Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | canicode's commentslogin

You could say that for just about anything, including Tesla...


Tesla make a lot of people happy but there must be accountants at Jaguar, BMW etc. who have not enjoyed losing sales to the California start up. However there are many happy Tesla customers and only a small handful of motor company accountants. Obviously there are sales staff too plus suits in the oil companies who have been pained by Tesla, but still the balance is a net happy one. Compare with Tony Blair, makes his business cronies happy but inflicts more misery.

Footballers do have a connection with their fans and it is their admiration that is sought far more than money. So they are very much in it to bring happiness to the world, to put on the show. I don't see them working for free though.


I felt sick reading that, I think you need to get yourself checked out.


It's not any worse than Dante Alighieri's Inferno, or the mythic punishments for Sisyphus, Tantalus, Prometheus, or Loki. Nor is it as tediously psychological as Sartre's No Exit (Huis Clos).

I assure you, I am well aware of the boundary between fact and fiction. I am actually a bit worried that you find words and imagination to be cause for concern. That fear leads to censorship, which is far worse than any of the fantasy blurbs I have ever written.

My real-life hope for Shkreli is that he will be very, very bored for about three to four years (if convicted), and that all the folks he (allegedly) defrauded are able to get some restitution. He doesn't even need to be beaten with meaty thug fists. He just needs to be kept away from productive workers and other people's money. And maybe also the cocaine.


Would you like a socialist society? Do you want a welfare state? I don't. Why shouldn't some people be able to afford luxuries like names on buildings?


> Would you like a socialist society? Do you want a welfare state? I don't.

I do. And I spend time and money on the political process.

> Why shouldn't some people be able to afford luxuries like names on buildings?

Let's talk about everyone being fed, clothed, and sheltered before you bring your straw man out.


If something is going to have an effect on profits, you can bet on the fact that a company will fight against it, hard. Because SHOCKER the point of a business is to generate PROFITS.

I think you're wrong in thinking that businesses will just give up, and take lower profits. No. They're going to cut hours, fire anyone they can, etc. to maintain their existing profit levels.


If you have a laser like focus on maximizing profit (and supposedly most businesses do), you've already fired everybody you can and cut all the hours you're able to already.

But no, they don't just sit there and take it. They pile money into think tanks and advertising campaigns in order to try to sway public opinion (see above).

One of my favorite tactics is when they pretend that robots that do minimum wage jobs all cost $minimum wage + $1 and raising wages is simply going to make them all go out and buy those magical robots.


Please read this: https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ulzdy/e...

Raising the minimum wage WILL increase unemployment. That's Economics 101. Companies are going to find ways to fire people, or give them fewer hours. Raising the minimum wage to something like $15 would be ludicrous.


> Raising the minimum wage WILL increase unemployment.

Reality disagrees :) Germany introduced minimum wage recently and the opposite of your prediction happened.

The argument didn't match reality because it completely ignores the growth of purchasing power that is a consequence of higer wages.


Econ 101 is "look at what happened in Australia". The commenter addresses that actually but his response is really lame. "Things are just different there". Uh huh.

Actually this is pretty much a model for what would happen to McDonalds in the US:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/mcdonalds-in-australia-vs-amer...


Nonsense. That's simply wrong.

And if Econ 101 states it's true, then Econ 101 is wrong too.

Here's a more fact-based explanation, with links to studies and comments by economists:

http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm


I can't believe people on a forum such as this are completely financially illiterate. The 7% rate is already inflation adjusted. The nominal rate is about 10%. So plug in a 7% real return. The result will be in 2015 dollars.


Your comment would've conveyed the same information had you omitted the first sentence.


Can you explain how the "maths just don't work out"? I'm pretty sure saving IS the way to wealth for the overwhelming majority of people.

This honestly sounds like it's straight from one of the Facebook posts with clouds in the background.


Mid and lower class people won't get rich by saving their salaries.

In fact, it's not unusual that the entire earnings of a work-life of a mid-class worker do not add up to something that would make a person rich, even if 100% of it is saved.

The other side of the coin is that mid-class life is pretty good, most of the GP advice will lead to poverty much more often that it'll lead to wealth, and the one important piece that is "create more" comes by responsible working.


"Responsible working" is how you make other people rich.

Having fun and playing ("irresponsibly"), expressing your true essence, is the only way to create ANY lasting value.

It is also the only way to create any wealth. The OTHER (much more common) way that people get wealthy is by capitalizing on what others have created. Which is fine with me (I'm all for the wonders of capitalism), but I prefer creating my own wealth.


Well, you may be the one of the few that like improving the same project, day after day, until it's good enough to get some money out of it.

Most people get bored, and will only create something for themselves if they act responsibly after a while. Unless what you call "responsible" is working for other people, instead of the more usual "hey, I don't want to do this right now, but I'm doing because I know it's good for me" meaning.


Most people get wealthy by working for other people. Depending on what you call wealthy. 1-2M in investment accounts and a paid off home is very affluent/wealthy to me.

Also, to say those people aren't creating wealth is very offensive.


Mid and lower class people can definitely get rich by saving. Of course their savings don't add up to millions, but you're completely disregarding the returns of a decent mutual fund. At 4-7% real returns, the amount they have after a 20-40 year period is wildly different from the raw amount they've put in/saved, due to the power of compound interest. So although they haven't SAVED millions, they HAVE millions.


>Mid and lower class people won't get rich by saving their salaries.

They get richer than they would by spending them.

http://www.millionaireeducator.com/our-story


Depends what you mean by wealth, but for the majority of middle-class people the way to wealth is highly leveraged property speculation: borrow deposit from parents, take out mortgage, wait 25 years during which time the property has gone up hugely in value.

.. which requires a steady enough job to make 25 years of uninterrupted mortgage payments.


That's completely wrong. Invest in a mutual fund monthly and you'll be amazed by the power of compound interest.


And local property markets where prices rise above inflation forever (this is never always the case!)


It's not guaranteed, but on average in the UK it's 2.9% above inflation since the 60s: http://monevator.com/historical-uk-house-prices/


If you can always find a job and have side projects to fall back on, I don't see the point. However, if you imagine yourself taking a shot at climbing the corporate ladder at a huge company, a degree is absolutely essential.

I also have a side project that would be able to support me, but I do attend college. In my opinion, having that piece of paper (provided you don't go into massive debt for it) is much better than not having it.


Idea for anyone interested in starting something that supports just you: visit Flippa.com. Sort by revenue. Save up, and buy something on there that you can grow from $500/mo in revenue to $1000/mo, then to $2000/mo, etc.

There are tons of sane businesses being sold on there that you can buy up and grow. At the very least, you'll see what actually makes money.


Do you have any experience buying businesses from there? Any tips on how to find a reasonable price? I heard that a reasonable price would be (monthly revenue) * 12


A lot of them sell for much less than (monthly revenue) * 12. I haven't personally purchased a site from there, but I know people who have.

You don't need to buy something from there -- you can simply use the site to find niches where people actually make money.

Making money online can be done. Example: I started a Minecraft server early on, sold in-game benefits, and now make $5-15K (depending on season) per month. A friend of mine makes way more. Here are the stats he sent me recently: https://i.gyazo.com/81718cef2295bbf4df8a6d9892d140c1.png

One of DHH's bits of advice is to find a niche and focus on profiting enough to support yourself. The internet is the best place to do that.


Is there a way to contact you to get proper insight into this. I noticed there is no email to reach you on your profile. As a student, I am looking for ways to support myself and be totally in-charge of things. Thanks


Username checks out.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: