Sort of like my dad, a professor of finance, who had a student remark to him "I didn't know there even was a case for free markets!"
I get similar responses. Sometimes I feel like I'm the only person on HN who understands how free markets work.
For example, most people would say that hard work leads to success. This is incorrect. It's creating value that leads to success. I very rarely hear the latter, in fact, pretty much never.
When I was a kid, I made some pocket money by mowing lawns. None of my customers ever asked me how I was going to do it, or how hard I worked at it. They did not give a damn. They only cared about was the lawn mowed. Using scissors, a push mower, a gas mower, or a rider mower all came with a huge variance in how hard the work was. None of that had any influence on what I was paid for it.
I can guarantee you that you're neither the only person, on HN or elsewhere, that "understands how free markets work" (if anyone can every truly fully understand a complex emergent system), nor are most people incapable of realising that hard work only pays off when you create value - it's just that for many people, hard work is the safest, and sometimes the only, way to get there.
So why am I the only one on HN pointing these things out, and legions of HNers telling me I'm wrong?
> t's just that for many people, hard work is the safest, and sometimes the only, way to get there
A lot of people are disappointed because hard work got them nowhere. It's because they weren't working on things that other people valued.
For example, the hardest job I ever had was working for the city maintaining the sidewalks. I was utterly exhausted at the end of each day. The job paid minimum wage, because the work had little value to it.
The jobs I've had since paid a lot more, and the work wasn't hard. It was just that the work was much more valuable.
> most people incapable of realising
I never said they were "incapable". I said they think differently.
> you're neither the only person
Of course there are other people that understand them. It's just that they are rare.
I'll give you some unsolicited advice: You come off as rather arrogant and I would suggest reflecting on it.
The idea that "legions of HNers" are telling you you're wrong sounds like confirmation bias. I basically see the same old discussion about free markets vs. market regulation every day on HN and it's not as if there was ever a clear-cut consensus. Maybe somewhat expectedly, radical positions such as "markets should be 100% unregulated" or, conversely, ones espousing something close to communism are comparatively rarer than ones in the middle (most people don't tend to have radical views), but that doesn't mean you can't see them often enough here (ok, maybe I haven't seen communist takes here that often, but definitely libertarian ones).
More importantly, even if everybody was disagreeing with you, it could be that they're right and you're wrong. Or that nobody is right or wrong because it's a matter of opinion. I haven't seen you take that option seriously, instead it's just other people who "don't understand" free markets
> When I see an example of a successful commune or communist society, I'll think about changing my mind.
It may not be obvious, but buying and selling land and resources for personal gain is somewhat novel in the history of humanity.
Basing the entirety of society and law on the notion of a single person being able to own a piece of the earth, which they are allowed to deny others access to if they like, is unique to our particular time and culture.
One could say with a fair amount of certainty that a 'commune' aka a village or tribe is the basis of the vast majority of the human experience.
> They only cared about was the lawn mowed. Using scissors, a push mower, a gas mower, or a rider mower all came with a huge variance in how hard the work was. None of that had any influence on what I was paid for it.
That may have been true for you, but it won't be true for everyone. Sometimes we really do value the work that went into something and that will have an influence on what we pay for it. It's why people will pay for an orchestra instead of a laptop and some software. Its why people will pay extra for "handcrafted artisanal" items that could easily be pumped out by slaves in a factory overseas and sold for much much less. The large amount of effort involved is a big part of the charm for a lot of art forms.
Sometimes hard work can result in success. Some people produce a lot of value but never see success. Some people manage success without doing anything of value at all. Some fail upwards and gain success while actually producing negative value. If we could really reduce the formula for success down to a catchy soundbite there'd be a lot more successful people in the world.
Indeed, a lot of people in America believe that there is no path to success. It's a very popular notion on HN. Another thing I'm in a small minority of is pointing out that adults of sound mind and body in America are capable of success.
> adults of sound mind and body in America are capable of success.
You are in a minority because of those caveats. 'Sound mind and body' and 'success' are vague enough to lend themselves to many interpretations and act as an escape hatch you can jump out of when someone points out any one of numerous exceptions to that statement.
I don't know what it means; that's the whole point. I want a specific definition. I'll start with a question: Is a pregnant woman of 'able body'? Is a person who speaks english as a second language 'of sound mind'? Is a person who grew up in a place with very poor schools and who had to drop in high school to take care of their aged mother 'of sound mind and body'? Expound on the reasons please.
