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

The Silicon Valley paradox: one in four people are at risk of hunger

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 249 posts

Re: The Silicon Valley paradox: one in four people are at risk of hunger

#191

Post by meebs »

trentmb wrote: post #82
mjfl wrote: post #3

Why pay $2000 a month when you have the whole country you could live in for much less? Why should I have to pay increased taxes for your ignorance/provincialism? Is living in San Francisco a fundamental right? I grew up in Lincoln, Nebraska. I'd suggest that these people move there, for the low cost of living combined with the vibrant-enough economy. Unemployment was at 5% through the great recession . However, I fin…

> You're more likely to die of boredom Who are these people? Having lived in both rural and urban environments, I don't think I've ever succumbed to boredom.

> Who are these people? Having lived in both rural and urban environments, I don't think I've ever succumbed to boredom.

I find it interesting that you've seemingly lived a life devoid of meeting ANYONE who was bored. I can name more than I can remember and that's JUST from university peers.

Re: The Silicon Valley paradox: one in four people are at risk of hunger

#192

Post by taway20171214 »

rgscg wrote: post #131
taway20171214 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> their worst experiences of in-your-face, constant racial/ethnic discrimination and tension in the US are almost always in the Midwest i'm asian american. here's what life is like somewhere other than maybe 3 or 4 cities in the US: 1. constantly explaining to people why i am not white (where i'm from, where my parents are from, why my last name is what it is [it's anglo]) 2. children are constantly getting the 'eyes…

I am also Asian American. I spent the first 20 years of my life in an area of the US where I was the only Asian in the entire school. 2. I can count the times this happened in 20 years on one hand. 3. Same as #2. 5. Never experienced this at all.

well then, how about you tell everyone where you grew up, so you can actually help someone out with some data? because that's certainly the exception, and not the rule.

Re: The Silicon Valley paradox: one in four people are at risk of hunger

#193

Post by b6 »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #185
BeetleB wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Man you're all over this thread handwaving away real concerns because of your parents. He's not handwaving anything. He's not promising anything, either. If someone wants guarantees, they've got the wrong mindset. It's all about managing probabilities. >It's totally reasonable to think that a family with kids who moves to Nebraska is still going to be food insecure. And it's totally reasonable to think that low inco…

Unlike a young tech worker who isn't materially tied down to any location and can view all locations as equal, many people have strong ties to the bay area which serve to keep them there. Moving to Nebraska is pointless if all it does is make you worse off and that's the main point of my post and one you haven't addressed. Most of these families are in some crappy circumstances where they're at but moving would only…

> many people have strong ties to the bay area which serve to keep them there

It sounds like you're saying that something there is important to them, so they choose to stay. We all make choices and live with consequences.

> but moving would only make those circumstances worse

How can anyone be sure of that? But let's say it's true that moving anywhere else would make their situation worse. Then what are they upset about? They're already in the best place, aren't they?

Re: The Silicon Valley paradox: one in four people are at risk of hunger

#194

Post by taway20171214 »

zzzzzzzza wrote: post #137
taway20171214 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> their worst experiences of in-your-face, constant racial/ethnic discrimination and tension in the US are almost always in the Midwest i'm asian american. here's what life is like somewhere other than maybe 3 or 4 cities in the US: 1. constantly explaining to people why i am not white (where i'm from, where my parents are from, why my last name is what it is [it's anglo]) 2. children are constantly getting the 'eyes…

"no offense" doesn't mean that they think you're not american, even though it could mean that, similar to "where are you from". I'll grant you tv/movies, though that is undeniably getting better. I grew up in a town literally called "white settlement", conservative suburban but semi rural texas, most of my friends were asian and while I don't think they NEVER heard the word chink, it was never in a threatening or eve…

> a lot (but not all) of my asian dude friends had a bad time with dating for instance

i was mainly talking about raising existing families, but yeah, this is true also. basically if you're not in the top 5-10% financially and physically as an asian guy, just forget about having a romantic life.

Re: The Silicon Valley paradox: one in four people are at risk of hunger

#195

Post by Bartweiss »

aaron-lebo wrote: post #2

This seems to explain at least some of the UBI-love tech founders have. They live as billionaires in a community, that despite all their money and highfalutin ideas doesn't actually take care of its own, unless you have millions if not billions of dollars. Of course to them the only solution is more money, that's the only solution they seem to know. They'd be more believable if they fixed their own literal and metaph…

> They'd be more believable if they fixed their own literal and metaphorical neighborhoods first before continuing their personal campaigns of empire.

How?

I'm serious about that - I think most of the tech billionaires who care enough to seriously support UBI are trying to fix their communities. Lots of people think their ideas like deregulation or more technology-focused schooling are counterproductive, but they seem largely well-meant. (The deregulation stuff in particular looks like a matter of principle; we have long-standing examples of what it looks like to push that selfishly.)

But all they have is money, really. The push for expanded housing has been choked by zoning boards and courts since Day 1. The tech industry has surprisingly little political influence because California is so large, and so entrenched with old-school Democrats. And "it came from tech" is basically enough to sink any kind of community initiative among anti-gentrification forces: low-cost annual bike shares were designed as a community good accessible to the poor, and the response was still to destroy all of the bikes as gentrification. "Throw money to people" is pretty much what's left to them, and UBI is a more stable approach to that than charity; even tech billionaires can't cover SF's housing costs alone.

I'm not even trying to defend tech billionaires here, particularly. I just don't want us to make all other change contingent on fixing San Francisco neighborhoods - because it seems like no one actually has an answer to that.

Re: The Silicon Valley paradox: one in four people are at risk of hunger

#196

Post by beaconstudios »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #154
someguydave wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your "option of taxing and fair redistribution" is actually a monstrous dictatorship. Every time it has been tried, many have perished and the median wealth has declined.

What on earth are you talking about? You believe the entire first world is a monstrous dictatorship?

the first world doesn't generally engage in wealth redistribution of that kind. Taxation for public services, yes, but straight up taking the money of the rich and successful and giving it to Joe Bluecollar? Not really.

Re: The Silicon Valley paradox: one in four people are at risk of hunger

#197

Post by Helmet »

CocaKoala wrote: post #156
Helmet wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How? How do you move to Nebraska when you have $100/week for food? You scrounge and save up or work odd jobs and get enough to move. > How do you find a job, when you have literally 0-day you can spend without working? There are plenty of jobs. They're not very good jobs, or jobs that most people want to do, but life isn't always about doing what you want. If you cannot afford to live somewhere, you need to move. >…

So your proposal is that the single parent work a second job in order to move to Nebraska. Who takes care of her child while she does this? Does the kid go to child care? How does the single parent pay for the child care? Does she need to get a third job to pay for the expense of her second job? What happens when the car she takes to work breaks down, and wipes out her savings? What about when she gets sick because s…

> So your proposal is that the single parent work a second job in order to move to Nebraska.

My proposal is that they do everything they can possibly do to better their position in life. If it means taking a second job, then they should take a second job. Are you asking me for specifics?

Here is how my parents did it when they couldn't afford daycare: My father worked 3rd shift (through the night) and my mother worked 2nd shift (afternoon-evening). This meant that I was alone with my sister in the morning/afternoon - i.e. the hours during which we were at school.

As I understand it, this woman is single, so even less income, which means an even greater reason to GTFO one of the most expensive places in the world.

>"everybody who's poor should just move to an area where minimum wage jobs are sufficient to live"

As opposed to your solution? You realize that California is one of the most liberal states in the US, right? You've been throwing policy at the wall for years now, yet you still have not managed to fix this problem, and it fact it continues to get worse each year.

Re: The Silicon Valley paradox: one in four people are at risk of hunger

#198

Post by taway20171214 »

mjfl wrote: post #34
jabot wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... but is it bigotry if it's based on actual lived experience? I mean, you're probably reading a bit too much into the guy's post. He's probably not talking about lynching, more likely about way smaller stuff.

> ... but is it bigotry if it's based on actual lived experience? absolutely. because you are generalizing an anecdotal experience to unrelated individuals who happen to be in the same general group. Also, if it's about "way smaller stuff" then the benefits by far outweigh the costs.

"pshhh, name calling and social ostracization? you non-white people should be happy to even be in this country. at least it's not lynching. sack up."

Re: The Silicon Valley paradox: one in four people are at risk of hunger

#199

Post by Helmet »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #185
BeetleB wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Man you're all over this thread handwaving away real concerns because of your parents. He's not handwaving anything. He's not promising anything, either. If someone wants guarantees, they've got the wrong mindset. It's all about managing probabilities. >It's totally reasonable to think that a family with kids who moves to Nebraska is still going to be food insecure. And it's totally reasonable to think that low inco…

Unlike a young tech worker who isn't materially tied down to any location and can view all locations as equal, many people have strong ties to the bay area which serve to keep them there. Moving to Nebraska is pointless if all it does is make you worse off and that's the main point of my post and one you haven't addressed. Most of these families are in some crappy circumstances where they're at but moving would only…

> many people have strong ties to the bay area which serve to keep them there.

My family had strong ties to Yugoslavia, until NATO bombed it, so we moved to Germany. We had strong ties to Germany, until it seemed likely that our temporary refugee visas weren't going to get extended, so we moved to the USA. We had strong ties to Washington DC, but it was too expensive. We ended up in Roanoke, VA.

You do what you need to do for your family. Life is about making choices and sacrifices. It's not anyone's responsibility to improve your life, you need to do that. These people cannot afford to live in one of the most expensive regions in the world, so they need to move.

Re: The Silicon Valley paradox: one in four people are at risk of hunger

#200

Post by frk1206 »

This is so so incredibly sad. I see people on this thread saying stuff like "this is how life is" and "suck it up and move" but the core of the problem is that we have literally institutionalized slavery by calling it a market force. This woman isn't a market operator, shes basically a modern day slave. Crucial to the functioning of the system (or Facebook doesn't have food) but somehow also expendable. This is not just a American but a worldwide issue. Whatever the market forces are it just doesn't make any sense that a cook is unable to make a living.
Post reply on HN