Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Sure, but the fuller picture is more like this.

Nearly every major industrialized nation's infrastructure was bombed to hell after WW2, except America. To the victor went the spoils, and so our economy boomed to a much much greater degree than it would have otherwise.

This lasted for a generation or two, and certain aspects of that capitalist feeding frenzy were enshrined as cultural values.

The idea that there was a social contract between employers and employees, and that an average hard working American wouldn't be tossed out on the street if they got sick, would have a house to live in and would not have to toil in their old age, was baked into America. If you work hard and you're loyal, you'll be ok.

However, where that was seen as a Governmental function after the Great Depression, in the boom years after WW2, the economy was simply flooded with money.

When there's that much money and opportunity around, it's easy to start thinking that the Government was the problem. That the social contract would always remain, and that we could trust our bosses who we knew and worked with every day far more than some politically motivated government bureaucrat.

Corporations bought the politicians. Then the politicians passed laws to make the bribery legal. Then slowly those post WW2 culturally enshrined easy answers became law.

Now we have people seriously talking about "trickle down" economics as if it were a real thing. Because it was kinda like that in the 50's when we were the only major industrial powerhouse in the world.

Now we've privatized nearly our entire healthcare system, because in the 50's hell, going to the doctor was cheap and how could that be anyone's problem but yours?

And now we have no retirement plans other than "we will let you put some of your own money into the stock market tax free, but hey if the market tanks you're on your own bruh! (even though you had zippy control over that)"

Again, because maybe that would have made sense in the 50's and 60's, and god knows if anything might have seemed true in that era it must be the word of God himself.

The problem of course, is that now that the winning team picks the referees, there's pretty much no way out of this. The government SHOULD be providing healthcare, and decent retirement so that business doesn't have this burden.

But then it'd be too easy to start new businesses. The referees picked by the last winning team aren't too keen on that.



Thanks for the historical perspective. Now what about times before 1950's, when societies were typically /not/ flooded with money? You mention that "The government SHOULD be providing healthcare, and decent retirement". Was that the norm before 1950's anywhere? If yes, how did the math work out?

I believe longer lifespans coupled with generous safety net provided by the government is a historical anomaly, propped up due to the growth spurt that happened post great depression + ww2. Now that things are reverting back to historical norms, we should rethink the way society is structured.


> Now what about times before 1950's, when societies were typically /not/ flooded with money?

Social welfare such as the old age pension and disability pensions were starting to be eased before that. In Britain and it's colonies it was just after the turn of the century. (Not idea re: the USA.) They were basic, but you wouldn't starve.

> Now that things are reverting back to historical norms, we should rethink the way society is structured.

Or should we fight against reverting to historical norms? I'm not so keen on seeing our quality of life and life expectancy decline.




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

Search: