Hacker News Reader

Comment by not_kurt_godel | Hacker News Reader

> More profoundly, investment in education, healthcare and retirement has a notable impact on consumers’ quality of life, and also on the future life chances of the next generation. Today’s inconspicuous consumption is a far more pernicious form of status spending than the conspicuous consumption of Veblen’s time.

Spending money on education, healthcare, and retirement is pernicious? Self-perpetuating, perhaps, but pernicious, really?

View on HN

Yeah, very poor choice of words. The writer must not know what it means as the effects of "investment in education, healthcare and retirement" are really the opposite of 'pernicious'.

"having a harmful effect, especially in a gradual or subtle way."

That seems like exactly the word to use for self perpetuating inequality to me...

And what's the alternative? Should people make a conscious decision to be less educated, less healthy, and less prepared for retirement?

In response to the statement that "People are defecting on the prisoners' dilemma.", you are saying "What's the alternative? Should people make a conscious decision to get a worse outcome?"

There's this very strange and very dangerous notion making the rounds that because some people don't have the means to access something (i.e. a college education) then those that do have the means should abstain out of...what, solidarity? Because it's unfair?

Problems of inequality are complex and have many different factors at play. I think it's extremely dangerous to discourage the wealthy from using their wealth in this manner. We need to explore the root causes of problems of inequality and this type of rhetoric does NOTHING but fester resentment.

Notions of solidarity have been around as long as human civilization existed. Thus you see a lot of cultures where the leaders/elite of their society were discouraged from ostentatious displays of their wealth. And you can see this today as well with a lot of very wealthy people choosing to not exercise their wealth (e.g. Warren Buffett still lives in his old home at Omaha).

The alternative is to tax the rich (gasp!) and provide good education and health care for everybody.

How is that an alternative? Both can and should co-exist.

Edit: that is to say, yes, I'm in favor of taxing the rich and universal healthcare. I don't see how enacting those policies would be an alternative to people investing their resources in improving their own lives in ways that are harmless to society at large, if not beneficial.

How is that an alternative? Both can and should co-exist.

Sure, but in countries that have a really good free public university system even the rich want to send their kids there. In fact going to to a private fee-charging university can be seen a sign that you weren't smart enough to get into a good university on your own merits.

That being said the rich can and will use their money to increase the chance of their kids getting into those good universities by moving to neighborhoods that increase the chances of their kids getting into good primary schools, so that they can get into good high schools.

Would you rather everyone be uneducated and poor as shit?

Honestly, this is such an insane sentiment. Things are getting better for everyone! Increased focus on health and education is obviously a good thing for society; you have to have some seriously fucked up priorities if you think jealousy is a reasonable objection to that fact.

You've strawmanned me into a black & white cartoon character, sufficiently that my views can be labelled "jealous", "fucked up", "insane". That is way out of bounds for HN.

Recognizing the flaws in a system is not advocating tearing it down, or even shifting direction.

For instance, you can simultaneously believe that the carbon emissions of countries lifting themselves out of poverty will be an ecological disaster, while also cheering them on because the alternative is a permanent human tragedy.

If the mere suggestion that there are problems with the inequality capitalism brings is enough to kill your civility and launch you in to a tirade, I'd suggest taking a step back and avoid commenting on the topic here.

The belief that exact equality of outcome is more important than human progress is insane (and very destructive), and it doesn't deserve a polite response.

Feel free to advocate for politically motivated artificial poverty, and I'll feel free to object in very strong terms.

But I didn't advocate for that, and no reasonable person would have put those words in my mouth based on my original post.

If you're looking for an argument, why not just walk down the street shouting at random people that look like they might have socialist leanings. I guess it takes less courage to do it over the internet.

Well then please, tell me how to interpret your post about the "self perpetuating inequality" of the search for health and wisdom.

You're expressing the Harrison Bergeron impulse born from the pathological elevation of equality-of-outcome as an ultimate terminal value.

People get different outcomes, and it's "unfair", and if we can't lift someone up then we'll damn well hold someone else down to make it "fair", even if it benefits nobody to do so.

This is why equality-of-outcome is a harmful impulse. (And it's mostly just raw envy with a layer of lipstick slapped on anyway).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com