Inherited wealth is increasingly rivaling earned income in importance, especially in advanced economies. As populations age and accumulated wealth grows, inheritances are becoming larger and more frequent, flowing disproportionately to the already wealthy. This exacerbates inequality, entrenches existing class structures, and potentially undermines the meritocratic ideal of social mobility based on hard work. The article argues that governments need to address this trend through policies like inheritance taxes, not just to raise revenue, but to promote fairness and opportunity across generations.
The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is establishing a new trading floor in Arlington, Texas, called NYSE Texas. Scheduled to open in 2027, this facility will serve as a disaster recovery and backup site for the NYSE's existing operations. It will also house a physical trading floor mirroring the iconic NYSE in New York City, offering a venue for in-person trading and important corporate events like IPO ceremonies. This expansion aims to increase the exchange's resiliency and geographical diversity.
Hacker News commenters were generally cynical about the announcement of NYSE Texas. Many saw it as a thinly veiled attempt to circumvent regulations, potentially relating to taxes or data sovereignty, with some speculating about connections to Texas's lax regulatory environment. Several pointed out the irony of a New York institution establishing a Texas branch for supposed advantages, while others questioned the practical implications and whether any significant trading activity would actually relocate. Some suggested the move was more about optics and public relations than genuine operational needs, especially given the existing electronic nature of trading. A few commenters expressed curiosity about the specifics of the "cutting edge financial technology" mentioned in the press release, but overall the sentiment was skeptical.
Scott Galloway's "Addiction Economy" argues that major tech platforms, like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube, are deliberately engineered to be addictive. They exploit human vulnerabilities, using persuasive design and algorithms optimized for engagement, not well-being. This "attention arbitrage" model prioritizes maximizing user time and data collection, which are then monetized through targeted advertising. Galloway compares these platforms to cigarettes, highlighting their negative impact on mental health, productivity, and societal discourse, while also acknowledging their utility and the difficulty of regulation. He concludes that these companies have become too powerful and calls for greater awareness, stricter regulations, and individual responsibility in managing our relationship with these addictive technologies.
HN commenters largely agree with Galloway's premise that many tech companies intentionally engineer their products to be addictive. Several point out the manipulative nature of infinite scroll and notification systems, designed to keep users engaged even against their better interests. Some users offer personal anecdotes of struggling with these addictive qualities, while others discuss the ethical implications for designers and the broader societal impact. A few commenters suggest potential solutions, including stricter regulations and encouraging digital minimalism. Some disagreement exists on whether the responsibility lies solely with the companies or also with the users' lack of self-control. A compelling comment thread explores the parallels between social media addiction and gambling addiction, referencing similar psychological mechanisms and profit motives. Another interesting discussion revolves around the difficulty in defining "addiction" in this context and whether the term is being overused.
The UK possesses significant untapped hardware engineering talent, hindered by a risk-averse investment landscape that prioritizes software over hardware startups. This preference stems from the perceived higher costs and longer development timelines associated with hardware, leading to a scarcity of funding and support. Consequently, promising hardware engineers often migrate to software roles or leave the country altogether, depriving the UK of potential innovation and economic growth in crucial sectors like semiconductors, robotics, and clean energy. The author argues for increased investment and a shift in perspective to recognize the long-term value and strategic importance of fostering a thriving hardware ecosystem.
Hacker News users discuss the challenges and potential of the UK hardware industry. Several commenters point out the difficulty of competing with US salaries and stock options, making it hard to retain talent in the UK. Others argue that the UK's strength lies in specific niche areas like silicon design, photonics, and high-end audio, rather than mass-market consumer electronics. Some suggest that the UK's smaller market size discourages large-scale hardware ventures, while others highlight the role of universities and research institutions in fostering talent. There's also discussion about the impact of Brexit, with some claiming it has worsened the talent drain, while others downplay its effect. Finally, some commenters suggest potential solutions, like government incentives, increased investment, and fostering a stronger entrepreneurial culture to retain and attract hardware talent within the UK.
Summary of Comments ( 546 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43213143
HN commenters largely agree with the premise that inherited wealth is increasingly important for financial success. Several highlight the difficulty of accumulating wealth through work alone, especially given rising housing costs and stagnant wages. Some discuss the societal implications, expressing concern over decreased social mobility and the potential for inherited wealth to exacerbate inequality. Others offer personal anecdotes illustrating the impact of inheritance, both positive and negative. The role of luck and privilege is a recurring theme, with some arguing that meritocracy is a myth and that inherited advantages play a larger role than often acknowledged. A few commenters point out potential flaws in the Economist's analysis, questioning the data or suggesting alternative interpretations.
The Hacker News post "Inheriting is becoming nearly as important as working" sparked a lively discussion with a variety of perspectives on the increasing role of inheritance in wealth accumulation. Several commenters agreed with the premise, pointing to the rising cost of living, particularly housing, and stagnant wages making it nearly impossible for younger generations to amass wealth at the same rate as their predecessors. They argued that inheritance is becoming a necessary leg up, not just a bonus, for many to achieve financial stability, let alone prosperity. The concept of "unearned wealth" and its societal implications were also debated.
Some users challenged the article's assertions, questioning the methodology and data presented. They argued that the article oversimplified a complex issue and didn't adequately account for factors like differing savings rates, investment strategies, and entrepreneurial endeavors. One commenter suggested that the article focused too much on Western economies and overlooked the global picture.
A significant portion of the discussion revolved around the fairness and ethical implications of inherited wealth. Some commenters advocated for policy changes, such as higher inheritance taxes, to address wealth inequality and promote social mobility. They argued that inherited wealth perpetuates a system where opportunities and outcomes are heavily influenced by family background rather than merit. Others defended inheritance as a legitimate form of intergenerational wealth transfer, emphasizing the importance of family support and the right to bequeath assets to loved ones.
The discussion also touched upon the broader economic and social consequences of rising wealth inequality, including its potential impact on social cohesion, political stability, and economic growth. Several commenters expressed concerns about the long-term effects of a society where inherited wealth plays such a significant role in determining life outcomes.
Finally, a few commenters shared personal anecdotes about their own experiences with inheritance, offering nuanced perspectives on the emotional and financial complexities involved. Some described the relief and opportunities afforded by inheritance, while others reflected on the challenges and responsibilities that come with it.