HN user

cmdrfred

1,797 karma

It's been real guys.

Posts5
Comments2,043
View on HN

Prior to that you had feudalism where you farmed land and shared the spoils with a king, prior to that we simply murdered the unproductive and socially unacceptable by removing them from the village. So far this seems like the best option.

Because if you think critically about that concept for a moment it falls apart. If people didn't have to work to earn wages in order to survive and simply had their needs provided by society there would be little incentive to work, thus few would work, and thus workers would have to be compelled to work by the state. Thus slavery. It solves no problem.

There is another aspect to this. Consider 911, you had 4 planes full of people and yet it is believed that only 2 - 3 people on a single plane did anything to stop the hijackers (ultimately saving many lives at the cost of their own).

Uncommon valor is prized and honored simply because it is so uncommon. It is easy to say how you would act in a situation from the comfort of your keyboard but when the shit hits the fan are you sure that you are part of the exceptional 5%? Or are you just another passenger trying to get home? Perhaps OP is just like most people, not wanting to rock the boat and trying to get on with his life. Having walked a few miles in his shoes are you certain you'd do any different? I'd like to think I would but I'd be dishonest to confidently claim it. "Some cats surf, Some cats make the waves"

You act as if the alternative is free. Will you maintain the same "life at any cost" mentality when your insurance premiums or taxes increase to the point that you can no longer afford them? If you lower the cost of healthcare you increase access, you can raise the costs involved and provide better care but less people will be able to use it. It isn't as simple as you postulated.

You'll note that many of those expenses are things the majority of the world lacks (homes with electricity, internet and running water/education expenses/entertainment budgets larger than most peoples total yearly income). If this is a valid defense of that policy why isn't "of course I need to make 10 million a year I have 3 mortgages, 5 luxury cars and a fully crewed yacht" a defence for keeping things as is? What is fundamentally different?

I never understood the wealth redistribution argument from (USA) Americans. If you make $32,400 a year you are in the top 1% globally. Thus you have the power to fix it, at least on the small scale and yet I haven't heard of a single person who holds these views even attempting to do so. When it comes to most of the western world screaming about income equality won't "help you with medical costs/student loans" in fact it will do very much the opposite unless you chose to implement it in a manner that really doesn't create more equality as much as making a certain class in a certain nation wealthier, but then aren't you just as bad as the capitalists you complain about?

[dead] 9 years ago

If Berkeley police weren't told to stand down some of the violent anarchists would have been arrested and this distinction would have been proven.

[dead] 9 years ago

Violence" is always somehow brought into the mix by conservatives

It is your contention that the violence at Berkeley was committed by Milo supporters? Do you have evidence for this claim?

How many deaths occur from solar once it is built/installed?

Well if we are talking about what would happen if energy was produced entirely with solar/wind wouldn't you have to include things like the people freezing to death during a string of cloudy yet still winter days?