Hacker News Reader

Comment by rzwitserloot | Hacker News Reader

In normal times, what you say is obviously true.

But specifically at this moment in time what you've written is total hogwash. Currently the US is spending money as if it's, specifically, an infinite resource.

Hence, this kaibosh on science funding can only be explained because the powers that be want it dead and gone.

Do with that info what you will. The various flavours of conspiracy-theory-leaning ideas on wanting to 'scare the scientist community away from commenting on political affairs' seem like the most likely explanation to me despite how petty and crazy that sounds.

If you are a scientist, get out.

Either out of science, or away from US-centric research systems.

View on HN

Currently, in the US, money is an infinite resource. One need only look at the world's latest one point five trillionaire.

Where is the money coming from to support that valuation? And why is it being spent to maintain that valuation?

Part of it is accounting tricks (sell 5% of a company for $20, and you're worth $400 with only $20 changing hands) but there's also genuinely a massive unexplained amount of money in existence in the US financial system, that should have caused massive inflation by now but somehow hasn't. Maybe it's only a matter of time, or maybe due to class segregation, it's stable like this and will never come down the ladder to affect grocery prices?

> Currently, in the US, money is an infinite resource. […]

Try harder to engage in dialog. Basic economic theory contradicts your claim. You need a much stronger logical argument to have any credibility.

Um, "basic economic theory" would include the processes that create money and the limits on them, which can be disabled, and what happens if the limits are disabled

the US can trivially and renewably acquire infinite money (in USD). It is an infinite resource.

Wealth on the other hand....

No, no, they're definitely correct. There's no hard limit on the amount of money created. Excess money creation just results in inflation.

More to the point: Congress is being profligate in other spending, and miserly w.r.t. science, so it does indeed look like the science cuts are not motivated by fiscal responsibility.

Your quip about "basic economic theory" doesn't really address the point they're making.

Valuations are often an absurd fantasy. The notion is that Musk could find a buyer who would be willing to pay that based on the value of each share he owns. It’s not real money. He can borrow against it but not too much, and he will have to find a way of paying the lender back without selling stock. The money is not real.

If he dumped all of his shares the value of them would essentially go away, like with any commodity.

He gets to exercise power based on his valuation, and in that sense, it is real. He is now known as the world's richest person and first one point five trillionaire, even if he doesn't have one point five trillion dollar bills in his closet. He gets people to suck up to him for fractions of it - "do X for me and I'll give you shares worth a million"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com