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

Is It Better to Be Poor in Bangladesh or the Mississippi Delta?

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 106 posts

Re: Is It Better to Be Poor in Bangladesh or the Mississippi Delta?

#81

Post by miraj »

chimeracoder wrote: post #17
thrownblown wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Bangladesh have a systemic prescription opiate problem? How about an illegal heroin problem?

> Does Bangladesh have a systemic prescription opiate problem? If you want to talk about the impact of opiates on Bangladeshi poverty today, you should go back much further in history. Bengal opium, being much higher quality than the product found in China and Afghanistan, was the major impetus behind the British annexing the territory back in 1757. They used this monopoly to extract exorbitant taxes from Bengal, cau…

opiate addiction may not be that prevalent in Bangladesh; but from what I understand Methamphetamine (popularly known as 'Yaba') is a significant problem.

http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/crime/2016/12/19/stud...

https://news.vice.com/article/yaba-the-madness-drug-is-findi...

the history of 'Bengal Opium', especially its production & distribution is indeed a fascinating one. The historical fiction by Amitav Ghosh in his "Ibis Trilogy" is very illuminating:

https://www.goodreads.com/series/59478-ibis-trilogy

Re: Is It Better to Be Poor in Bangladesh or the Mississippi Delta?

#82

Post by zeroer »

com2kid wrote: post #42
mmsimanga wrote: post #18

I was born in an African village, literally in a mud hut. I spent the first 9 years of my life in a village. The town I grew up in wasn't far from the village so I spent holidays in the village too. I now work in IT and try keep up with the latest frameworks. That is I am not concerned with starving to death and I have health insurance. If I compare my upbringing with my daughter's, there is nothing to compare. We wa…

> Here is the interesting thing, none of us ever had to see an occupational therapist to help us with our hand eye co-ordination. Falling out of a tree was enough incentive to figure it out on your own. Survivorship bias. I have poor eyesight, no amount of practice would ever allow me to throw a spear and hit a wild animal. Heck with lots of occupational therapy as a kid, I can kinda-sorta catch a ball. On a good day…

> I have poor eyesight, no amount of practice would ever allow me to throw a spear and hit a wild animal.

What, specifically, is your eyesight problem? There's some growing suggestive evidence that our eyes need time outside in bright sunlight to develop properly. Depending on your particular sight problem, it may very well be the case that a failure to be outside attempting to throw a spear and hit a wild animal as a child is the cause of your problem.

https://www.aao.org/eye-health/tips-prevention/time-outdoors...

Re: Is It Better to Be Poor in Bangladesh or the Mississippi Delta?

#83

Post by gerpsh »

criddell wrote: post #39
mmsimanga wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make a very interesting point. I would say I am able to adapt to my surroundings pretty well. At work it is all about databases and SQL. When I am back in my home country, conversations are about the rain. Rain determines how crops fare and how much food is available for the livestock. Trying to describe what I do is a none starter. The interesting thing is how easy it is to adapt and to also get caught up in the…

> people have genuine smiles but own less That's a great observation. I think it's hard to argue that someone happy in their life is not successful just because they haven't advanced economically.

This Onion article really nails this point: http://www.theonion.com/article/unambitious-loser-with-happy...

Re: Is It Better to Be Poor in Bangladesh or the Mississippi Delta?

#84

Post by ptaipale »

charles-salvia wrote: post #77
gamblor956 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I've also lived in rural America. While there are significant populations of lazy dolists in both, the population of do-nothings is much higher in rural America. Rural America really does believe that everyone has forgotten about them, and blame all their problems on other people while they happily do meth or get drunk all day in their trailers. The thing is...they're right. Because they live so far from any pla…

Well, Donald Trump matters. And he thought about them. And this is where we are.

Indeed. Looking at America from across the Atlantic, it seems that the American inner cities are making themselves heard by drug trade and a fairly large number of homicides, and rural America now made themselves heard through elections.

I kind of find the latter approach more constructive, in fact, even if it resulted in Trump.

Re: Is It Better to Be Poor in Bangladesh or the Mississippi Delta?

#85

Post by charles-salvia »

ptaipale wrote: post #84
charles-salvia wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Donald Trump matters. And he thought about them. And this is where we are.

Indeed. Looking at America from across the Atlantic, it seems that the American inner cities are making themselves heard by drug trade and a fairly large number of homicides, and rural America now made themselves heard through elections. I kind of find the latter approach more constructive, in fact, even if it resulted in Trump.

It's a bit more complicated. Inner-city populations heavily vote Democrat, along with most densely populated areas. In fact, something like ~80% of Americans live in urban areas (which also includes dense suburbs), and therefore we should expect Democrats to win elections most of the time (even in spite of the fact that some dense sub-urban areas heavily lean Republican). However, this doesn't happen in practice because the electoral college system heavily reduces the weight of votes coming from inner-cities and urban areas, and also excludes votes coming from urban areas that lie within a larger, Republican-leaning state. For example, in the last election, probably most people in Philadelphia voted for Clinton, but their votes were nullified because the state over-all went to Trump.

So inner-city populations can't reliably make themselves heard on the national level via Presidential elections.

Re: Is It Better to Be Poor in Bangladesh or the Mississippi Delta?

#86

Post by AnimalMuppet »

thrownblown wrote: post #20
thrownblown wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the downvotes. Rent is just theft based on the monopolization of land. Forcing the poor to pay to live in government approved ghettos is more extortion of their limited resources by those who monopolize the commons.

Downvote me too. It's ok. All property is theft.

So, where did you steal that computer that you're composing your messages on? Where did you steal your phone? Your car?

You sound like you want a world where cars and computers are free. In practice, that would be a world without cars and computers.

Or are you only talking about "property" in the sense of real estate? But if the land doesn't (enforceably) belong to me, I'm not going to build anything substantial on it - not a skyscraper, not even a decent suburban home. I'm not going to build anything but what I absolutely need, because I can lose it.

And I can't get a loan on it, either. This matters. In parts of the world without secure property rights, a family can't take a loan on their property so that the wife can buy a sewing machine and develop an income. It makes it harder for people to climb out of subsistence.

So your position makes a nice soundbite, but it doesn't actually work very well in the real world.

(Your post parallel to this one is correct - property rights can exist only if the state enforces them. The thing is, it is good that the state does so.)

Re: Is It Better to Be Poor in Bangladesh or the Mississippi Delta?

#87

Post by InitialLastName »

charles-salvia wrote: post #23

I think a lot of the resentment felt by the rural American poor has to do with their perception that they are constantly ignored or overlooked, while similarly impoverished inner-city minorities are at least given some kind of institutional sympathy. It's hard to say how true this really is, or how much of it is simply further fuel for pre-existing racism, but apparently this perception is ubiquitous enough that it c…

In one sense, this is a little true: It's easier and more efficient to provide access to the various safety net services in a city. Just like you can support a niche store in a big city that would never see enough customers to survive in a small town. Population density improves the "customer":"provider resource" ratio.

Access to lots of other services is better too... In the core of the large city I live in, there are so many emergency rooms/clinics that it would be difficult to be outside of walking distance of emergency care. That's much harder to do (and a poor allocation of resources) in rural Oklahoma, but it means my access to medical care is dramatically better.

Re: Is It Better to Be Poor in Bangladesh or the Mississippi Delta?

#88

Post by InitialLastName »

charles-salvia wrote: post #85
ptaipale wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Looking at America from across the Atlantic, it seems that the American inner cities are making themselves heard by drug trade and a fairly large number of homicides, and rural America now made themselves heard through elections. I kind of find the latter approach more constructive, in fact, even if it resulted in Trump.

It's a bit more complicated. Inner-city populations heavily vote Democrat, along with most densely populated areas. In fact, something like ~80% of Americans live in urban areas (which also includes dense suburbs), and therefore we should expect Democrats to win elections most of the time (even in spite of the fact that some dense sub-urban areas heavily lean Republican). However, this doesn't happen in practice beca…

It doesn't help when voter suppression efforts make access to voting rights prohibitive to people in cities, especially the poor. 4 hour lines to vote (because there are fewer polling places) are painful even when your livelihood isn't on the line.

Re: Is It Better to Be Poor in Bangladesh or the Mississippi Delta?

#89

Post by noobiemcfoob »

charles-salvia wrote: post #85
ptaipale wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Looking at America from across the Atlantic, it seems that the American inner cities are making themselves heard by drug trade and a fairly large number of homicides, and rural America now made themselves heard through elections. I kind of find the latter approach more constructive, in fact, even if it resulted in Trump.

It's a bit more complicated. Inner-city populations heavily vote Democrat, along with most densely populated areas. In fact, something like ~80% of Americans live in urban areas (which also includes dense suburbs), and therefore we should expect Democrats to win elections most of the time (even in spite of the fact that some dense sub-urban areas heavily lean Republican). However, this doesn't happen in practice beca…

I'd like to see some data for that 80% urban population statement. Unless the definition of "dense suburbs" is outlandish, I can't see the percentage getting that high. Most studies I've seen put the US at a fair rural to urban split that up until very recently has always favored the rural population. It is only in the past 10 years that we've approached 50% urban to rural.

I know this to be true in North Carolina, and various readings about elsewhere make me believe it to be the case for the greater US.

Re: Is It Better to Be Poor in Bangladesh or the Mississippi Delta?

#90

Post by CrackpotGonzo »

Brendinooo wrote: post #79
empath75 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just want to be clear that I don't want to paint to rosy a picture of what poverty looks like in Central America. It's not uncommon to see a single mom with a family of three or more kids living in a tin shack with a dirt floor. It's fucking heartbreaking to see. And you know that you could spend a few hundred bucks and help change their lives, but there are a billion more people just like them in the world. We in th…

I know there's balance to this issue - I once spent an afternoon at a shantytown located in a garbage dump in Managua. Worldview-changing, especially when the interpreter noted that some people felt fortunate to at least have work to do in the dump. But some things certainly are a matter of perspective. My grandmother was one of 13 kids, 12 of which survived early childhood. The way she describes it, they all lived i…

I was born and raised in Managua. I think a visit to La Chureca (the dump you're taking about I think) would be a life-changing experience for most. I don't think you can truly understand poverty living in the US and not traveling to the third world.
Post reply on HN