TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022)

227 点作者 peanutcrisis超过 1 年前

61 条评论

indigo945超过 1 年前
<p><pre><code> &gt; When I was growing up in foster homes, or making minimum wage as a &gt; dishwasher, or serving in the military, I never heard words like “cultural &gt; appropriation” or “gendered” or “heteronormative.” &gt; &gt; Working class people could not tell you what these terms mean. But if you &gt; visit an elite university, you’ll find plenty of affluent people who will &gt; eagerly explain them to you. </code></pre> I figured out as soon as I saw the link title that the author&#x27;s examples for &quot;luxury beliefs&quot; would <i>just so happen</i> to be associated with a feminist and anti-racist outlook.<p><pre><code> &gt; But unlike luxury goods, luxury beliefs can have long term detrimental &gt; effects for the poor and working class. However costly these beliefs are &gt; for the rich, they often inflict even greater costs on everyone else. </code></pre> This is certainly true for a high number of luxury beliefs, such as &quot;trickle down economics&quot;, &quot;small government&quot; advocacy and &quot;catallaxy&quot;, none of which come up often among dishwashers; and all of which freshman students at Yale, who just read their first essay on Friedrich Hayek, will gladly explain to you.
评论 #38084091 未加载
评论 #38082712 未加载
评论 #38082048 未加载
评论 #38088332 未加载
评论 #38082496 未加载
评论 #38084087 未加载
评论 #38084411 未加载
评论 #38092893 未加载
评论 #38082880 未加载
评论 #38083350 未加载
评论 #38083156 未加载
评论 #38084300 未加载
neilk超过 1 年前
Let’s consider the contrary. Do poor people sometimes hold highly questionable beliefs, promulgated by institutions, and does professing these beliefs in expensive and flamboyant ways confer status?<p>Religion ticks all these boxes.<p>In some contexts, so does patriotism, racism, worship of the military, publicly dumping cases of Bud Light, etc etc etc. In some ways, even disdain for education is a sort of expensive status display.<p>The author is just describing what people of all kinds do. Yes, there are very silly beliefs which sometimes seduce educated elites. But that just makes them like everybody else.<p>Also, the author is picking on some trendy ideas which are currently held by some of the elites, but so what? It would be truly surprising if a decade-plus of higher education and immersion in data and discourse did not produce a different consensus. The author offers no evidence that “defund the police” is an inherently absurd idea, no more than other formerly radical ideas like universal suffrage or abolishing slavery. In my town, the police absorb over 20% of the city budget, have doubled their spend in the past decade, and are unaccountable to the people. So I think it’s at least a topic worthy of interest!
评论 #38085283 未加载
评论 #38083256 未加载
评论 #38082406 未加载
评论 #38087375 未加载
评论 #38083170 未加载
jawns超过 1 年前
This piece does not really touch on the many confounding variables that are found when examining the correlation between esoteric beliefs and social status. Level of education, for instance, is a biggie, even when accounting for the perceived prestige of where one goes to school.<p>The author dismisses some concepts, like cultural appropriation, by saying that the working-class people he grew up with not only didn&#x27;t trouble themselves with it but didn&#x27;t even realize that it was a concept.<p>But just because someone with low education and&#x2F;or low status doesn&#x27;t know about or understand a topic doesn&#x27;t make that topic merely a status symbol, any more than it makes calculus a status symbol.<p>I agree, in part, with the author that certain pockets of higher education can veer into navel gazing and ivory-tower perspectives, and it can lead students to adopt distorted views of the world. But I don&#x27;t think it can be said that just because a point of view is more prevalent among higher-educated people (who may indeed have higher status) that means the idea is bunk.
评论 #38087393 未加载
justanother超过 1 年前
Starts off with an interesting premise and makes me think, hey, maybe I should re-examine my priors, let&#x27;s see the evidence. And then the evidence turns out to be something about people who &quot;make more than $100K,&quot; and goes on to assert that they &quot;live in gated communities&quot; and &quot;can afford private security.&quot; In 2023, &quot;making over 100K&quot; just means that you&#x27;re usually on-time with your monthly housing payment.<p>Author may indeed be going somewhere with this, but I&#x27;d like to see stronger support for the thesis.
评论 #38081684 未加载
评论 #38071943 未加载
评论 #38083522 未加载
chancemehmu超过 1 年前
Reminds me of one of my favourite quotes by Huxley:<p>&quot;If you’re to do anything reasonable in this world, you must have a class of people who are secure, safe from public opinion, safe from poverty, leisured, not compelled to waste their time in the imbecile routines that go by the name of Honest Work. You must have a class of which the members can think and, within the obvious limits, do what they please. You must have a class in which people who have eccentricities can indulge them and in which eccentricity in general will be tolerated and understood. That’s the important thing about an aristocracy. Not only is it eccentric itself—often grandiosely so; it also tolerates and even encourages eccentricity in others&quot;
评论 #38084443 未加载
评论 #38071028 未加载
asmor超过 1 年前
The terrible argument, built over several pages, is that &quot;defund the police&quot; as a political conviction is a status symbol, because rich people live in gated communities and don&#x27;t need police.<p>It ignores the evidence is a 10% increase in a single poll, in which the majority was <i>not of the inverse opinion</i> that police is without fault, they just had a slightly different outlook on necessary police reform being possible in the current structures. It&#x27;s yet another deliberate misunderstanding of &quot;defund the police&quot; (not a maybe understandable accidental misunderstanding).<p>Would be interesting to have this poll broken down by race, putting those most affected by broken windows policing and police violence first. And also those who coined the term.
评论 #38071440 未加载
surrTurr超过 1 年前
On the point of success and the rich believing it is just luck whilst the working-class beliefs it&#x27;s hard work: Maybe both is true. Becoming successful in working class jobs often *does* require hard work, whilst becoming successful in upper-class jobs depends more on other factors such as luck. For example, to become a great construction worker, you need physical strength, stamina, and a strong work ethic, as the job involves long hours of manual labour. On the other hand, landing a high-paying job in finance or tech might depend more on being in the right place at the right time, networking, having access to resources and opportunities etc.
评论 #38084718 未加载
评论 #38082719 未加载
评论 #38087187 未加载
评论 #38083424 未加载
评论 #38095692 未加载
isaacfrond超过 1 年前
Orwell&#x27;s line from Notes on Nationalism (1945): &quot;One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool.&quot;<p>Source: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;quotepark.com&#x2F;quotes&#x2F;1035696-george-orwell-there-are-some-ideas-so-absurd-that-only-an-intell&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;quotepark.com&#x2F;quotes&#x2F;1035696-george-orwell-there-are...</a>
logseman超过 1 年前
Given that working class rubes like myself who finished college in a place my man can&#x27;t even find in a map are somehow able to know what “cultural appropriation” or “gendered” or “heteronormative” mean, and do that by the same means as everyone else (reading about it) I&#x27;m going to presume that the good man has a very peculiar understanding of what &quot;elite&quot; means.
评论 #38071244 未加载
Animats超过 1 年前
&quot;Class&quot;, by Paul Fussell, is a fun read. It&#x27;s from 1981 and reads like a period piece today, but it&#x27;s still a good read.<p>Somehow, &quot;Black Lives Matter&quot; morphed into &quot;Defund the Police&quot;, which turned into a joke. It derailed any serious effort to fix the real problem of cops shooting too many black people. Not quite sure how that happened.<p>The hard work thing seems to be the reverse of the criticism usually leveled in that direction. The more common criticism is that rich people claimed their riches came from hard work, while most of the time they actually got a big boost from their parents.
评论 #38082954 未加载
评论 #38085813 未加载
评论 #38085288 未加载
评论 #38088483 未加载
mistercow超过 1 年前
The defund the police point here is really weak. The author is taking a pretty small difference across very coarsely divided economic categories, and then ascribing the difference to their pet theory, without any effort to address the myriad other candidate hypotheses for why this difference would exist.<p>And to look at a “100k and up” bracket and say “oh, well they can afford to live in gated communities and hire private security” is just absurd. No, the vast majority of that bracket cannot.
timkam超过 1 年前
The general concept of luxury beliefs is very interesting, but it feels the author gives it an ideological spin:<p>1. The author claims that when luxury beliefs &#x27;trickle down&#x27; to the working class, they are damaging, which is supposedly not the case for luxury goods. Still, in some not-so-privileged parts of society, signaling status with luxury goods consumes the larger parts of people&#x27;s budget. Think of someone living in a cheap apartment while driving a (leased) luxury car. This is certainly more damaging than believing the police should be de-funded (which does not have any consequence whatsoever on the micro-level, stupid as it may be).<p>2. The author claims that advocating a disciplined work ethic while attributing one&#x27;s own success to luck is inconsistent (and hence bigoted). Still, it _is_ true that success is mostly luck, due to opportunities we cannot control. This does not mean that one should not work hard. It&#x27;s not that affluent people say: &quot;I am rich because of luck, so you should not even try.&quot; The realistic take is that success is mostly due to luck but hard work is one of the few ways to control success _to at least some extent_. Also, in many societies hard work is seen as a virtue in itself, not matter whether it pays off or not. So I would claim that &quot;hard work pays off&quot; is a luxury belief for people who are already super privileged, have strong networks, et cetera. When you are born into the elite, you can afford claiming that marrying into the elite is inferior to working your way up...
satellites超过 1 年前
“A survey from YouGov found that Americans in the highest income category were by far the most supportive of defunding the police.”<p>“By far” means “10% more” in the actual graph the author cites, which comes from an online poll that had 1500 respondents. I’m no statistician but that seems like a small difference and small sample size to be the key piece of “data” here.<p>This article follows most tropes of behavioral science blog articles: broad moral statements taking a vaguely contrarian stance, analogies comparing humans to random animals (gazelles?), and “gotcha” survey data with questionable sample sizes. I find it difficult to take it seriously.
评论 #38071060 未加载
评论 #38071173 未加载
评论 #38071108 未加载
评论 #38071063 未加载
评论 #38071066 未加载
uses超过 1 年前
With a cynical viewpoint like this, how would you know the difference between &quot;luxury beliefs expressed just to keep others down and make me look fancy&quot; vs &quot;earnestly held beliefs based on learning, and perhaps I could learn something by considering these beliefs&quot;? Perhaps evaluate the beliefs based on their merit, rather than whose beliefs they are?
neotrope超过 1 年前
Rob gave a talk at the All In Conf if you&#x27;re rather watch it: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=ck7Krz7QcxU">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=ck7Krz7QcxU</a><p>My luxury belief is that AI Safety is a joke, but it&#x27;s a dangerous belief as the benefits of AI will not be equally distributed and biasing towards caution could reduce future suffering. So...<p>Be cautious reading comments here as many of us are in the socioeconomic class that luxury beliefs appeal to.
TerryGrampl超过 1 年前
This reminds me of an interesting piece I read last month, which looks at one particular luxury belief that is especially divisive right now, and criticizes it with regards to class: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.spiked-online.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;09&#x2F;25&#x2F;trans-the-new-ideology-of-the-ruling-class" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.spiked-online.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;09&#x2F;25&#x2F;trans-the-new-ideol...</a><p>Like those described in the article above, this is very much a middle-class movement whose proponents have seized the opportunity to sneer at working-class people as bigoted, stupid and reactionary.
评论 #38082328 未加载
评论 #38082861 未加载
评论 #38095727 未加载
lifeisstillgood超过 1 年前
I am not clear why this is flagged but it seems pretty on point academic-blog for a US university (hey look, there are <i>class</i> issues in society ! who knew!)<p>I think the idea of luxury beliefs is a fairly good descriptor for what the .5% will need. Once you start looking there are many examples - how many high flyers do you know that have taken up ultra-marathons (very time consuming) or charity work as an all but obligatory percentage of time.<p>It&#x27;s a marker for &quot;I have family life so locked down that I can attend to these other expensive options and not be overwhelmed.
regentbowerbird超过 1 年前
This is an interesting read but at the same time I&#x27;m puzzled at the length this is going to in order to avoid engaging with ideas the author disagrees with.<p>This seems similar to the &quot;virtue signaling&quot; attack. But instead of opponents being charged with hypocrisy, they are accused of being (1) privileged, (2) vain, and (3) either senseless or indifferent towards the well-being of others. It seems to me this is suggesting these people don&#x27;t ever deserve to take part in democracy, which is worrying.
评论 #38071336 未加载
snoochyboochies超过 1 年前
This is an interesting social phenomenon.<p>Given HN&#x27;s user base, if the author is correct, his hypothesis would predict that the users of HackerNews are disproportionately likely to hold these luxury beliefs.
评论 #38090632 未加载
评论 #38086026 未加载
langsoul-com超过 1 年前
There&#x27;s a book called &quot;The Tragedy of the Virtuous Justine&quot; that really exemplifies how luxury beliefs are luxury because they have nothing to lose by adopting them.<p>In contrast, the less well off stand to lose so much more.<p>Take plant based meats to save the world belief. They cost double or quadruple the price of normal meat. Given how people live pay check to pay check, living out that ideal will cause them to suffer.
nomilk超过 1 年前
&gt; <i>Conspicuous consumption</i> - in economics, the consumer practice of buying goods in greater quantity&#x2F;price&#x2F;quality than practical [1]<p>Luxury beliefs sound like conspicuous consumption for beliefs. The analogy also works in that some people &quot;boast&quot; of having certain beliefs in the same way some people might think very highly of themselves by, say, wearing loud brand name clothing. In both cases, others (perhaps with more taste) may not be as impressed.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Conspicuous_consumption" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Conspicuous_consumption</a>
tayistay超过 1 年前
I think the explanation for &quot;defund the police&quot; is simpler... they just see the bad stuff cops do on the news, but haven&#x27;t ever actually needed the cops personally (and few of their friends have too), primarily due to their affluence. There are exceptions, obviously.<p>Of the people who have obtained a restraining order, I wonder what percentage want to defund the police.
codesnik超过 1 年前
&quot;so, translated beliefs could be just expensive status symbols coming from dishonesty and having too much of free time. So here are examples of leftist beliefs, see?&quot;
renewiltord超过 1 年前
This guy&#x27;s Twitter account is full of the worst replicating psychology stuff. He&#x27;s an outrage merchant surfing the present wave. When I pointed out one such failure to replicate he blocked me.
fredley超过 1 年前
On language, in Britain there was (and still is to an extent) a whole host of words that would mark you as &#x27;non-U&#x27; (aspirant middle class) rather than &#x27;U&#x27; (upper class).<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;U_and_non-U_English" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;U_and_non-U_English</a><p>It is still evident today if you know or interact with any truly upper-class people. There are still variations in the names for some things which persist even now.
darigo超过 1 年前
Alex Kaschuta discussed this with Rob Henderson on her Subversive podcast: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.alexkaschuta.com&#x2F;p&#x2F;subversive-podcast-rob-henderson#details" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.alexkaschuta.com&#x2F;p&#x2F;subversive-podcast-rob-hender...</a><p>Her point is that this effect is way bigger in 3rd world countries, where these kinds of beliefs signal alignment with &quot;The West&quot; and the status that comes with that.
NeoTar超过 1 年前
I find the luck vs. hard-work a weird dichotomy - both are true and both are false.<p>If you don&#x27;t work hard, you probably won&#x27;t be successful. But if hard-work were sufficient for success then the richest person in the world, or the President, or however we measure success would also the hardest working, which I don&#x27;t think most people who agree with.<p>Similarly, although I think most sports-people would be acknowledged to be very hard-working, there is a matter of luck in their success - you need to find the right sport for you, you need to avoid injury, you need to perform at your best on the day of the big competition &#x2F; when the talent-scout is visiting.<p>Perhaps it&#x27;s just a problem of perspective - if you are relatively successful to begin with you can see that there are a lot of people less successful than you who worked harder by some metric and so would attribute success more to luck and connections than hard-work; if you are relatively unsuccessful, perhaps the correlation between success and hard-work is more immediate - you see that the people who work hard are more successful than you, and that those who slack-off are not.
评论 #38074507 未加载
j7ake超过 1 年前
The fraction of people with luxury beliefs that also have to request vacation days to a manager is too high to be an exclusive upper class signal.<p>Private jets, yachts, personal cooks and butlers are truer symbols of the upper class.
评论 #38083333 未加载
评论 #38082970 未加载
评论 #38082429 未加载
diamondap超过 1 年前
&gt; Only the affluent can learn these things because ordinary people have real problems to worry about.<p>I can&#x27;t say I agree with all the author writes, but that statement is spot on.
评论 #38083946 未加载
m463超过 1 年前
Strangely, this reminds me of a book on relationships I read.<p>It said that only when people were safe and secure in their relationship, were they able to speak freely and voice their true opinions.<p>Maybe this is similar. If people are financially and physically secure can believe things openly, even if they have little to do with reality.
评论 #38082017 未加载
alex_young超过 1 年前
Seems like the rich are spending lots on fancy cars and big houses. I’m not sure saying you support x or y belief is quite the same signal as a sports car.
评论 #38081722 未加载
moomin超过 1 年前
Yet another dude who’s dressing up the idea that the working classes are “noble savages” in a lot of fancy words.
croisillon超过 1 年前
&quot;a vulnerable poor person in a crime-ridden neighborhood can’t afford to support defunding the police&quot; [citation needed because the vulnerable poor person is police&#x27;s first target]
评论 #38081736 未加载
评论 #38081743 未加载
moribvndvs超过 1 年前
Sure, skepticism is a useful tool. Understanding someone’s motivations and how their wealth influences their worldview is a natural approach for assessing their position.<p>However, the conclusion presented here–taken at face value–is reductive and ironically spells out what appears to be the author’s own bias.<p>I’m not one to go out on a limb to defend affluence, but is it not enough to draw conclusions (whatever they may be) based on veracity and sound logic? Or shall we all just categorically dismiss the opinions of the person further up from you on the economic ladder?
jamincan超过 1 年前
Is someone earning $100k&#x2F;year really reflective of the elite? I don&#x27;t really think that cuts it anymore and I would be surprised if the real elite are actually calling to defund the police.
notacoward超过 1 年前
There&#x27;s a grain of truth here, but only a grain. Who hasn&#x27;t seen an obviously affluent TikTok Tot (fancy home studio, high end video gear, expensive clothes and makeup) trying to gain clout by talking about the very same injustice of which they are the beneficiary? Pretty annoying, yes. But at the same time, the fact that an idea is expressed for clout doesn&#x27;t make the idea wrong. We could debate &quot;defund the police&quot; all day, but whether TikTok Tot supports it is irrelevant. That&#x27;s called well poisoning, close relative of <i>ad hominem</i>, and it&#x27;s a fallacy. It&#x27;s the fallacy that pervades OP.<p>In some quarters, superfluous weaponry is a status symbol. In related quarters, it might be ostentatious displays of crosses and other religious symbols. Does that mean guns or religion are bad? Maybe they are and maybe they aren&#x27;t, but their use as status symbols doesn&#x27;t determine the answer. What&#x27;s more interesting is that OP <i>omits such examples</i>. All of their examples feed into a very particular political narrative, and cherry-picking is another thing that should make readers suspicious.<p>In the end, the article starts with a small and somewhat interesting observation, which is great, but then ascribes to it greater (and more particular) significance than it deserves.
dang超过 1 年前
Related:<p><i>Luxury beliefs are status symbols</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=33547954">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=33547954</a> - Nov 2022 (45 comments)<p><i>Luxury Beliefs Are Status Symbols</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=31713870">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=31713870</a> - June 2022 (1 comment)
mo_42超过 1 年前
I don&#x27;t buy it.<p>Wikipedia lists nine possible explanations for stotting. The author, however, simply picks the one that fits his story.<p>There are also multiple explanations for sexual evolution.<p>I can hold the belief &quot;Defund the Police&quot; as a poor or as a rich. So it&#x27;s easy to fake this signal. Also, I don&#x27;t see any evidence that this belief is held mainly by rich people.
NotYourLawyer超过 1 年前
I found myself experiencing some serious cognitive dissonance reading this, so there’s probably a lot of truth to it.
jyounker超过 1 年前
The poster&#x27;s entire article is based on a strawman.<p>The &quot;Defund The Police&quot; movement has very specific and very well documented goals: Use police <i>only</i> for law-enforcement, and use specialized responders for non-law enforcement interactions. For example, you send mental health specialists when someone is threatening suicide. This reallocates funding from the police to more capable responders, but allows the remaining police to actually focus on law enforcement.<p>The author ignores this completely to make his argument.
评论 #38083843 未加载
评论 #38084000 未加载
评论 #38083036 未加载
评论 #38083048 未加载
评论 #38083269 未加载
SergeAx超过 1 年前
&gt; [Gaselles] repeatedly jump as high as they can, springing vertically into the air with all four feet raised.<p>&gt; The signal this sends to predators is essentially: “I’m so fit that I can afford to expend valuable energy to show you how strong and robust I am compared with the other gazelles.”<p>I always thought that high jumps of savannah herbivores is meant to give them better view of predators, especially in tall vegetation.
denton-scratch超过 1 年前
&gt; In other words, high-status people desire wealth and status more than anyone else.<p>Isn&#x27;t that a bit like observing that powerful people tend to be politicians, or that being wealthy is correlated with wanting to make a lot of money? Wealth, power and status are scarce goods, so it stands to reason that the people who possess them are the people who are most-motivated to seek them.
giraffe_lady超过 1 年前
Kind of falls apart at the end with the defund the police thing. If you ask poor people &quot;do you want to defund the police&quot; they&#x27;ll mostly say no. If you ask them &quot;would you rather see fewer police in your neighborhood, and more medical and social response teams instead?&quot; they&#x27;ll mostly say yes. So in a sense sure &quot;defund the police&quot; is a luxury belief but also... no.
mindslight超过 1 年前
Of course there is some truth in here. But the sheer majority is missing the forest for the trees.<p>Luxury beliefs are certainly products of wealth - it requires a level of wealth to declare something is wrong rather than pragmatically keeping your head down and going with the flow. As our society becomes more wealthy, these beliefs gain mindshare and become widely accepted - democracy, natural rights, freedom from religion, worker protections, etc.<p>These things are products of wealth, a type of wealth in their own right, and we should be greatful that our society has become wealthy enough to declare that they should be universal. The author kind of references this at the very end, but then steers right back into the regressive fundamentalism as his closing conclusion.<p>Looking forward, many visions of progress are somewhat wrong, misguided, or at the very least overstated. Remember when we were all going to be living in Buckyballs? Which is why you have to kind of hold your nose to wade through much of the blue tribe groupthink. But the answer isn&#x27;t to conclude the entire idea of progress is fallacious and dopamine-pine for the glory days of hard work that are comfortably in the past. Rather, it&#x27;s to discuss and critique the forward-looking ideas on their own merits, despite the neo-clergy and other politickers that will attack you for it.
menshiki超过 1 年前
&gt; They found that individuals with higher income or a higher social status were the most likely to say that success results from luck and connections rather than hard work, while low-income individuals were more likely to say success comes from hard work and individual effort.<p>This is basically the old paradigm saying that &quot;people don&#x27;t make money, money makes money.&quot; No one became a billionaire without being in the right place and knowing the right people. Access to that environment can be only gained if one already has significant capital. I guess this is what they mean by luck.
j7ake超过 1 年前
What would it take to have status symbols be the ability to spend your time writing poetry, proving theorems, playing music, and making art?<p>Seems more wholesome than these zero sum games played by the rich.
jenkstom超过 1 年前
The basic idea is sound. But the majority of the examples are strangely politically biased and in my experience they are things I&#x27;ve <i>never</i> heard from the 1%.
Jeff_Brown超过 1 年前
That was not convincing.<p>The article only touches two unorthodox beliefs: that we should defund the police (really a preference, not a belief) and that success is largely attributable to luck.<p>But the elites are more likely to believe conventional wisdom on climate change, on whether vaccines work, on whether the Holocaust happened, on whether digesting genetically modified organisms changes the consumer&#x27;s DNA, any number of things. Heterodox beliefs in these areas do seem consistent with the hypothesis of in-group signaling, but not with signaling status.<p>Wanting to defund the police is likely correlated with not needing the police -- but that&#x27;s likely simple ignorance, not status signaling.<p>Why the elites would be more likely to say luck is important is not obvious to me, but a single example does not justify the sweeping generalization that this article makes.
评论 #38071107 未加载
everybodyknows超过 1 年前
Needs &quot;2022&quot;.
EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK超过 1 年前
Goes on to write a post so unnecessarily long and full of quotes of little known auteurs français, that only people with a lot of spare time can read.
mathgradthrow超过 1 年前
The aristocracy showing off how much money they have is &quot;why things are expensive&quot;? I feel like maybe economics has come a long way since Veblen.
tlocke超过 1 年前
&gt; “I’m so fit that I can afford to expend valuable energy to show you how strong and robust I am compared with the other gazelles.”<p>Is this why humans dance?
评论 #38082150 未加载
thisgoesnowhere超过 1 年前
&gt; A survey from YouGov found that Americans in the highest income category were by far the most supportive of defunding the police.<p>&gt; They can afford to hold this position, because they already live in safe, often gated communities. And they can afford to hire private security.<p>This isn&#x27;t what defund the police was about at all and is just a strawman to stop inquisitions into the actual point of the defund the police movement.<p>&gt; In the United States, &quot;defund the police&quot; is a slogan that supports removing funds from police departments and reallocating them to non-policing forms of public safety and community support, such as social services, youth services, housing, education, healthcare and other community resources. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Defund_the_police" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Defund_the_police</a><p>Defund the police was never a anarcho communist feel good movement despite what articles like this will guide you believe.<p>That said, the slogan was slightly ambiguous so it was absolutely destroyed in the &quot;marketplace of ideas&quot;. Apparently defunding the police actually means get rid of the police entirely. I guess the slogan had to be &quot;decrease the budget, not entirely remove it just less money, for the police and move that money into other prevention and treatment methods for community support&quot;.
评论 #38082420 未加载
rawgabbit超过 1 年前
The author is arguing extreme ideas like defund the police is self serving without anyone’s real interests in mind. Instead of calling it luxury beliefs, this the next phase of identity politics. A new litmus test.
atomicnature超过 1 年前
Basic question: What exactly is a luxury belief?
评论 #38085517 未加载
SV_BubbleTime超过 1 年前
“there are no starving people with celiac disease”
评论 #38071039 未加载
vannevar超过 1 年前
Other examples of &quot;luxury beliefs&quot; not mentioned by the author include the idea that all the poor need to do is work harder, and the idea that unregulated capitalism provides the best outcome for all.
seydor超过 1 年前
too many words to say something obvious. rich people have always had the luxury of time to think novel things. That&#x27;s what gave us most of science, philosophy, politics, liberalism, socialism, the democracy of today and the freedoms to make powerpoint presentations about it. history decides which of them go to the garbage bin
tech_ken超过 1 年前
Is this the new codeword for &quot;champagne socialism&quot;? Interesting how &quot;trickle down economics&quot; isn&#x27;t provided as an example of a luxury belief, seems like it would fit the provided definition extremely well in the context of US politics.
评论 #38070912 未加载
brindlejim超过 1 年前
In a feminized society that systematically elevates victims, status seekers must either LARP as victims (Singapore scions doing undergrad at Yale who march as &quot;people of color&quot;) or make an ostentatious show of allyship, publicly subordinating their interest to that of the &quot;oppressed&quot;.
jxdxbx超过 1 年前
He seems unconcerned about the actual truth and falsity of ideas, just how “useful” they are.<p>The single most important predictor of economic success in life is the wealth of your parents: luck. Maybe some people find this “discouraging” and would prefer if it were not true, or if people did not believe it. But it is true. Social mobility in the United States in general is fairly low.<p>Personally I prefer to know the truth and to work to fix things I think are unfair, rather than proposing that we just adopt viewpoints that make people into better workers.