3 ms·

Would you argue that the fact that people who CHOOSE to hand over their money live in a society in which they are taught to do so by more and more intrusive mea

Would you argue that the fact that people who CHOOSE to hand over their money live in a society in which they are taught to do so by more and more intrusive means, and of which the entire value system is constantly being manipulated by means only available to the "handee" doesn't factor in at all?

ctdonath 14y ago
Of course I'd argue the "fact". It isn't one. Are there centralized influences, operating toward their own interests? Of course. Always have been. Those pursuing an effective strategy of sales & social normalization of X do so because it pays off. In a world of increasingly homogeneous media domination, putting up significant sums to buy influence pays off - hence the increasing concentration of wealth, supplying what can be marketed to increase demand. This influence is not, however, infinite/total in scope. Options exist. You don't have to buy into anything "they" manipulate you to. It's still a choice. You can say "no" and buy elsewhere or do it yourself. Corporations are not gods; they are not omniscient/omnipotent/omnipresent, and do not strike you down with brimstone if you fail to buy their goods/services. You can turn off the TV, choose your own teachers & influences, and spend your money with whomever will trade as you see fair. That much of society submits to such influences, well, that's their choice. I've chosen not to abide by those choices in large part, and know that where I do it's MY choice, and that I have options thereto. Selfish influence arguments aside, there's also the matter of just doing a good job supplying what people need. People need Y, company Z does a remarkably good job of supplying it, people pay what it's worth to them (or less, what a great value!), and Z pockets the net profits. So? What's wrong with reaping rewards for a job well done? BTW: This is Hacker News, on Y-Combinator, devoted to the notion that anyone can concoct something techy and - with a goal of profit - persuade others to buy it.
- boomlinde 14y ago
  You disagree with my supposed fact and then go on to support it in the following paragraph. I never said anything about it being infinite or total in scope. As for the ultimate power of an individual to choose freely, I totally agree, but I won't pretend for a second that society doesn't always influence my choices in one way or another. That would be arrogant and short-sighted, especially since, no, most people don't get to choose their teachers and influences until they're 18.

ctdonath 14y ago

Of course I'd argue the "fact". It isn't one. Are there centralized influences, operating toward their own interests? Of course. Always have been. Those pursuing an effective strategy of sales & social normalization of X do so because it pays off. In a world of increasingly homogeneous media domination, putting up significant sums to buy influence pays off - hence the increasing concentration of wealth, supplying what can be marketed to increase demand. This influence is not, however, infinite/total in scope. Options exist. You don't have to buy into anything "they" manipulate you to. It's still a choice. You can say "no" and buy elsewhere or do it yourself. Corporations are not gods; they are not omniscient/omnipotent/omnipresent, and do not strike you down with brimstone if you fail to buy their goods/services. You can turn off the TV, choose your own teachers & influences, and spend your money with whomever will trade as you see fair. That much of society submits to such influences, well, that's their choice. I've chosen not to abide by those choices in large part, and know that where I do it's MY choice, and that I have options thereto. Selfish influence arguments aside, there's also the matter of just doing a good job supplying what people need. People need Y, company Z does a remarkably good job of supplying it, people pay what it's worth to them (or less, what a great value!), and Z pockets the net profits. So? What's wrong with reaping rewards for a job well done? BTW: This is Hacker News, on Y-Combinator, devoted to the notion that anyone can concoct something techy and - with a goal of profit - persuade others to buy it.

boomlinde 14y ago
You disagree with my supposed fact and then go on to support it in the following paragraph. I never said anything about it being infinite or total in scope. As for the ultimate power of an individual to choose freely, I totally agree, but I won't pretend for a second that society doesn't always influence my choices in one way or another. That would be arrogant and short-sighted, especially since, no, most people don't get to choose their teachers and influences until they're 18.