The 1 percent are parasites – debunking lies about trickle-down and capitalism | Hacker News Reader

The 1 percent are parasites – debunking lies about trickle-down and capitalism

salon.com

42 pointsneuro_imager7 comments

Most of this is the top 10% using the 90% against the top 1% so the top 10% can pay less taxes and have more power. Not that I'm against that, but the 90% are just used for centuries by the fight of the top 10% and the top 1%.

> Most of this is the top 10% using the 90% against the top 1% so the top 10% can pay less taxes and have more power.

This.

I would also add that all this parlance sounds an awful lot like communist propaganda, not in the message but on the power-grabbing strategy.

They've fabricated a common enemy (the 1%/the bourgeoisie) and in spite of all the propaganda the only objective of the elites controlling these movements is to manipulate useful idiots (90%/the proletariat) into doing all the dirty work to transfer power away from an established rival to their own hands.

The tactics are the same, the propaganda is the same, the rhetoric is essentially the same, etc etc etc.

Haha this is the biggest BS I read in HN for life. Congratulations, sir.

One thing that would bear looking into is the "star system" - say you have a pool of 1000 people very skilled at whatever (singing, acting, athletics, TV talking, etc.).

Only a few get to be "stars" and reap most of the available rewards, although they could be replaced by another pool member with minimal difference.

Until the XIX century, there was not enough communication reach for this to occur noticeably. But now anyone from Podunk can have a global audience.

Is this a problem, and does it need fixed?

... also calling real humans 'parasites' says a lot about the thinking of the author. Media should have learned where devaluing human life leads to.

>As we show later, governments have repeatedly fostered fundamental research and borne the risk of ventures failing.

How do "governments" bear a risk when ventures fail?

First, I don't really know if the article's argument is correct, but the vehemence in the "1%" discussion is bad. If nothing else, this movement should concentrate more on rent seeking and regulatory capture.

Living in a part of the world with a bigger (non military) state, the state as entrepreneurial is a cruel joke. E.g., the last few Swedish governments have been systematically under investing in railway upkeep -- an improvement won't be noticed until after the next election, so the governments do the "bread and circuses" thing with the available resources instead, to win the next election. (This works because they also use the resources to integrate with the media and avoid too harsh criticism.)

But sure, the previous is arguably "entrepreneurial"... :-(

The examples of this abound for the whole of EU.

As another point: The world has seen a fast global increase in the work force. That quite naturally stress the salaries and job markets in the "old world". (This rise of poor countries is IMHO a good thing, even if it hits me and other people like me.)

What I expected more of in the article: What works, considering international benchmarking of different tax/education/etc systems?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com