News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Capitalism and Inequality by nailer on Wednesday January 23, 2019 @12:27PM (#18980307)
Inequality of output is not the same as inequality of opportunity. Two people with thr same opportunities may have different outcomes due to different decisions and luck.

Bill Gates leveraged a traffic light data system into a global default OS and productivity suite. It might be because he's lucky, it might also be because he saw things Microsoft's smartest hundred engineers did not.

Fund children to get food and education to the best of their abilities. Healthy adults don't deserve anything and can stand on their own feet.

Re:Capitalism and Inequality by socrates1998 on Wednesday January 23, 2019 @01:50PM (#18981304)
Rich parents generally have rich children.

Let's take a look at Bill Gates' luck. He was at a private high school which was only of a few in the world that had access to super-ish computer. Not only that, he was given control access to do whatever he wanted.

Sure, he was talented, but if he hadn't been at that EXACT high school at that EXACT time, he wouldn't be a billionaire.

Billionaires need a shit of ton of things to go right and ALL their decisions need to work out almost perfectly.

Even when they "lose" something, if you became a billionaire, you found a much better opportunity right after you "lost" something.

The fact is the number one predictor of a person's income, health and net worth is their parents income. How do you explain that the extremely high correlation of parental income and children income?

Re:Capitalism and Inequality by nailer on Wednesday January 23, 2019 @01:52PM (#18981338)
You've just said it can be both luck and talent. This is exactly what the comment you're responding to says.

The parents income doesn't just magically create wealthy kids: money runs out. In the US, wealth controls the child's access to good education, and parental wealth may also result from good genetics (intelligence) or culture around wealth and investment.

An example: friend of mine isn't particularly intelligent, but she's wealthy because she knew the law of 72 and said no when offered a credit card (with compound interest like all credit cards) before her frontal cortex developed. Most young adults would say yes and immediately enter financial slavery.

Re:Capitalism and Inequality by socrates1998 on Wednesday January 23, 2019 @02:47PM (#18981977)
Just because someone is talented and lucky, it doesn't justify them making $100 billion while others die from lack of basic health care.

Parental income is the highest predictor of a person's income. Nothing you have said counters this argument.

If you have any stats or data that counter it, then please provide them.

Re:Capitalism and Inequality by nailer on Wednesday January 23, 2019 @06:03PM (#18984110)
You are assuming someone making 100 billion is related to others dying from lack of health care.

It would be entirely possible for both to happen: an actual competitive health care market in the US reducing costs to closer to the rest of the first world and the government paying those costs via taxes (pretty close to what people in the US pay now).

Re:Capitalism and Inequality by orthecreedence on Wednesday January 23, 2019 @12:49PM (#18980557)
> It might be because he's lucky

Yes, this is it.

People do not become billionaires through sheer determination and leveraging opportunities. They are in the right place at the right time (and often have a pool of capital already), and that is 90% of it. The last 10% is hard work, taking risks, and foresight.

"Rags to riches" is a story we're told so we believe that any of us can climb to the top when, really, it's a way to placate people who have nothing, and not just that, but to enlist them in unbending support for those who have everything (because, one day, THEY might be the billionaire).