40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense • Hacker News Board

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#31

Post by ralusek » Tue, May 22, 2018, 10:37 PM UTC

sjg007 wrote: post #19

johnm1019 wrote: post #2

I think we as a nation should consider this an issue of national security. This type of financial instability in such a large percentage of the population could lead to making short-sighted or bad decisions in tough times, increased violence, increased rates of incarceration (both of those increasing the cost of government for all), among many other things. The reasons for it are multi-faceted I'm sure. I hope voters…

We should but you know personal responsibility and all that jazz. The wealthy only care when the pitchforks come out. The biggest achievement of the wealthy has been to convince the middle class to eat itself.

But personal responsibility is actually an important concept. It is completely unacceptable to not have $400 on reserve for an emergency as a functioning adult. That is a situation that can only be achieved by poor decision making and a lack of personal responsibility. Any strategy that is employed to remedy this has to contend with the fact that the individuals who need to have this situation remedied for themselves are the same ones who have gotten themselves into this situation.

I will say this again. As a mobile adult, in the United States, to not have $400 on reserve for an emergency is simply not possible with proper decision-making. Individuals at that level of poverty have national and state level food stamps, welfare, disability, affordable housing, rent control, minimum-wage laws, child-support, often social security, medicare/medicaid. It's not as though the country has a non-existent social safety net. You simply can't propose that the solution can exist independently of the personal decisions made by the individuals in this position.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#32

Post by baby » Tue, May 22, 2018, 10:37 PM UTC

cryptoz wrote: post #3

This makes it clear why our current capitalism doesn't work. The ruling class / rich and wealth people and businesses could extract more wealth out of the middle and lower classes than they do now, if the lower classes were more stable and secure. In the US especially, but nearly everywhere, there are hoards of people trying to lower or eliminate social services, basic science research, etc, with the dog-whistle clai…

I can’t believe you’re getting downvoted so much for that. Socialism fear is still very real.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#33

Post by extesy » Tue, May 22, 2018, 10:37 PM UTC

cryptoz wrote: post #3

This makes it clear why our current capitalism doesn't work. The ruling class / rich and wealth people and businesses could extract more wealth out of the middle and lower classes than they do now, if the lower classes were more stable and secure. In the US especially, but nearly everywhere, there are hoards of people trying to lower or eliminate social services, basic science research, etc, with the dog-whistle clai…

Isn't this similar to a prisoner's dilemma but on a large scale? If the society is optimizing for a global maximum then the few individuals would be better off by being selfish and optimizing for a local maximum.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#34

Post by maerF0x0 » Tue, May 22, 2018, 10:38 PM UTC

I had a coach that when I'd ask about how to get out of tricky situations he'd often respond with something along the lines of "Bro, you f'd up a long time ago"...

I don't think 40% is some magic number to begin hysteria. Neither is $400. Selling something to cover your expenses might be a blessing in disguise if the thing you sell is a liability in the first place (ex: a car you cant really afford).

My observation of America is that for a whole lot of people we F'd up a long time ago... These people need financial education, they need to be taught to not buy things they dont need, they need to be taught delayed gratification and to not be consumerists.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#35

Post by gowld » Tue, May 22, 2018, 10:38 PM UTC

dv_dt wrote: post #17

cryptoz wrote: post #3

This makes it clear why our current capitalism doesn't work. The ruling class / rich and wealth people and businesses could extract more wealth out of the middle and lower classes than they do now, if the lower classes were more stable and secure. In the US especially, but nearly everywhere, there are hoards of people trying to lower or eliminate social services, basic science research, etc, with the dog-whistle clai…

The Shock Doctrine [1] described that idea that the rich could undertake disasters of various types in order to push unpopular policy in their wake. I don't think it was ever updated to the 2008 recession, but the bailout of the banks via buying poorly performing securities via quantitative easing follows that though with the same effect. The fed bought risky bank mortgage securities, while still allowing mortgage lo…

Examples of Shock doctrine in practice:

Using tax leins to steal real estate:

https://live.washingtonpost.com/tax-lien-investigation.html

Bail fees convert civilians into prisoner-slaves:

https://brooklynbailfund.org/our-results/

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#36

Post by Chyzwar » Tue, May 22, 2018, 10:39 PM UTC

cryptoz wrote: post #3

This makes it clear why our current capitalism doesn't work. The ruling class / rich and wealth people and businesses could extract more wealth out of the middle and lower classes than they do now, if the lower classes were more stable and secure. In the US especially, but nearly everywhere, there are hoards of people trying to lower or eliminate social services, basic science research, etc, with the dog-whistle clai…

The US is incredibly rich country. Every second teenager is carrying iPhone worth more than yearly income in a large portion of the world. It is all thanks to capitalism.

Problem is that most US population is not educated/smart and easy to manipulate into crazy consumption. UBI will not fix it, it will make it worse. Even putting more money into education is not really a clear solution.

You need to understand that middle class is gone. Beside 2-5% of highly specialised STEM workers everyone else job is already subsidized.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#37

Post by nrb » Tue, May 22, 2018, 10:39 PM UTC

matte_black wrote: post #28

projectileboy wrote: post #4

Wealthy investors are happy to tell founders that a smaller percentage of a bigger pie is a better deal, but then seem not so happy to make their percentage smaller in order to increase the size of the pie for society at large.

Investors have to fight hard and endure a long time for every % of return. Society on the other hand will never be satisfied with their piece, they will always need more, and sooner not later.

"Workers have to fight hard and endure a long time for every $ of income. Investors on the other hand will never be satisfied with their piece, they will always need more, and sooner not later."

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#38

Post by patrickdavey » Tue, May 22, 2018, 10:39 PM UTC

cabaalis wrote: post #7

cryptoz wrote: post #3

This makes it clear why our current capitalism doesn't work. The ruling class / rich and wealth people and businesses could extract more wealth out of the middle and lower classes than they do now, if the lower classes were more stable and secure. In the US especially, but nearly everywhere, there are hoards of people trying to lower or eliminate social services, basic science research, etc, with the dog-whistle clai…

I am and know many conservatives. I don't see any "poor hate," though I don't argue it doesn't exist. Rather, it seems conservatives get upset at the idea of an unlevel playing field, i.e. creating policies that favor one group over another. Well-intentioned as any given policy may be, we are opposed to crafting government rules or benefits that apply to one set of people and not another.

Do you not think that it should be an unlevel playing field? If you happen to be born (by complete luck) into a house where you always had a meal on the table & books to read, you're already miles ahead of many people.

To me it just seems fair to help those who through no fault of their own have been born into poverty. A "level playing field" just helps those who are miles ahead to begin with.

If you haven't seen it, you might want to watch this video [1] on a "race" - see how level the field actually is.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4K5fbQ1-zps

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#39

Post by xena » Tue, May 22, 2018, 10:39 PM UTC

ralusek wrote: post #31

sjg007 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should but you know personal responsibility and all that jazz. The wealthy only care when the pitchforks come out. The biggest achievement of the wealthy has been to convince the middle class to eat itself.

But personal responsibility is actually an important concept. It is completely unacceptable to not have $400 on reserve for an emergency as a functioning adult. That is a situation that can only be achieved by poor decision making and a lack of personal responsibility. Any strategy that is employed to remedy this has to contend with the fact that the individuals who need to have this situation remedied for themselves…

What about people whose life situations constantly rip money out of them and their pay is just fundamentally insufficient to cover their expenses?

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#40

Post by jadedhacker » Tue, May 22, 2018, 10:39 PM UTC

matte_black wrote: post #28

projectileboy wrote: post #4

Wealthy investors are happy to tell founders that a smaller percentage of a bigger pie is a better deal, but then seem not so happy to make their percentage smaller in order to increase the size of the pie for society at large.

Investors have to fight hard and endure a long time for every % of return. Society on the other hand will never be satisfied with their piece, they will always need more, and sooner not later.

Society has to fight hard and endure a long time for every % of return. Investors on the other hand will never be satisfied with their piece, they will always need more, and sooner not later.

Or as Adam Smith put it: "All for ourselves and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind."

https://www.quora.com/What-did-Adam-Smith-mean-when-he-said-...