News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Big Cities No Longer Deliver for Low-Skill Workers by wonderwonder on Tuesday January 22, 2019 @12:57PM (#18970456)
Is that... is that really your argument? That everything is fine because these people in line at the food bank are able to get free food so that their children don't starve to death? So we can ignore the massive wealth disparity and the vast number of people living in poverty because we don't force them to die of hunger. That's very magnanimous of you. Imagine what they could accomplish with both free food and knowledge of your mantra.
[dead]
Re:Big Cities No Longer Deliver for Low-Skill Workers by maxxxxx on Tuesday January 22, 2019 @07:57PM (#18974636)
Your first two paragraphs should get an award for most arrogant comment in quite a while.
Re:Big Cities No Longer Deliver for Low-Skill Workers by fastball on Tuesday January 22, 2019 @08:27PM (#18974834)
How do you figure?
Re:Big Cities No Longer Deliver for Low-Skill Workers by maxxxxx on Tuesday January 22, 2019 @08:55PM (#18974967)
You basically told the previous poster that he is an idiot. That's arrogance in my view especially since you are only stating things with nothing to back them up or any coherent thought besides that you are right and everyone else is stupid and not even worth discussing with.
Re:Big Cities No Longer Deliver for Low-Skill Workers by fastball on Wednesday January 23, 2019 @12:20AM (#18975868)
The idea that two different things are in fact different does not require "back up". Wealth inequality and poverty are not interchangeable concepts, but wonderwonder was treating them like they were by appealing to everyone's innate sense that poverty is bad and then conflating that with wealth inequality.

This isn't up for debate. The two things are, by definition, not the same. You may think they are related, but that burden is wonderwonder's (and perhaps yours) to prove, not mine. Two separate concepts are not correlated, causal, or interchangeable until they have been shown to be. Not the other way 'round.

I don't think everyone else is stupid. But people that conflate those two things are either missing something or doing it deliberately (knowing full well they are wrong). Telling someone this is not arrogance, and my comment was perfectly coherent to a great many people if upvotes are any indication. If you want an example of incoherence, look no further than the comment which talked about "driving past food banks" as if that was some sort of "gotcha" about wealth inequality. I think it was lost on wonderwonder that food banks themselves are a great example of wealth not being a zero sum game.

Re:Big Cities No Longer Deliver for Low-Skill Workers by maxxxxx on Wednesday January 23, 2019 @09:24AM (#18978303)
Your starting point was that wealth is not a zero sum game. I replied that it is. If you do some arithmetic and look at growth rates you will see quickly that the economy never has grown beyond certain rates. That means if someone or a whole industry or population group accumulated wealth at a higher rate then the money had to come from someone else. It wasn't "created" out of thin air.

You really should work on your debating style. Phrases like "this is not up for debate" are just bullying to stop a debate you don't want to have. If you are the same at work I feel for the people who have to put up with this.

Re:Big Cities No Longer Deliver for Low-Skill Workers by fastball on Wednesday January 23, 2019 @10:34AM (#18979020)
I’ve dealt with enough people who willfully conflate different topics to know that it is not worth my time to engage on that level and be forced to show repeatedly that two things are different, only to have the other person continue to conflate them. It is not up for debate because it needs to first be shown that there is some relation in order for it to be debated. This is neither arrogance or bullying: it is pragmatism.

Now, as to your comment (which was never the topic of discussion in this part of the thread): if the entire economy grows at 2%, and 0.1% of people’s wealth grows at 10%, the growth of the entire economy can absolutely account for that subset’s gain in wealth. It depends entirely on how big those respective groups are, not purely on “this % is larger than that %”. The money is not necessarily coming from someone else. The growth of the economy is not a fixed rate — if more people produce more good work, the economy will grow more. You also might be forgetting globalism and the fact that the "1%"’s wealth is not necessarily coming from One Place™. For example, Jeff Bezos is wealthy because of AMZN. AMZN operates in many countries all over the world. Therefore, saying “the US is growing at X rate, so Jeff Bezos’ wealth growth rate is too high!” is misguided at best. This is true for many of the "1%" -- they are creating value all over the world, not just in their home country, so it follows that the growth of their wealth is not tied to the growth rate of their home country.

I hope making calculations is not part of your job, because if so I feel for the people that are forced to rely on them.

Re:Big Cities No Longer Deliver for Low-Skill Workers by wonderwonder on Tuesday January 22, 2019 @08:04PM (#18974681)
psst, look at yourself and the way you talk to people, there are several problems here but I'm not one of them. I hope you are eventually able to find whatever you are looking for. Have a good night and optimally a better life.
Re:Big Cities No Longer Deliver for Low-Skill Workers by fastball on Tuesday January 22, 2019 @08:29PM (#18974844)
I plan on having a better life every day, as I work towards that goal and get rewarded for my efforts.

Good luck with your wealth redistribution campaign. I'm sure it'll work out great. Who knows, you might get a life of abundance you did nothing to deserve!

Re:Big Cities No Longer Deliver for Low-Skill Workers by mdorazio on Tuesday January 22, 2019 @06:50PM (#18974103)
Ad hominem attacks are an extremely poor choice for comments and have no place on this site.
Re:Big Cities No Longer Deliver for Low-Skill Workers by fastball on Tuesday January 22, 2019 @08:21PM (#18974788)
Misusing the phrase "ad hominem" is not constructive and has no place on this site.