simplecomplex

Yes. There will be recessions and periods of growth. The economy is a chaotic non deterministic system. It is never stable and is not predictable. It’s not homogenous either. Some sectors grow while others contract.

When the next recession comes nobody knows. I think the worry is that when the next haircut on stocks happens the Fed can’t stimulate the economy with interest rates because they’re already zero bound. That could mean a long recession and slow recovery, and possibly catastrophic considering that most Americans choose to put all their retirement savings in the stock market.

Historically, there have been huge stock crashes periodically. You could wake up tomorrow and see a 10-20% drop in stocks for multiple days. It’s happened before.

Car companies know the writing is on the wall with regards to pollution and EV.

> The administration’s plans have been further complicated because major automakers have told the White House that they do not want such an aggressive rollback. In July, four automakers formalized their opposition to Mr. Trump’s plans by signing a deal with California to comply with tighter emissions standards if the broader rollback goes through

I will admit I am not involved in FSF and am realizing I am missing a lot of context here regarding Stallmans apparent history of these types of comments.

> Being the kind of person who would do what he did

And what kind of person are you? You’re a “good” person and Stallman a “bad” one? Stallman’s evil but you’re just ignorant? Ha!

I’m not a fan of Stallman, but your shit stinks too.

> is not merely a mistake with words.

Yes. Yes, it is. Are we talking about the same story? We’re talking about something Richard Stallman said. That is his offense and the reason for him being kicked out of FSF and MIT.

Since you dodged the whole point of my comment by reiterating that Stallman said something offensive, I’ll restate my point clearly as a question: In your opinion, can someone be forgiven for saying something wrong? and how do they seek that forgiveness other than apologizing and admitting they were wrong?

I’m sure like everyone you’ve said horrible shit over your lifetime, whether in public or private, whether strangers or family. If we brought out those people hurt by your words over your lifetime, wouldn’t you want to be forgiven? Don’t hold other people to a different standard than you hold yourself.

How do I start a credit reporting company?

People have to have a path to redemption. Stallman apologized and admitted he was wrong. Why is it not acceptable to make a mistake with words? Isn't it impractical to expect everyone to never say something they regret? These are words we're talking about. It's not like Stallman raped a child.

Kicking him out of FSF and MIT seems quite excessive for somebody saying something and then apologizing for it. Whether they are Stallman, a student, or anyone really.

Do the people involved at FSF and MIT hold themselves to the same standard they're holding Stallman to? We'll surely find out because humans tend to say a lot of stupid shit over the course of their lifetime.

> You know what's one thing that makes people very unhappy with their lives? Severe chronic pain.

That's my point. Having taken an opiate actually has little to do with whether they form an addiction. So we shouldn't be focused on restricting supply to treat and prevent addiction.

> Any flesh and blood human will become dependent on opiates after a few weeks.

Yes, if by dependency you're referring to withdrawal symptoms or tolerance. Opioid addiction however varies wildly depending on the demographic, despite all having consumed opioids. It's not the act of taking opioids that predicts whether someone becomes addicted. Research points to addiction not being caused by the drugs themselves. This isn't surprising when you consider that humans get addicted to such a wide variety of totally unrelated chemical combinations. When you think about it, isn't it a little suspicious that almost any chemical that can be consumed is potentially addictive? That strongly suggests that addiction is not about the drugs really, and research is finally corroborating this.

Having said that, now think about the fact that all food is drugs (chemicals that affect and manipulate your biology) and it becomes apparent that addiction is a much much bigger issue than one might assume when only thinking about things like Oxy and booze as drugs. If one qualifies harmful diet as drug addiction it turns out the majority of our society is suffering from addiction. But there's very little research going on in this area, despite diet probably being the most prevalent and harmful form of drug addiction. You can't unsee it. The similarity between someone talking about their struggles with poor diet ("but that cheeseburger/cheetos/soda/etc. is all I have, can't I have just one thing to look forward to?") and someone talking about alcoholism or smoking is almost indistinguishable.

My point is limiting access to opioids isn't effective at treating addiction. Yet that's how our society has chosen to respond to drug addiction across the board, from opioids to alcohol.

The war on drugs doesn't work. And we've had 50 years now to see that. It's sad that the extent of our national conversation about the opioid epidemic is a soap opera about the Sackler family. There will be no front page articles on HN about actually treating addiction.

Research on drug addiction points to socioeconomic and cultural factors predicting addiction, not consuming the drug.

See the work of Johann Hari. People become addicts because they’re unhappy with their lives and their environment, not because opioids are inherently addictive. Which shouldn’t be surprising to anyone who has experienced addiction.

“marketplace” is just a word, not a legal fiction/status like “corporation”.

AFAIK US antitrust law does not have any concept of “marketplaces.”

Which law would that be?

Of course. Good for them. It’s their fucking store!

> Amazon has adjusted its product-search system to more prominently feature listings that are more profitable for the company

Unthinkable. A store trying to make a profit selling things. How crazy.

Purdue never prescribed opioids to anyone. They only sold them to hospitals and doctors, after the FDA let them do it. Not sure what message punishing them is supposed to send?

But I get it. Someone dies and it’s the drug dealers fault, and punishing them will make everyone feel better. Except it doesn’t do anything about the actual problem (opioid addiction).

It feels to me like the elation here is because the Sacklers are rich and people really don’t like that, rather than any sort of victory in combating opiate addiction.

The best outcome would be directing resources at preventing and treating opioid addiction, not at punishing the drug manufacturer.

Great now all the opioid production and prescriptions and thus addiction will stop! Oh wait...

I can’t read the article. Which computer system was hacked, what was the result of the hack, and how it attributed to Russian intelligence?

“Russia tried, succeeded, and continues to do it to the US“?

Source? Which computer system did they break into, and how is it attributed to the Russian government?

Every time in the past when someone says this to me or I search for it online, the “hack” is that US citizens voted for Donald Trump.

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

Doesn’t show any convincing evidence of hacking into election systems, or what the result of the hack was. At best I can see that people suspect WikiLeaks is connected to Russian intelligence and that the Hillary email leak originated with them, but there’s little evidence to support that. Besides, that’s not hacking any computer systems related to the election.

Preventing people from preserving their wealth and the fruits of their labor is not liberty. It’s a restriction of liberty.

Capital controls have historically been associated with despotic governments.

Why shouldn’t I be able to put my wealth where I want ?

Only if they sell the debt to a creditor (hospitals and doctors can’t garnish wages) sue you, win, and pursue the judgement. And then they can only take from your disposable income (after rent, food, other bills, etc.)

And you can wipe out all of it by filing bankruptcy.

Just a reminder for those reading: you don’t need to pay medical bills, nothing is going to happen except a bad credit report.

Go to the hospital, let them bill you, and then throw the bills in the trash.

And the AMA? The FDA?

Should doctors not be allowed to prescribe OxyContin?

Very weird to me that the focus is on the people least responsible. Doctors, FDA, AMA all have to approve the prescription of OxyContin. The whole point of the FDA is to evaluate drugs using science instead of marketing.

If one accepts that Purdue is the party most responsible for the opioid crisis then one must consider doctors, the AMA, and the FDA all incompetent idiots, right?

Do you think doctors should be criminally prosecuted, along with the AMA? After all, they allow the prescription of OxyContin and physicians are the only ones who actually prescribe them. The FDA also regulates the sale of OxyContin.

If doctors prescribe harmful drugs without evaluating their efficacy and without questioning the marketing, aren’t they responsible ? They are ultimately the ones “pushing” OxyContin after all.

I’ve worked plenty with drug addiction and am a recovering addict.

The idea that marketing is responsible for drug addiction is delusional.

The idea that doctors are so stupid as to not know Oxy is addictive is laughably untrue.

If you want to blame anyone blame the people ordering patients to consume opiates. The lack of supervision and education is the doctor’s responsibility not the drug maker. Every doctor in the US knows Oxy is addictive and has for a very long time. Doctors overprescribe OxyContin not pharmaceutical companies.

If you want to play a blame game there is no way Purdue comes out on top. Doctors are the ones who put opiates in peoples hands https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6140023/es

They didn’t directly contribute to the opioid crisis. At worst they were found guilty of deceptive marketing which is obviously highly political considering doctors ultimately prescribed them. Purdue wasn’t running commercials telling consumers to take OxyContin. Blaming Purdue for the opioid crisis is absurd. They make the drug, the doctors choose to buy and prescribe them, and people choose to take them at the advice of their doctor. How does Purdue have more responsibility than doctors and addicts?

Nobody addicted to opium was “tricked” into it. All legal opium is prescribed by a licensed doctor for godsakes!

Fining them isn’t helping people with opiate addiction. If we were to bankrupt the Sackler family tomorrow nobody addicted to opium is magically going to kick the habit.

By definition if person A pays person B for something, person A values that something. By definition a job is not meaningless or without value. David Graeber‘s “bullshit jobs” betrays an ignorance of basic economics, and an understanding of what a job is, what trade is, the fact that people have different preferences and values, etc.

The idea that people pay other people for no reason at all is completely divorced from reality.

Oh shut up Paul. Get over yourself.

Also, put your money where your mouth is and ban paywalled articles on HN.

You need a plan to achieve your goals.

First goal should be saving 6-12 month emergency fund. That gives you freedom to change jobs or weather other problems.

Then start building cash flow positive assets (profit from business, interest from investment, rental income from real estate, etc). This could be anything from a SaaS to buying rental properties.

Build your assets while working until the cash flow from them can replace your job income, then quit and boom you’ve made it. Then you can devote all your time to continuing to grow those assets free from the constraints of a 9-5.

So start with a plan and a budget.

hnrss.org with a filter for points.

https://hnrss.org/newest?points=500

I read the newest posts as they reach 500 upvotes delivered to my RSS reader (feedbin).

HN desperately needs a ban on NYT, Atlantic, and Guardian articles.

They are mostly political opinion pieces that provide no insight and the discussion around them is always the same: one political camp bitching about the government and corporations.