribution of resources, we could take care of everyone with disabilities 10x over with plenty to spare.

AlexandrB 4mo ago
> we could take care of everyone with disabilities 10x over with plenty to spare. Yes, like the 40%[1] of Stanford undergrads who have disabilities. The greatest long term impediment to what you're suggesting is folks who don't need the help taking advantage of the resource distribution. It both massively increases the costs and sours those who have to pay into the system on the whole thing leading to a backlash. If we could just solve this quirk of human nature, we'd be all set. [1] https://fortune.com/article/rise-in-elite-students-seeking-accomodation-gen-z-phenomenon-find-success-in-competitive-job-market-stanford-university-skills-based-hiring/ https://fortune.com/article/rise-in-elite-students-seeking-a...
- NuclearPM 4mo ago
  This is an issue, but billionaires are a greater issue.
  - mrkstu 4mo ago
    You could take away 100% of billionaires capital to redistribute and end up in the exact same place in 4 years.
    - jjav 4mo ago
      You would not end up in the same place because then you'd be in a world without billionaires, so you would not have people who can too easily just buy every politician and law they wish for their own perpetuation. That alone would be a massive win.
      - cucumber3732842 4mo ago
        It's not the ~50 billionares I'm worried about. They are human. You can appeal to Bill Gate's desire to leave a legacy he's proud of. You can appeal to Elon Musk's desire for technological progress. What worries me are the god knows how many "billionaire equivelent" entities and institutions that swing their dicks around in the same manner but do so with the sociopathic ruthlessness of corporations and governments. Peter Thiel may be evil but he'll almost certainly never knowingly instigate genocidal war in a foreign land for marginal benefit to his interests whereas that's exactly the kind of thing that nonhuman entities do because no person is singularly responsible.

throwaway173738 4mo ago

You’re missing the point of the article and of the post. Why do you assume that someone who reads and takes breaks is unproductive? Should we get a second job instead? I spend 8 hours sleeping. Would you like me to work those hours as well? I spend some of my day cooking and cleaning and raising my son. Would you rather I keep working instead? Maybe it’s time that we worked together to gain that time back for you instead of you fighting for us to lose our free time.

shepherdjerred 4mo ago

I think the key part of the parent was talking about disabled individuals. I don’t think anyone is advocating to provide a free ride for capable individuals Of course someone has to produce/work harder — and the parent is arguing that there is already more than enough extra

overfeed 4mo ago
> I don’t think anyone is advocating to provide a free ride for capable individuals Unless the capable individuals control a lot of capital - then free-riding is expected via the "Job-creator exception clause"

dostick 4mo ago

More than half of employment is “bullshit jobs” needed only for capitalism. There’s artificial scarcity but artificial scarcity in minds of people is much worse problem.

nradov 4mo ago
If you think capitalism is bad then wait until you see how many more "bullshit jobs" are needed for socialism.
- afpx 4mo ago
  I think that’s what they call a ‘false dilemma’. Recently, I had a conversation with a bunch of people who have worked in the tech industry since the 90s. Someone asked which technologies have greatly improved our lives. Outside of some specific medical innovations, we struggled to agree on more than three.
- dostick 3mo ago
  Why assume socialism?