Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 462 posts

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#131

Post by bluedino »

douche wrote: post #33
sokoloff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not so sure the corner bodega belongs in the same category with the payday loan assholes. Yes, the corner bodega is more expensive than the full grocery store, but they also probably have way lower sales per hour of labor, lower sales per square foot, lower sales per other overhead (rent, insurance, security, utilities, taxes), higher credit card interchange fees, higher shrinkage and spoilage, and pay more for t…

Corner stores make their profit on tobacco, alcohol and scratch tickets, though. The rest of it is just to give a patina of respectability.

Don't forget food stamp fraud.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#132

Post by notthegov »

zw123456 wrote: post #59

There is an old saying that "if you took all the money away from all the rich people, and spread it around evenly to everyone else, within 2 or 3 years, all the formerly rich would be rich again having taken advantage of the poor who don't know how to make and keep money". This adage, although heartless to be sure, has some degree of truth to it in my view. The problem is twofold, 1) a lot of people become rich not b…

I think the problem is most rich people aren't smart. This creates flawed systems, bad business models and poor public infrastructure.

I don't know many people in Silicon Valley but I know a lot of rich people. They definitely have a lack of compunction and some use confidence games to scam and exploit people.

I am not suggesting they are all bad but 90% act like my friends who live in trailers in the Midwest on welfare.

Human nature doesn't care about privilege. I believe education fails to teach critical thinking and tools to face adversity. And this creates situations where rich people lie, or honest investment bankers launder drug money. Or doctors overprescribe drugs, surgeons do unnecessary surgies and rich men exploit young girls. But they all self-rationalize their decisions and never think they are part of the problem. Arrogance, incompetence, greed, stupidity, etc.

There are a ton of successful incompetent people.

In general, I agree with you that it is the individual's job to transcend these challenges but it is ignorant politicians and lazy wealthy and influential people who sustain a system that has so much friction, so much chaos and so many challenges to overcome to get a fraction of what the alleged "elite" get.

My point is, for the most part there is nothing elite about the 1%. There is no secret group controlling the world. If we want to change things, we can.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#134

Post by unclebucknasty »

tim333 wrote: post #72
unclebucknasty wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably, a better approach to downvoting would be to explore the works in context.

I didn't downvote myself and also have no intention to further explore the works - awful vague pompous stuff that they seem to be from the few pages I've read.

Well, that must be the most concise summary of their work in history.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#135

Post by zdragnar »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #40
Tycho wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once someone is trained, they might just leave and work somewhere else.

That can be contractualized, right?

I believe that's called indentured servitude, and at least in the US, cannot be enforced by contract law.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#136

Post by grecy »

orangecat wrote: post #113
grecy wrote: post #27

Of course it profitable, which is why we have things like minimum wage - if WalMart et. al. could, they would pay 3 cents an hour, or even better consume peoples living and eating and entire lives like factories in China. At some point the governments in developed countries have stepped in to set some kind of limit on what's "reasonable". IMHO, they're not doing enough in America right now, the enormous social divide…

if WalMart et. al. could, they would pay 3 cents an hour Sure. Of course they can't, because most of the time even poor people have other options. Also WalMart has in fact supported raising the minimum wage, which is either a virtuous act of corporate responsibility or an attempt to increase the burden on their competitors. because the government forces the wealthy to distribute their wealth I just finished my taxes.…

> Sure. Of course they can't, because most of the time even poor people have other options.

If there were no laws, every company would do this, and there wouldn't be other option.

You think people work in factories in China for $0.50/day even though they have an option to make a good wage?

> Quite a bit of my wealth is being "distributed"

Not nearly as much as if you lived in another developed country, where your money would be paying for healthcare for all, higher education for all, etc. etc.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#137

Post by tysonjennings »

ubernostrum wrote: post #73
ctdonath wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, say those "exploitive" businesses didn't exist. That doesn't subsequently mean "non-exploitive" alternatives would exist, it just means those customers/employees would have no options (not even "exploitive" ones). Is having no option better than having a bad option, when good options aren't available?

That doesn't subsequently mean "non-exploitive" alternatives would exist, it just means those customers/employees would have no options (not even "exploitive" ones). The hidden assumption here is that producing the goods and services required to keep a single human being alive in relative comfort (fed, sheltered, educated, healthy) necessarily requires an expenditure of manual effort roughly equivalent to what that h…

Or, in other words, the assumption is that it is not and never can be the case that N people can be provided for by the effort of K people, where K

This attitude is terrifying. As a matter of policy, you would have me work as a slave for someone else or in turn, benefit from the slavery of others? It would be total war first.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#138

Post by Overtonwindow »

hotshothenry wrote: post #6
Overtonwindow wrote: post #2

Poverty is profitable to other people. People who are in poverty often have to depend on services that are overpriced and predatory. From check cashing services, and payday lenders, to not being able to go to a grocery store where prices are better, but instead depending on smaller stores of convenience where the prices are often higher. The lottery depends on those in poverty. Sometimes I think even the police and c…

Of course they do. IMO towing (especially here in SF where the price for getting your car towed is astronomical relatively speaking), lottery, all those types of gov't fines are really just a tax on the poor. If you're well off you don't really give a damn about getting your car towed a fee here and there, besides the inconvenience, but for someone who depends on their rinky-dink car to get to and from work, getting…

I agree completely on the towing. On the one hand I think the entire process of towing is rigged and corrupt, but on the other, I think it's enforcement is completely uneven and absolutely targets low income people.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#139

Post by MonadQueen »

That's _exactly_ the problem. The Democrats depend on it to be profitable and stay in business. All these people on the Government payroll "helping" the poor. And now they're trying to add to it with "Pre-K" programs (for example) that have been proven ineffective, as a means to make even more money off of poverty.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#140

Post by eli_gottlieb »

ctdonath wrote: post #52
darpa_escapee wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Predatory businesses are still exploitation. > Building such a business (and I assume running a 131 unit mobile home park) is absolutely work, the value of which is evident by the paying tenants. Running a sweatshop is still work, the value of which is evident by its customers. Just because someone needs to work or a place to live doesn't make it right or commendable.

OK, say those "exploitive" businesses didn't exist. That doesn't subsequently mean "non-exploitive" alternatives would exist, it just means those customers/employees would have no options (not even "exploitive" ones). Is having no option better than having a bad option, when good options aren't available?

Make the alternatives exist. It's an engineering problem. Solve it.
Post reply on HN