chadkoh started reading Non-Things by Byung-Chul Han
Non-Things by Daniel Steuer, Byung-Chul Han
We no longer inhabit earth and dwell under the sky: these are being replaced by Google Earth and the Cloud. …
Typically I read two books simultaneously: one fiction, one non fiction. I love audiobooks, and usually follow the same pattern. So two books in text, two books in audio simultaneously. Sometimes, when I want to get through a book quick, I'll do both audio and text.
If you are interested in what movies I watch, check me out on Letterboxd (letterboxd.com/chadkoh/)
This link opens in a pop-up window
40% complete! chadkoh has read 14 of 35 books.
We no longer inhabit earth and dwell under the sky: these are being replaced by Google Earth and the Cloud. …
Limitarianism is an ethical framework advocating for limiting excess wealth and redistributing to the benefit of wider society. The book builds its case by historically analyzing the rise of inequality over the past 50 years through global neoliberal policy; the social problems that inequality cause or exacerbate; how taking a Limitarian stance could improve things for everyone including the wealthy; and what needs to be done to get there. She starts off the book with her proposal that there be a “political” wealth cap of 10mm $/€/£ per person, and an ethical limit of 1mm $/€/£ per person. Basically, she comes out of the book fighting. Then, throughout the author provides many shocking statistics and refers to many different academic studies. Furthermore, she runs though many of the counter arguments that have been posed to her by the public and the media, naming and taking apart each objection as a …
Limitarianism is an ethical framework advocating for limiting excess wealth and redistributing to the benefit of wider society. The book builds its case by historically analyzing the rise of inequality over the past 50 years through global neoliberal policy; the social problems that inequality cause or exacerbate; how taking a Limitarian stance could improve things for everyone including the wealthy; and what needs to be done to get there. She starts off the book with her proposal that there be a “political” wealth cap of 10mm $/€/£ per person, and an ethical limit of 1mm $/€/£ per person. Basically, she comes out of the book fighting. Then, throughout the author provides many shocking statistics and refers to many different academic studies. Furthermore, she runs though many of the counter arguments that have been posed to her by the public and the media, naming and taking apart each objection as a trained philosopher should. She brings a lot to the fight, and in the end settles basically on a strong welfare state (I would like to a see an anarchist argument). Altogether is a strong package. It is not the kind of thing you pass to the proverbial conservative uncle at the Thanksgiving dinner table. He will scoff, reject it outright, and recommend Thomas Sowell or some other ghoul. But for people who do not pray to Ludwig von Mises or one of the Mont Pelerin set, but do not necissarly have a strong critical bent or are not as politically aware, it might serve as a good catch-me-up and help them understand why they think we might be in the Bad Timeline. I really appreciate Robeyns’s call at the end for more political engagement by regular people. Our democratic muscles have atrophied in the decades of consumerist atomization. As the classic Graeber quote goes, “The ultimate, hidden truth of the world is that it is something that we make, and could just as easily make differently.”
Ch10: Inequality not widely understood. Poor tend to think they are richer than they are, and rich think they are poorer. She does not advocate for a specific economic system, but thinks that one that supports Limitarianism would include: dismantling Neoliberalism; reduce class segregation; strong tax system, tax income from capital just as much as labour; limiting exec pay; halt intergenerational wealth.
Ch9: There are self-serving reasons for the rich to accept Limitarianism. 1. prevent political instability ⋔ 2. economic growth (strong middle class with good wages is the source of demand, and thus profits) 3. wealth is bad for your psychological welfare (addiction, lack of empathy, constant power imbalance, “affluenza”). We should help the rich like we help the psychological problems of the poor.
Ch8: Philanthropy is undemocratic and amoral. As per Ch2 much of the money is dirty. Taxes > Philanthropy both morally AND in terms of efficiency. Runs through args for private philanthropy but basically cuts each down. Also slaps the effective altruism movement. Give away the gap between the ethical wealth cap and the legal Wealth cap. Basically, we should give away our MORALLY earned money to the ethical limit.
Ch7: Utility of money declines the more you have (Bentham). Excess money should go to general society to benefit all, eg extreme global poverty. No means-testing! Bootstraps are a myth! BIG in Namibia (a UBI) worked. Poverty in developed nations too: hungry kids, expensive benefits. A section on Innovation, leaning on Mazzucato. No evidence rich work less if they are taxed more. There are other incentives.
Superior Glokta has a problem. How do you defend a city surrounded by enemies and riddled with traitors, when your …
Ch6: Do people deserve big pay? Argues profits are part of social contract: no individual right to profits. Inheritance not deserved, exceptional salaries do not reflect exceptional performance. Much depends on luck. However not full determinism: there IS agency. Allows for SOME disparity, but not like now. Prosperity depends on who came before and infra. Social mobility is actually not that much, and getting worse
Ch5: How the rich overly contribute to GHGs, not only because they consume a lot more, but also benefit from carbon intensive investment choices. Question: how to divide the remaining carbon budget fairly? Interesting approaches, but all result in way less what we are doing now. She really argues for a state-based solution. Heavily tax the super rich and use that money to transition the economy for everyone’s benefit
Ch4: wealth inequality threatens democracy. Commodification of citizenship (sale of political rights for money). Lobbyists, corps threatening to leave a tax domain to get laws passed, rich buying media outlets, Koch Network activities. Well-connected group actively rigging the rules to grow the capital they already have. All rich ppl benefit from this. Neolibs play into hands of fascists and RW politics.
Ch3: “Dirty Money” Questions morality of how people got their money in the first place: inheritors of Nazi Germany industrial wealth, Atlantic slave trade. Discussion of Reparations. Klepts. Socialized risk. Labour exploitation. Immorality of Tax Dodging. “fiscal engineering by the wealth defense industry” Wealth inequality is likely a lot worse than we think, since much of wealth is undetected.
Ch2: How focusing on poverty (instead of inequality) allows for optimistic narrative about progress these past 2 centuries. Actually most happened in China, which obviously not capitalist. She presents much data on distribution of gains to show rising tides floats yachts more than boats. Piketty. Neoliberalism. How we forget to talk about class. Focusing on poverty only leaves the rich to do what they want.
Ch1: Poverty much more visible than extreme wealth. Media doesn’t report enough on the rich, many don’t notice inequality. 4 kinds of wealthy. Diff between rich and super-rich. 3 thresholds: the Rich Limit: how much it takes for people to think of you as rich; the Ethical Limit: the max amount you can hold without feeling icky (about 1M per person); the political limit: the cap the gov should incur (10M per person).