Hacker News Reader

Comment by dleslie | Hacker News Reader

There are children going hungry at school, people with trivial to fix but prohibitively expensive medical issues, and silicon valley millionaires are spending more than many will make in a year by purchasing bullshit.

Shit's on fire, yo.

View on HN

> Shit's on fire, yo.

Let them eat cake.

Can anyone else hear the guillotines being sharpened?

Seriously though this obscene inequality can only lead one place, and we were lucky that they were morons on January 6th and not organized properly.

Ironically the revolution will be stoked by those first up against the wall in the name of engagement.

It won’t be televised but it will be on Instagram.

Real change can only happen if the poor (people earning less than $1M per year) unite against the rich. Instead, the poor are hopelessly divided and fight pointless culture battles, like the main/master debate.

I don't think anyone making less than the median US income has even heard of the main/master debate :)

But sure, I agree with the larger point. Culture wars are great for keeping the weak divided. The $GME fiasco - albeit a bit silly - was the first glimmer of hope I saw in a long time towards that unification. Hopefully there's more to come.

> poor (less than 1m)

the top 10% globally is 30k... which is low income for Americans.

Americans bitching about the 1% is laughable.

Ironically, America basically shows how the 1% can maintain control of the global hegemony for decades without any effective resistance. The fact that this system of oppression is fractally recursive adds to the irony.

Precisely because Americans lead comfortable lives.

Why is it laughable that Americans want a better world for others? Most Americans have no control over what their country's leaders do.

Every time I read something like this, I think of how little the person saying it knows about the conditions of the poor in 18th century France.

jesus calm down

Good thing no one knows who to behead if you pay the $50k with ETH.

Well purchasing an NFT doesn't really reallocate any resources that would have gone to those things, so I don't think it's a huge issue. They are just transferring money from one person to another, essentially.

> They are just transferring money from one person to another, essentially.

That's what "reallocating resources" usually means.

I said they are not reallocating resources which would have gone towards those things. Unless the person buying the NFT has a greater chance of spending it on the poor than the person selling it, nothing has really changed as far as our spending on health, housing etc. goes.

All money does is decide how we allocate physical resources and labour. If it is just sitting in a bank, or being moved from one person to another, nothing is being taken away from the poor.

Rich people have always spent lots of money on bullshit. That's nothing new.

Similar effects of a Veblen good

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good

Yeah, like automobiles and cell phones before they were good or cheap.

Like ludicrously expensive mechanical watches after they got good, cheap, and obsolete (in that order).

NFTs are a mechanism for transferring money from rich people to artists who are not rich. Isn't this something you should support, given your stated beliefs?

If you think this is what’s happening in reality, then I have a bridge to sell you...

Not anymore you don't

Consider that the high-end art trade is largely a mechanism for tax evasion.

I have not looked closely into NFTs, but I have severe doubts that starving artists are, or are going to be the actual beneficiaries of money sloshing through that system.

Are they? I'm not familiar with John Cleese's finances, but his well-established fame is probably driving prices up

Not to mention that Jack guy who NFT'd his first tweet. Pretty sure he isn't hurting for cash

> more than many will make in a year by purchasing bullshit.

Often more than people make in a lifetime.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com