Comment by hueving | Hacker News Reader

Comment by hueving | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> You can create this utopian society by distributing capital in a way that all individuals have their basic needs provided

This is currently not even close to possible based on our current technology level. In order for everyone to have their basic needs provided for free we would need full automation for all of these things:

* all of healthcare * all of food production * all of shelter construction and maintenance * all energy generation * all transportation * all waste disposal * all water collection and treatment * maintenance of the things that automate all of the above

Given that this is not the scenario now, countries are forced to tax the currently economically productive people to pay for some of these things for those not currently participating in the economy.

There is no country in the world that provides all of these things for free to all citizens because there would be no incentive for anyone to do the work to support all of the basic needs. It's already hard enough to incentivize people to work to support the economy when they have to do it in exchange for food/shelter/transportation.

>Capitalists are not workers

This is completely false. Anyone with a retirement account or money sitting in a bank earning interest is a capitalist. Even as a worker with no money earning growth, you are a capitalist selling your own labor/skills/time.

Your definition of "capitalist" does not seem to bear much relation to the ideas of Adam Smith. Also, you added a clause ("for free") to the statement you responded to, then argued against it. This is disingenuous and invalid as a form of argument.

> Given that this is not the scenario now, countries are forced to tax the currently economically productive people to pay for some of these things for those not currently participating in the economy.

It's at least as valid to say that capitalism is incorrect in valuing people only in relation to the value of their labor. We have massive social and financial structures to subsidize students, because we recognize that activity has a great deal of future value to individuals, nations, and the world at large. We provide a great deal of support to mothers, and the elderly, because societies are more than just economic engines.

> There is no country in the world that provides all of these things for free to all citizens because there would be no incentive for anyone to do the work to support all of the basic needs.

Contradicted by studies. People work because they want to, and because they want more than a basic existence. You would also need to show that it's less expensive to have a bunch of homeless and/or sick people, which is not really possible in a democratic society. Not paying for things that are necessary for your fellow citizens to survive usually ends up being the most expensive way possible to pay for things.

I think that you should rethink a great deal of your sociopolitical philosophy.

>We have massive social and financial structures to subsidize students, because we recognize that activity has a great deal of future value to individuals, nations, and the world at large

Based on capitalism though. We incentize it because educated people are must more useful economically so their future earnings potential is the reason they are able to take pictures of out student loans in the first place.

Places that offer student discounts aren't magically treating them better because they are thinking about their future, they do it because it's an easy way to ensure that someone is likely poor and unable to afford your regular price. It's no different than grocery stores giving coupons to people via annoying mailers so only people with lots of time get the discount.

>Contradicted by studies.

Which are all bullshit because there is no place where this is done on a national level. Nobody unplugs toilets just for fun. You'd have a lot of artists and carpenters contributing things that society doesn't need.

>I think that you should rethink a great deal of your sociopolitical philosophy.

And I think you should spend a little time learning about economics.

> Based on capitalism though.

This is close to a non sequitur, and it doesn't help that you're talking about student discounts as if they were a particularly large component of student financial support. Mentioning that is absurd. Massive subsidies are not "based on capitalism", and they're particularly antithetical to the laissez-faire capitalists.

A blanket dismissal of related studies is simply prejudice.

You are wrong.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com