Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by simplemts 2844 days ago
Debt is worse now than in 2008. We haven't / didn't escape anything, just passed it on to future generation(s).

Future generations will be paying the bill for mistakes of their parents.

3 comments

As a parent, I fail to see exactly how I'm guilty of anything here. I used the banks because I had to, I listened to their advice because I can't possibly become an expert on their subjects, etc. I even voted for people who want to regulate them. I don't play on the stock exchange (pension funds do, with my money). I didn't do anything wrong.

My children will pay for the mess a few made by pushing unreasonable expectations and by not listening to people like me.

There are some fights that must be fought by others.

Now if you can provide me with decent alternatives, I'd be glad to here from them. But remember, I have to live in the system.

>But remember, I have to live in the system.

That's generally the problem is that people can only ever see a solution that mirrors our society as is which means voting for the same politicians talking about the same neo-liberal capitalist economy, people need to be a bit braver ideologically if they don't want the wealth gap to increase and when the time for peaceful solutions has passed. We see the rise of the far right, it's slow but there's no denying those people are there in significant numbers and won't go away by calling them all sorts. It would be easy for me as a generally liberal middle-class white man to say everything is fine now but there are some issues which are still prevalent that can't be ignored.

I'm with you on decent alternatives of which I think a non-Fed based monetary system as well as the end of crony capitalism (not capitalism itself) would probably be a decent alternative.

However, the biggest problem is the education of the wider public and garnering the democratic will of the people to make necessary changes.

Economics, for all its show of being empirical is really just politics, and politics is really just philosophy.

In the daily struggle, hustle and bustle of life, few have the time and desire to learn these subjects, let alone pay the price to apply themselves politically to make the necessary changes.

Are you willing to?

I'm not... at least for now, willing to do anything. Charity starts at home and before I contemplate doing anything political I must ensure my family is well off.

However if you are willing, and able to do something, I strongly encourage you to.

>>> Economics, for all its show of being empirical is really just politics, and politics is really just philosophy. >>> Are you willing to?

You're painfully right. I 100% agree. There lies the issue. I have the philosophy right, but the opportunity and skills to fight for it, well, it's much tougher. If only one could contribute to that like on open source projects ('cos there, I contribute, I find time and energy)

But I'm not guilty :-)

Well I think you can make opportunities through persistence and sacrifice and for a given level of intelligence and time, all skills can be learnt.

However the will to do it requires a good enough why... and if you have more pressing whys than you just won't start.

Best I can do for the time being is vote.

> a non-Fed based monetary system

Could you elaborate on that please?

> Economics, for all its show of being empirical is really just politics, and politics is really just philosophy.

That's very-very incorrect. Economics is about models, and understanding the past, and maybe trying to peek at the future. But at its core, it's about modeling.

And it helps us understand what works and what doesn't. Politics should be about giving the parameters to those models. And philosophy (logic) is about finding the inconsistencies in our politics.

And as you say, nowadays people don't care about logic, they care about their beliefs. Even if they are inconsistent. They are too busy to notice that they are wrong.

Re: The Fed

The Fed is a privately owned bank that is given the monopoly to issue debt backed by the taxation of the State.

The U.S. could simply issue debt itself. Even though the President appoints the Fed Chairman and it has the word "Federal" in its name it is not a Government organization. If you don't believe me, try getting ownership information from the Fed via the Freedom of Information Act.

For further information see what happened when President Andrew Jackson abolished the precursor to the current Fed. America didn't implode it actually thrived. Also worth looking into is how the current Fed came about. President Woodrow Wilson lived long enough to regret bringing the Fed back.

Fun fact, the Bank of England started off as a private bank before it became nationalized. Nothing is stopping the U.S. from doing the same.

Re: Economics is modelling

If that were the case what is Communism? Is that a model or a political system? What is Capitalism? Is that a model too? No... they are 'societal beliefs in action' which is what politics is.

As for your assertions on philosophy... I would say philosophy is more than finding inconsistencies, it's a framework for thought itself that allows for reasoning.

What is a model anyway? At its essence it's an idea (or set of ideas) that may or may not be true. I think a big part of the problem with Economics today is the hubris modelling can confer by giving the illusion of accuracy.

It's worth looking into the works of Nobel Prize winner in Economics and the Turing Award winner Herbert A. Simon or more recently Nassim Nicholas Taleb.

Simon's Nobel acceptance speech suns things up better than I can.

> Even though the President appoints the Fed Chairman and it has the word "Federal" in its name it is not a Government organization. If you don't believe me, try getting information from the Fed via the Freedom of Information Act.

The Fed's own page on the FOIA indicates that the Fed thinks it's a federal agency covered by FOIA.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/about_foia.htm

Okay... request information on the ownership structure of each of the Fed banks (i.e. share register) and see how far you get.

I know it sounds crazy but the Fed is simply not a Government organization if it is privately owned.

if you are referring to the budget debt of the US government then a simple cap limiting expenses to less than inflation would in a decade result in a positive balances. however Congress changed their accounting rules decades ago and neither party is interested in fiscal responsibility while the other is in office.

the only real fix is getting out of the tyranny of a two party system, however each new finance reform bill does its best to prevent that possibility under the guise of protecting democracy from outside influence

Will they pay the bill or will they revolt? I feel it is time for some of the latter.
Depends what proportion of them are kept content with mediocre food, shelter, and a slimmer of hope that their kids can move up in the game. And as long as the security guards (military and police) are kept happy and well equipped, then a small number of them should be able to keep the rest in line.

Debt is the smart way to keep them in the hamster wheel.

Edit: fixed contempt to content

contempt -> content
Thanks, missed that auto correct!
The trouble with revolutions is you end up with a new set of leaders, who may well be worse than what you have now.
It served the US quite well the last time they did it around 1776.
We got pretty lucky though, George Washington and others were exceptional people.
How so? What evidence do you have that the US is better off than it would have been by continuing along the lines of e.g. Canada?
If your life is poor, you don't have much left to lose
Venezuela disagree with you, wholeheartedly

You can (especially in US) lose a looooot more.

And most African nations would disagree with Venezuela. But many governments have been overthrow for much less or in cases where a government is so authoritarian that a coup is very difficult. Not saying America is in that situation, but something has got to give, especially when you look at how far wealthier certain people are living in your country.