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

How Indian Americans Came to Run Half of All U.S. Motels

nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 256 posts

Re: How Indian Americans Came to Run Half of All U.S. Motels

#101

Post by protomyth »

sumeetjain wrote: post #31
sidlls wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not (just) that most Americans feel these jobs aren't worth their time. There is a very strong individualist streak in American culture and a very strong taboo against lending friends or family members money for any reason. There are plenty of American families who have relations who could easily help bootstrap a profitable small business in the way described here. It just doesn't happen that way very often. Ins…

> There is a very strong individualist streak in American culture and a very strong taboo against lending friends or family members money I think the individualist streak in American culture is better shown by people being unwilling to seek help from friends/family. I might call an unwillingness to help others (assuming one can afford to do so) selfishness -- not individualism. But what I have seen in American is, as…

> There is a very strong individualist streak in American culture and a very strong taboo against lending friends or family members money for any reason.

I agree with the individualist streak, but the second part is pretty much untrue of anyone I've met in the upper plain states. Helping to bootstrap you friends and family is part of the culture.

Re: How Indian Americans Came to Run Half of All U.S. Motels

#102

Post by tathougies »

iguy wrote: post #99
tathougies wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because (crudely speaking) the catholic church wished to diminish alternative power structures, such as clans. This led to an unusually open society, which had many benefits... with generally higher levels of trust among strangers. Oh please... Indian Catholic families still act in extended structures. I mean, three of my uncles are priests and one is a bishop. We've been Christian for thousands of years. We're sti…

To be clear, my claim above is that the church, as a centralising power structure in "christaindom" circa 1000AD, played some role in pushing the culture there towards openness, or in making extended families less important. Claiming that christianity always and everywhere does this would be pretty obviously wrong, and I did not say this. And indeed even within europe today, catholic-ness is anti-correlated with this…

But still this doesn't make sense, as Latin America was converted in the 1500s, well after the 1000 AD change that you claim occurred. Latin America, despite having 500 years for Catholicism to settle in, is still really big into the extended family.

I think a better explanation is the Protestant reformation weakened the idea that any person should subjugate their own personal individual desires for the greater good, with its emphasis on an individual quest for truth, an idea which has now permeated western culture. This makes sense with what I've experienced of non-European Catholicism, which mostly just finds Protestantism bizzare and confusing.

Re: How Indian Americans Came to Run Half of All U.S. Motels

#103

Post by najarvg »

stephengillie wrote: post #55
monocasa wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? The killer app here seems to be access to capital on amazing terms. > They would give each other handshake loans—no collateral, no payment schedule, just pay when you can

They don't say how big is the loan, nor how many were needed to buy the hotel. They might have had to shake hands with everyone in their family. Some Asian immigrant families form a "lending circle" where they choose a member to go 1st, and everyone gives their extra money to that person, and they buy a hotel/restaurant/etc. The circle chooses a 2nd, and everyone gives them spare money - it's a lot faster this time,…

Excellent observation! This is the basis of "chit funds" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chit_fund), an alternate form of circular financing in India. Similar schemes also apparently exist in countries like S Korea per my Korean neighbor. But in the motel instances outlined here, anecdotally, lending circles are not used. It's typically a small group of family members or very close friends with a pool of money to "lend".

Re: How Indian Americans Came to Run Half of All U.S. Motels

#104

Post by fipple »

siruncledrew wrote: post #34
sidlls wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not (just) that most Americans feel these jobs aren't worth their time. There is a very strong individualist streak in American culture and a very strong taboo against lending friends or family members money for any reason. There are plenty of American families who have relations who could easily help bootstrap a profitable small business in the way described here. It just doesn't happen that way very often. Ins…

Jeff Bezos also got a loan from his parents. Having parents with disposable capital in the >$50k range is definitely not something the majority of American families can provide. https://medium.com/@timconneally/companies-started-by-loans-...

Most families don’t have $50k to invest in their kids’ business, but there are at least 10 million such families for each Gates/Zuckerberg/Bezos etc.

Re: How Indian Americans Came to Run Half of All U.S. Motels

#105

Post by Timmah »

sidlls wrote: post #28
stephengillie wrote: post #3

This model has led to success for other immigrant groups in other industries. > Many followed his advice. “They would give each other handshake loans—no collateral, no payment schedule, just pay when you can,” Doshi explains. Once a family purchased a motel, they would live there, and the family members would do all the tasks needed to run it, from cleaning rooms to checking in guests. That helped keep costs down, an…

It's not (just) that most Americans feel these jobs aren't worth their time. There is a very strong individualist streak in American culture and a very strong taboo against lending friends or family members money for any reason. There are plenty of American families who have relations who could easily help bootstrap a profitable small business in the way described here. It just doesn't happen that way very often. Ins…

Another important difference is the free-labor-from-your-kids benefit. From what it appears, Indian families are more cohesive and their kids are less rebellious (at least 1st generation). I'm aware there are also American children who work in their parents small businesses, but I think they are more likely to demand compensation.

Re: How Indian Americans Came to Run Half of All U.S. Motels

#106

Post by iguy »

naeemtee wrote: post #97
iguy wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's much deeper than "individualist streak in American culture". Western Europe in the last 1000 years or so has been a very unusual place... one aspect of which is having nuclear families not extended ones. Because (crudely speaking) the catholic church wished to diminish alternative power structures, such as clans. This led to an unusually open society, which had many benefits... with generally higher leve…

There are several things wrong with this line of thinking (as others have pointed out), but I'd like to draw attention to a less salient point you made: > This led to an unusually open society, which had many benefits... with generally higher levels of trust among strangers. It's interesting that you're portraying the openness of European society in a strongly positive light, given the high levels of abject lonelines…

Well this is fun, see other answers.

I agree that the extreme individualist end of the spectrum has downsides, for sure. Suicide rates make horrifying reading. But I think you can argue it's part of what made the west successful -- in HN terms, being forced to learn to deal with strangers, a lot, set you up to scale well.

Isn't the flip side of being on the other end of this scale -- tight happy families, or clans, maybe even castes -- something close to nepotism? Stagnation because once you've employed all your nephews then you can't grow, who would you trust?

Of course there are a million other factors etc too... anyway.

Re: How Indian Americans Came to Run Half of All U.S. Motels

#107

Post by brightball »

sidlls wrote: post #28
stephengillie wrote: post #3

This model has led to success for other immigrant groups in other industries. > Many followed his advice. “They would give each other handshake loans—no collateral, no payment schedule, just pay when you can,” Doshi explains. Once a family purchased a motel, they would live there, and the family members would do all the tasks needed to run it, from cleaning rooms to checking in guests. That helped keep costs down, an…

It's not (just) that most Americans feel these jobs aren't worth their time. There is a very strong individualist streak in American culture and a very strong taboo against lending friends or family members money for any reason. There are plenty of American families who have relations who could easily help bootstrap a profitable small business in the way described here. It just doesn't happen that way very often. Ins…

> taboo against lending friends or family members money for any reason.

It's less taboo than years of hearing stories of ended family relationships where money was loaned and then abused, mishandled, wasted, etc without any intention of paying it back. I've heard these types of stories my entire life.

Re: How Indian Americans Came to Run Half of All U.S. Motels

#108

Post by derefr »

sumeetjain wrote: post #31
sidlls wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not (just) that most Americans feel these jobs aren't worth their time. There is a very strong individualist streak in American culture and a very strong taboo against lending friends or family members money for any reason. There are plenty of American families who have relations who could easily help bootstrap a profitable small business in the way described here. It just doesn't happen that way very often. Ins…

> There is a very strong individualist streak in American culture and a very strong taboo against lending friends or family members money I think the individualist streak in American culture is better shown by people being unwilling to seek help from friends/family. I might call an unwillingness to help others (assuming one can afford to do so) selfishness -- not individualism. But what I have seen in American is, as…

> a Kickstarter campaign, bank loan, or VC investment doesn't diminish one's pride in the way that the same support from someone's parents might.

I don't think it's about pride at all. I think it's about face (something most Americans don't even have a word for, but which is very relevant in this case.)

Americans don't want to give face to anyone, ever. They don't want anyone to have social power over them. When an individual loans you money—or, even worse, gifts you money—you're giving them a ton of face in exchange. Americans find that idea horrifying. It's like signing up for indentured servitude, except—since it's a social rather than legal obligation—you can't even get out of it by declaring bankruptcy! (See: the way "favours" are portrayed in The Godfather movies, for an image of the American mindset on what owing someone a favour / being in someone's debt is like.)

Bank loans and VC investments are better precisely because they're legal rather than social obligations, so you can get out of them (or, say, sell them off to someone else along with the business.) And Kickstarter is better because no single individual is responsible for enough of the loan to actually attain much social-obligatory power over you in exchange. You're maybe beholden to your Kickstarter backers as a class, but you aren't scared to talk to any individual one of them for thought of what they might ask of you.

Re: How Indian Americans Came to Run Half of All U.S. Motels

#109

Post by Shivetya »

sidlls wrote: post #28
stephengillie wrote: post #3

This model has led to success for other immigrant groups in other industries. > Many followed his advice. “They would give each other handshake loans—no collateral, no payment schedule, just pay when you can,” Doshi explains. Once a family purchased a motel, they would live there, and the family members would do all the tasks needed to run it, from cleaning rooms to checking in guests. That helped keep costs down, an…

It's not (just) that most Americans feel these jobs aren't worth their time. There is a very strong individualist streak in American culture and a very strong taboo against lending friends or family members money for any reason. There are plenty of American families who have relations who could easily help bootstrap a profitable small business in the way described here. It just doesn't happen that way very often. Ins…

I would have put it more at not about lending them money but the strong desire to strike out on their own. plus throw in sibling rivalry where culture tends to put self first and family second. there are communities within the US which still lean family first but they are not common in the cities

Re: How Indian Americans Came to Run Half of All U.S. Motels

#110

Post by sidlls »

alexhutcheson wrote: post #36
sidlls wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not (just) that most Americans feel these jobs aren't worth their time. There is a very strong individualist streak in American culture and a very strong taboo against lending friends or family members money for any reason. There are plenty of American families who have relations who could easily help bootstrap a profitable small business in the way described here. It just doesn't happen that way very often. Ins…

There are good reasons that many people avoid lending money to (or even doing business with) close friends and relatives. If the venture doesn't succeed, and the friend is unable to repay the loan, it can create animosity and bitterness that wreck the relationship. Even if things go well, it can create an uncomfortable power dynamic that makes the relationship less pleasant and friendly.

To some (admittedly fuzzy) degree what you describe is a symptom of what I describe, not a causal reason for the taboo or individualistic tendency to exist.
Post reply on HN