Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rapjr9 1075 days ago
From the article: "Unfortunately, however, these people have enough money to do serious damage."

Having money does not make anyone fit to change anything outside their business. Maybe there need to be limits set on what can be done with money, government approval of business plans for example, or limits on how much cash can be spent in some area the wealthy person has no understanding of. If someone makes a fortune selling cat food they should not be able to use that money to lobby for rule changes in medicine or to buy their way into running hospitals. Even the business experience side of things is NOT generalizable. There needs to be a requirement of knowledge and experience as a barrier to entry to spending huge amounts of money. Otherwise wealthy people will just fuck things up because then can. An airplane pilot needs training to fly a plane, training for the wealthy should be required to alter an economy.

1 comments

People would definitely resist the idea of not being able to spend their money the way they want. That's the whole point of capitalism, and these people made their fortunes thank to capitalism so obviously capitalism is correct.

The core fundamental issue I see a lot of is that your net worth defines your value. People with more money have more inherent value across the board, and people with less have less. Rich people have an outsized effect on society because people look at their bank balance and see how much money they've made and immediately think that their success came from being an exceptional specimen of humanity.

If we could ditch the cult of personality and the "rich makes right" attitude and actually looked at the behavior of billionaires, we'd see that these people are almost universally unhinged from reality, making baseless claims and assertions, changing social or political affiliations as soon as the group they support doesn't support them unconditionally, avoiding paying taxes as much as possible and then turning around and performing "philanthropy" by paying for a new library or wing of a museum to be named after them. They complain that the government is subsidizing health care when taking billions in government subsidies just so they can turn a bigger profit, which people then attribute to their skill and worth as a person and not their leveraging of their fortune for political gain.

>we'd see that these people are almost universally unhinged from reality, making baseless claims and assertions, changing social or political affiliations as soon as the group they support doesn't support them unconditionally, avoiding paying taxes as much as possible

This sounds like a normal person. So the problem is that they're plagued by the same biases and shortcomings as the un-monied, but via their wealth are able to inflict their flaws upon us on a vast scale?