Hacker News Reader

> I think many don't understand how money works and that money is just a number. So few people think strategically about their salaries and just accept their circumstances.

You should be more humble. You are on an "hacker" website. Did someone say we can't hack money? If you earn 10k a month, that's great, what about sharing it among the people who didn't have the same luck than you?

People aren't born with the same information environment and legacy. Some people can afford to take risks and earn even more while some simply cannot.

> what about sharing it among the people who didn't have the same luck than you?

That's one big thing what taxes are for: To redistribute wealth. And I have employees which earn good money. I don't know what you expect from me.

> Some people can afford to take risks and earn even more while some simply cannot.

That's why a solid social system is so important. It gives us the room to take risks because we can be sure that we can get food, shelter and healthcare. See [1].

[1]: https://youtu.be/A9UmdY0E8hU

> Some people can afford to take risks and earn even more while some simply cannot.

I would like to know what you mean specifically. When you are jobless, the German system gives you enough to rent an apartment and eat something. It's not luxurious, but it's better than those anti-social systems like those in the US. You don't have to worry about getting enough food.

When these basic needs are met, you are free to open your mind. Most people don't - even those that have jobs - and I think that's pretty sad. Many people accept the pointless work and shitty environments because the fear of social decline is so big in their heads. I think most of those points you talk about can be changed on the psychological level. Money doesn't necessarily change this, it's a mindset.

When I talk about environment and legacy, I talk about your parents, your grand-parents and your grand-grand-parents.

If you are born Germans and your parents are Germans since generations, there are higher chances they teached you how the system works since the first day. It's probable they accumulated a social network of friendly lawyers, politicians, or any other persons the system already rewarded, and told you what to do to make sure you keep your privileges and protect the system.

Trusting the system when you are a foreigner is way more difficult, especially when you know no one.

You can't compare the lifestyle of someone who lives with $10k/month with someone who is clueless and, because of lack of information and ressources, cannot defend his/her own human rights.

We are not born equal, if your parents are richer than mines, you are probably privileged before we even proved our skills.

There are many assumptions in your comment - maybe I can provide some anecdata: My mother is from india (so I know what you mean with the problems for foreigners) and my parents were not wealthy for a long time. They still aren't extremely wealthy and I can make more money than my parents combined (but without that job security).

All they've told me was how important education is. But I've dropped out of college anyways. I wasn't very good in school. I didn't care.

I agree with you in general, but not everyone who's able to achieve something got it naturally. My father works 50-70 hours a week and he was the best in school because he had no other chance to study otherwise (he wasn't allowed to get a degree and needed the best grades to get an exception; GDR was a hostile place for intelligent people). My grandfather worked since he was 13 (this was shortly after the war; his father died).

I'm not the type of person who thinks that the world owes anyone anything.

I've learned about how the system works in economics classes in school (we had a very good teacher who showed us the BS in the world) and through psychology books.

There are many money-poor people who give their children the opportunity to grow. As I've said: Many times, it isn't about money and privilege. It's about attitude and mindset - a specific mindset can lead to privileges. Not taking anything for granted, for example. Not immerse oneself in self-pity.

- - -

I still agree with you in general, because the numbers are very clear about it: Social mobility is very low in Germany.

Most poor people have other problems holding them back e.g. some parents were abused in their childhood, so they're unable to give proper emotional support. Many are jealous of the opportunities their kids have (not because they're bad people, but because they never felt loved). Escaping those vicious cycles is extremely hard and we're currently not doing enough to change it. But I still think that our current system enables people who value education and have a certain mental health to move upwards - much better than the system in the US. You don't need to be rich to get good education here or accumulate big debt.

These are some good points, but people still compare themselves to the prior generation and notice, that while they have a whole bunch of luxuries their parents never had [1], that they also can't afford other luxuries. Like housing. My parents had a huge house and property by the time they turned 30. While some people still buy houses in their 20s, they're usually small shit houses with tiny properties.

[1] The whole computer thing, generally much better healthcare, much better daycare offerings if you're the sort of person that wants or has to give her children away, etc.; or even things like being able to buy a used car for 5k with excellent interior, crash safety and gimmicks. (But you of course can't afford to fuel it, so maybe that's a moot point).

> My parents had a huge house and property by the time they turned 30.

How much was it? You can make 3500€ pre-tax with a bachelors degree in many fields. That's around 2200€ after taxes. Two people can live comfortably with ~2500€ and lay away 1900€ a month. You will not be able to buy a property in a big city, but after 10 years you'll be able to pay for a small house. And you even get a tax break for it.

Today it's uncommon to be a couple that takes a mortgage together - young people don't really trust relationships in the same way anymore. This halves their net worth to buy a house.

I think stable relationships are extremely important for the wealth of our parents. Many older people are now broke because they've split up with their partners. So if you want to have the same wealth, you also have to find a partner who's up for this challenge.

> Two people can

Like many, they did this on a single income.

Interesting.

The inflation-adjusted incomes (median for a more accurate analysis) stayed pretty much the same in the US [1], but the purchasing power dropped.

> For example, the Census Bureau reports that the average price of a new home in July 1994 was $144,400. According to the inflation calculator, that price today should be $232,141. The same report places the average sale price for July 2014 at $339,100, however, more than 46% higher than the price when accounting for inflation alone.

The housing and living costs are higher today. It seems that capitalists are chasing inelastic demands (people can't really defend themselves there). I can understand why they do this, but politics should use proper regulations to enable normal people to buy their houses. The system seems to be corrupted at those places.

[1]: https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/09/1...

[2]: https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/101314/what-does-cu...

Society can't expect the value of labor to remain the same if you double the supply by adding women to it. Plus automation and globalization means no way Americans could continue consuming so much per capita more than the rest of the world. Unless via the use of force, usually military, which the US does but it's not as effective as before.

While I don't think the supply was doubled (at least not here), yeah, that seems about right. What this meant is the middle class got nuked. You can't have a middle class family any more with only one parent working; as a mother you're pretty much coerced to work to make ends meet (or take a drastic standard of living and social cut). As an added bonus, people will tell you that you have a bad character and you are morally wrong if you want to look after your own kids yourself.

And I think this is one of the most impressive feats here (besides turning, or rather directing, feminism into mainly being about reducing labour costs); a lot like spin doctoring.

Instead of gaining actual, actionable choice and freedoms, merely one social ideal (man works, woman cares for the children) was exchanged for another social ideal (both have to work, state handles the children), and the demographic pressuring women into compliance changed perhaps slightly.

> Society can't expect the value of labor to remain the same if you double the supply by adding women to it.

This sounds funny if you think about it.

Women fought a long time for emancipation which also means they have the same obligations w.r.t work and other activities.

Now they work and the market corrected itself to account for the new labor supply. In the end: No one won except companies. Sounds like a bad deal in general.

- - -

I don't think that emancipation is bad. I think it's a good thing and necessary for social progress. But I think it's hilarious that good intentions can have these unwanted consequences. I don't want to offend anyone, but I'm too cynical to not laugh about it.

Women who now finally have freedom due to the financial security afforded to them by being able to work certainly "won".

This certainly wasn't my cleverest moment, but I still find it very interesting that we had to pay a certain price to get this privilege. It seems like there's no free lunch in many types of social progress.

In what country ? 2200 euros is less than £20k. For what its worth a couple of weeks ago I got a pitch to work in Portugal @100K euros or almost £90k.

What a lot of people don't realise that some eu countries where before they joined the eu - developing countries

well said.