| ▲ | crote a day ago |
| > The wealth inequality we have today, as bad as it is, is as best as it will ever be moving forward. It's only gonna get worse. Why? As the saying goes, the people need bread and circuses. Delve too deeply and you risk another French Revolution. And right now, a lot of people in supposedly-rich Western countries are having their basic existance threatened by the greed of the elite. Feudalism only works when you give back enough power and resources to the layers below you. The king depends on his vassals to provide money and military services. Try to act like a tyrant, and you end up being forced to sign the Magna Carta. We've already seen a healthcare CEO being executed in broad daylight. If wealth inequality continues to worsen, do you really believe that'll be the last one? |
|
| ▲ | lurk2 a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| > And right now, a lot of people in supposedly-rich Western countries are having their basic existance threatened by the greed of the elite. Which people are having their existences threatened by the elite? |
|
| ▲ | zwnow a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Delve too deeply and you risk another French Revolution. Whats too deeply? Given the circumstances in the USA I dont see no revolution happening. Same goes for extremely poor countries. When will the exploiters heads roll? I dont see anyone willing to fight the elite. A lot of them are even celebrated in countries like India. |
| |
| ▲ | jack_tripper a day ago | parent [-] | | Yep, exactly. If the poor people had the power to change their oppressive regimes, then North Korea or Cuban leaders wouldn't exist. |
|
|
| ▲ | FridayoLeary a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| As long as you have people gleefully celebrating it or providing some sort of narrative to justify it even partially then no. >And right now, a lot of
people in supposedly-rich Western
countries are having their basic existance threatened by the greed of
the elite. Can you elaborate on that? |
|
| ▲ | jack_tripper a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | otikik a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > start removing more and more of your rights to bear arms Wasn't he killed in New York? Not a lot of right to bear arms there as far as I know. | | | |
| ▲ | lurk2 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | > because most people are as clueless as you Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Don't be curmudgeonly. Thoughtful criticism is fine, but please don't be rigidly or generically negative. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html | | |
| ▲ | jack_tripper a day ago | parent [-] | | You mean he wasn't being clueless with that point of view? Like the majority of the population who can't do 8th grade math let alone understand the complexities of out financial systems that lead to the ever expanding wealth inequality? Or do you mean we shouldn't be allowed to call out people we notice are clueless because it might hurt their feelings and consider it "fulmination"? But then how will they know they might be wrong if nobody dares calls them out ? Isn't this toxic positivity culture and focus on feelings rather than facts, a hidden form of speech suppression, and a main cause in why people stay clueless and wealth inequality increases? Because they grow up in a bubble where their opinions get reinforced and never challenged or criticized because of an arbitrary set of speech rules will get lawyered and twisted against any form of criticism? Have you seen how John Carmack or Linus Torvalds behaves and talks to people he disagrees with? They'd get banned by HN rules day one. So I don't really see how my comment broke that rule since there's no fulmination there, no snark, no curmudgeonly, just an observation. | | |
| ▲ | qsera a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I agree with what you say. But here is the thing. HN needs to keep the participants comfortable and keep the discussion going. Same with the world at large, hence the global "toxic positivity culture"... | |
| ▲ | lurk2 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Or do you mean we shouldn't be allowed to call out people we notice are clueless? That’s exactly what it means. You’ll note I’ve been very polite to you in the rest of the thread despite your not having made citations for any of your claims; this takes deliberate effort, because the alternative is that the forum devolves to comments that amount to: “Nuh-uh, you’re stupid,” which isn’t of much interest to anyone. | | |
| ▲ | jack_tripper a day ago | parent [-] | | >“Nuh-uh, you’re stupid,” You're acting in bad faith now, by trying to draw a parallel on how calling someone clueless (meaning lacking in certain knowledge on the topic) is the same as calling someone stupid which is a blatant insult I did not use. | | |
| ▲ | lurk2 a day ago | parent [-] | | > meaning lacking in certain knowledge on the topic Clueless has a pejorative connotation. I am struggling to imagine how anyone would read a comment like: > because most people are as clueless as you about the reality of how things work and not interpret it to be pejorative. |
|
|
|
|
|
