Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by uk_programmer 2247 days ago
> You aren't seeing the forest for the trees. That bit of welfare going to people who maybe don't deserve it? It's nothing compared to the money that goes to corporations to keep people working in jobs that make no economic sense.

Get rid of corporatism as well. Any politicians to be seen to be paid off (and I don't doubt there are quite a few) should be locked up. Corporations can that are inefficient can only survive because there isn't a fair market place and this is facilitated by politicians.

> That money is not only taken from you, it's taken from generations to come through debt. You're the sucker, either way!

At the moment it is getting taken from me. I can see it in my accounting. So don't tell me it isn't when it very clearly is.

> Now, do you want to make things worse to enforce some idea of "fairness"? That's the essence of socialism.

Oh please. This is ridiculous. I am not saying it should be fair, I am saying that in principle it is wrong to allow those that do not want to work to do nothing and be supported by those that do do the work. Doing something on principle isn't fairness. I don't like corporatism and those politicians that sold us down the river should be rotting in a prison cell.

>That's survivorship bias. Depending on the business, it would be unwise to take all the risk, relative to the limited reward. I hope you managed to save enough for your retirement, unlike most small business owners.

Claiming survivorship claim is a bit of a meme on here and your usage is utterly ridiculous, in fact it must be some sort of fallacy to claim this every-time someone simply say "You can do this without the government" they parrot survivorship bias because they read the wikipedia entry the week before.

I am a contractor (and I sub-contract to others). There are plenty of small businesses that do fine and it is trivial to setup a pension and investments through you business (took me an afternoon on the phone). This does however require you to read up on things, and take responsibility and think ahead.

> If you want real capitalism where workers don't have all these rights that prevent an efficient economy, inevitably some workers will be in a dire economic situation and will have to take any job, lest they starve. That's an exploitable situation. I suppose you don't want that.

The reality is that some people will have to work jobs they don't like. I've done it. That still isn't exploitation, it is called life mate. There are some thing that you won't like doing. I don't like working with legacy systems but most of the work involves working with them.

> I'm not arguing for Marxism, I'm arguing to get rid of the entitlements and most of the worker's rights, but in turn give them a simple safety net, a very modest means of living, so that they don't have to take or keep a bad job - especially not those artificial jobs created by corporate welfare.

"I am not arguing for socialism. I am arguing for redistributing wealth by taxing the upper-middle class further". The elites never pay these taxes (I wouldn't if I was soo rich I could pay an army of accountants to work out how to move my wealth to a tax haven).

Also when people say "corporate welfare. I am starting to suspect that it means "I don't like my boring job at global-corp, therefore if we had UBI I could read reddit at home instead and post pictures on r/unixporn instead of having to pretend to be working".

> You must understand that keeping people working in uneconomical jobs is more wasteful than just giving them money to do nothing, because on top of it costing taxpayer money, it also costs people's time.

No you must understand we have to end collusion between Government and Business. UBI will make people more dependant on Government. Once that is ended, if the job is uneconomical and there is no corporatism the problem will resolve itself as eventually businesses will have to innovate their processes if they want to stay competitive.

1 comments

> At the moment it is getting taken from me. I can see it in my accounting. So don't tell me it isn't when it very clearly is.

I didn't say that. Read the sentence again. It is not only taken from you. Sure, you pay taxes, but the government is also getting deeper and deeper into debt, because your taxes aren't enough. Who is going to pay for that? Well, you, as long as your alive, then your children, if you have any. Or maybe you'll be poorer through inflation. You need to look beyond taxes and start looking at debt. Taxation is (politically) hard, debt is easy.

> I am not saying it should be fair, I am saying that in principle it is wrong....

It's only wrong because it is unfair. Same difference.

> This does however require you to read up on things, and take responsibility and think ahead.

Oh sure. Most likely, you'll be wiped out easy as soon as some minor crisis shows up at the door. There's a major recession unfolding right now, perhaps it hasn't hit you yet. You'll lose all your money, your pension, and then you'll wish you had your protected salary at some "too big to fail" company, or maybe some government desk job. You can barely afford real estate, so the risk you are taking is in no proportion to the reward. I wish it'd be different, but I didn't make the rules.

> The reality is that some people will have to work jobs they don't like. I've done it. That still isn't exploitation, it is called life mate.

Dude, you're from the UK, your worst case scenario is being on unemployment benefits. You effectively have a social safety net, you can just stop pontificating about the people who don't have one. If your options are "be out on the street" or "work 60hrs in a dead-end job for the rest of your life", it's a little bit different.

> No you must understand we have to end collusion between Government and Business. UBI will make people more dependant on Government. Once that is ended, if the job is uneconomical and there is no corporatism the problem will resolve itself as eventually businesses will have to innovate their processes if they want to stay competitive.

The whole argument to keep these companies alive is to protect jobs. If we have it your way, a lot of people will be unemployed. Maybe in the UK that's not such a big deal, but only because there is a welfare system.

Just admit that your idea of good politics is putting people out in the street and let them figure it all out. Apart from that, we're probably on the same page.

> Just admit that your idea of good politics is putting people out in the street and let them figure it all out. Apart from that, we're probably on the same page.

When people like yourself start putting words into my mouth. It is time not to bother conversing any longer. Goodbye.

> When people like yourself start putting words into my mouth

I'm only replying in kind. Haven't you noticed?

I dunno what you are trying to prove. I haven't been rude.