Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by obrero 3815 days ago
> the public conversation about economic inequality is way too sloppy, and that we should focus not on crude statistical measures like economic inequality but on the specific underlying components

This is a ridiculous thing to day. For one thing there is no public conversation about income inequality. The press is owned by corporations, whose majority ownership is billionaires. Even this forum is owned by Y Combinator, a corporation which owns shares of companies who have collectively raised billions of dollars.

I mean, elected political parties like Hezbollah in Lebanon have television channels like Al-Manar. When someone like Javed Iqbal in the US sets up receiver satellite cards so Americans can watch this channel - he was sent to prison for over six years. That's the "public conversation" in the USA.

There have been somewhat open channels of public discussion on the Internet like Usenet. Which is why the US government and last-mile monopolies got together to work to crush Usenet a few years ago, which for the most part worked in severely harming it.

Then it's also in the interest of the idle class heirs who expropriate surplus labor time from those of us who work to try to muddle the conversation. The idle class is who has been working to take the "focus" off "specific underlying components". It's farcical that the people working to confuse the issue then go on to complain how it seems so unfocused.

It's pretty simple - any created wealth is created through work. Heirs who do not work can then only live by expropriating surplus labor time from those of us who do work. It's as simple as that. It's been happening for 10,000 years, whether it's called slavery, or serfdom, or modern wage slavery. It's all the same thing. Among we who do all the work and create all the wealth has been awareness of the 1% parasites who feed off of our labor.

If the focus of the issue is confused, it's because the offending group wants it to be confused - the people who own the press, who jail the Javed Iqbal's who allow different views from elected parliamentary parties, who crush public forums like Usenet etc.

2 comments

"I mean, elected political parties like Hezbollah in Lebanon have television channels like Al-Manar. When someone like Javed Iqbal in the US sets up receiver satellite cards so Americans can watch this channel - he was sent to prison for over six years. That's the "public conversation" in the USA."

Iqbal was imprisoned because he entered into a business relationship with Hezbollah, a terrorist organization, not because of the content of the broadcast. From the New York Times:

"But Judge Richard M. Berman of United States District Court rejected that view last year, ruling that the prosecution was based not on the content of speech but on conduct — allegations that the men provided material support to a foreign terrorist group.

In court on Tuesday, Mr. Iqbal admitted that his company, HDTV Ltd., received money for providing television services to Al Manar — “the beacon” in Arabic — which the United States Treasury Department has designated a global terrorist entity." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/24/nyregion/24plea.html

Terrorist attacks by Hezbollah: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah#Alleged_suicide_and_...

> "Hezbollah, a terrorist organization"

Hezbollah is more than just a terrorist organisation...

http://www.irinnews.org/report/26242/lebanon-the-many-hands-...

"Hezbollah not only has armed and political wings – it also boasts an extensive social development programme. The group currently operates at least four hospitals, 12 clinics, 12 schools and two agricultural centres that provide farmers with technical assistance and training. It also has an environmental department and an extensive social assistance programme. Medical care is also cheaper than in most of the country’s private hospitals and free for Hezbollah members.

Most of these institutions are located in the country’s more marginalised areas, such as Beirut’s southern suburbs, in South Lebanon and in the Bekaa Valley. “We have special sections all over the country that provide financial and food assistance to the poor,” said Hezbollah spokesman Hussein Nabulsi. “We also run an emergency fund for instant care in case of immediate hospitalisation.”"

> Iqbal was imprisoned because he entered into a business relationship with Hezbollah, a terrorist organization, not because of the content of the broadcast. From the New York Times:

You quote from the Times but leave out the next sentence:

"Prosecutors have said Hezbollah operated Al Manar in Lebanon as a way to raise money and recruit volunteers for attacks."

So his "business relationship with Hezbollah" is Hezbollah makes money off its channel in some manner. Under that criteria, every television channel in the US, every magazine, every newspaper could be banned according to your reasoning, yet you can contort this in some theoretical way so that it has nothing to do with the content.

Name a US channel that has a direct business relationship with Hezbollah (good luck).