Live data from Hacker News

Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

bloomberg.com

201–210 of 216 posts

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you not “finance” the phone? All the carriers basically have payment plans where they just take the cost of the phone and divide payments by 24-36 months. You don’t pay interest and there is no markup.

Because then you’re paying a ridiculous amount of money for your monthly plan. You should be paying for your device outright and then using it on a prepaid carrier. The reason the large carriers finance at 0% interest is because it ties you to their exhorbitant plans for 2 years.

For $70 a month from T-mobile all fees included you get unlimited talk, text, data and 3G tethering. The price goes down to $60 a month for two adults - yes both adults need cell phones, how else are they going to be reachable for jobs and if one is at work and the other is at home?

I know my older son doesn’t have cable or home internet and he uses his phone for everything including entertainment, internet connectivity to his computer, etc.

I’ve known families with children who were going through things and the kids studied on a hand me down laptop and use their phone’s internet access and tethering to do homework.

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because then you’re paying a ridiculous amount of money for your monthly plan. You should be paying for your device outright and then using it on a prepaid carrier. The reason the large carriers finance at 0% interest is because it ties you to their exhorbitant plans for 2 years.

For $70 a month from T-mobile all fees included you get unlimited talk, text, data and 3G tethering. The price goes down to $60 a month for two adults - yes both adults need cell phones, how else are they going to be reachable for jobs and if one is at work and the other is at home? I know my older son doesn’t have cable or home internet and he uses his phone for everything including entertainment, internet connectiv…

And my prepaid plan is all unlimited at $30 a month on my phone I bought all cash for $200. It's much cheaper!

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#203
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having an iPhone isn't inexplicable. You can finance or lease a phone for $30-$40 a month. And given the extraordinary advantages having a smartphone provides, it would be inexplicable if they did not do so. Also, cigarettes are an appetite suppressant and in many places are cheaper than food. Food stamps are hardly comprehensive. Cheaper, that is, until it all catches up to you medically. One thing I've learned in m…

> Having an iPhone isn't inexplicable. You can finance or lease a phone for $30-$40 a month. And given the extraordinary advantages having a smartphone provides, it would be inexplicable if they did not do so. It's inexplicable when there are alternative phones available for 1/10 the cost. Why would you choose to take on a $40/mo expense when you could buy an entire fully functioning low end Android phone for $40? >…

I hope your (probably imaginary) neighbors literally eat you.

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#204

The risk of eviction, meanwhile, can be roughly measured by the percentage of people’s incomes that they spend on shelter each month. As of 2015, 17 percent of Americans spent half or more of their incomes on rent. This is why we (here in the US) need to address housing. And I don't know what term to use. "Affordable housing" is the term I want to default to, but that gets misinterpreted by people and ends up being a…

Good comments. Just FWIW Strong Towns (StrongTowns.org) the housing you’re taking about is often referred to as “the missing middle” housing types.

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if the iPhones make them happy, and your Nokia 520 would not? What if they're just pursuing their happiness? What if the value of that happiness is more than the value they could have saved with a budget junker phone? What if their lives are not very happy, but this one thing makes them happy? Is it worth it then? I would argue yes. This reminds me of that infamous Fox News talking point: "Look at these people,…

That's a lot of what ifs. I bet that they'd be happier with a crappier phone when they lose their job and have enough savings to ride out looking for a new one. In fact, they'd probably find a better paying job if they didn't have to take the first one they could land. The problem with poverty is that many think "that's how life is" and don't realize that they can get out of the cycle. If people in poverty saved just…

That $1000 in a year is literally $1000 or so lost opportunities.

That's ~1500 calories/ day for the year buying gas station pizza. It's hard to work when you're hungry.

That's electricity or heat and water for most of a year.

That's a beater to get through a winter.

That's a couple visits to urgent care.

That's cell phone and internet payments for a year.

That's half a deposit on an average apartment.

That's winter tires and months of gas.

How can someone who is unable to think rationally (because they're poor and are at the mercy of capitalists) to keep them homelessness? The reality is terrifying and anyone who can muddle through it without resorting to crime, drug addiction, or being institutionalized is a person of immense strength of mind and character. Arguably stronger and more resourceful people than the multi generational families of inheritance.

What good could $1000 really do for someone?

$1000 to me is insignificant and yet more than half a month's rent. In order to escape this poverty trap I'd need a lot more money, money I'll never have.

Even if I saved as aggressively as possible making sacrifices like eating only the cheapest foods available, buying only second hand clothing, cutting my own hair, biking an hour instead of the 10 minute drive to work, I'd only be able to save $400/mo. An extra $5k/yr at a loss of over half my free time and nearly every empty pleasure in life affords me the ability to what? Spend 8 years getting an outdated associates degree at a community college? I have several friends who did that, currently making more than them with only a HS diploma, yet still dead broke, paycheck to paycheck. Oooh. Maybe 16 years for a bachelor's degree. I'm sure I'll be a desirable applicant in my forties or fifties with entry level skills.

The point is, poor people can't save their way out of poverty like they can't work their way to ceo unless they're actively groomed for better positions. The vast majority of companies are actively removing progression tracked positions and automating the higher skilled positions to further rely on low wage low skill workers that get stuck there. This is a travesty and left unchecked will further the social collapse of this country. You really should get out of your social bubble and interact with middle aged people working minimum wage jobs. You'll find a lot of unlucky but otherwise hard working, honest, reliable, and compassionate people, as well the occasional jerk. Try to get to know the jerk and find out why they're abrasive. Chances are they've had a hard life and their efforts failed to pay off in meaningful ways. Sure some might be truly awful despite having been given every advantage, but those are few and far between.

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adam Smith observed years ago that cost of housing tends to eat up most people's pay raises. Which is to say if you can afford more you get more. Of course there are limits. Everybody has a point where their house is big enough for them and there are no better areas to move to (or the better areas are out of reach). Then they improve it for lack of anything else to to with their money.

The bigger issue is that as society in general gets richer much of the increase is being captured by landlords (and to an extent older property owners.) In the UK, the size of new build homes is at a 90 year low. [1] [1] https://www.which.co.uk/news/2018/04/shrinking-homes-the-ave...

Ironically Adam Smith also pointed that one out.

He also suggested a tax on rent as one of the best ways to tax, since it ends up being paid by the landlord.

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am in no way poor, but if I lost my job and couldn't pay my bills, I'd be in trouble very quickly Sounds like if you lost your job you could pay the bills. You're running into the difference between what is - for you - a hypothetical and what is for others a reality. > That's no one's fault but my own Bu-bu-bu-bullshit! This is completely discounting the role the entire rest of civilization has in producing the c…

> "Bu-bu-bu-bullshit! " Is this really necessary, or the best way to make your point? It really takes away from an otherwise decent post.

I mean... Reasonable. "Bullshit" has a particular meaning to me (ala Dykstra's comment on abstraction) that I felt was appropriate; adding syllables is then a particular modifier on that concept (same same but more so, basically) given phonetics and cultural usage. "Fuckin' bullshit" carries more anger, "that's a load of bull" doesn't convey enough dismissal. "Bu-bu-bu-" conveys not only a more-than-usual amount of bullshit, but enough and of the right flavor that it's starting to be humorous in a pyrrhic kind of way.

I'm not actually figuring out a non-loaded term to use instead; the next best that I'm finding are the phrases "head so far up your own ass" and "check your privilege", both of which have their own issues.

AFAIK, when people are willfully ignorant of the plight of others, you call bullshit on their crap. Like replying to ad hominem attacks with fallacy ref memes. Anything else is engaging with the trolls. I'll take suggestions, tho.

Otherwise, thanks!

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#208
post #6

> Luckily, there is just such a concept: It’s called material security. This is really important. There are people that are one paycheck away from not being able to afford rent and basic necessities. I have lost my job in the past. I was calm and just enjoyed the time while I was looking for a new job. I have money saved. For a lot of people that will have been an extremely stressful situation. That kind of stress is…

> That kind of stress is related to bad-decision taking and reduced life expectancy. I can't tell if you're really meaning to say that people down on their luck are there because they deserve it. It's just not that black-and-white. EDIT: I read this wrong. I agree with what you're saying, "related to" would have made more sense as "leads to". > Nowadays they depend more and more on credits and increase the amount bor…

> EDIT: I read this wrong. I agree with what you're saying, "related to" would have made more sense as "leads to".

Yes. Thank you. "Leads to" is what I meant. :)

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the same thing, you funded your company on credit cards...

Meh, more like paid my mortgage and bought food. But, even if we frame it as funding a company on credit cards, it was a mistake, and one I would discourage others from making.

Money is fungible

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is, what's the alternative? Suppose you roll out a new voting schedule expanding voting hours. The purpose is to make things more convenient, not affect election outcomes -- someone who might have had to miss an hour of work to vote can now do it during off hours instead etc. But without having any way to know this ahead of time, the new schedule turns out to change who votes in a way that disproportiona…

> In theory they could allow voting 24 hours a day for a month That's exactly (well, perhaps not exactly a month) what places that adopt all mail-in (or just permanent, no-special-qualification mail-in) voting do, so it's not just “in theory”.

That has other costs. It allows people to buy or coerce votes by observing the target filling out and mailing their ballot, which is specifically prohibited at polling places. And it opens you up to an extra set of dirty tricks, e.g. stealing ballots from mailboxes on the day they're distributed. And it's effectively impossible to prevent people from mass producing forged ballots (e.g. by using serial numbers and then detecting non-issued serials or duplicates) while at the same time allowing the voter to be confident that no one is using that to correlate who they voted for with their identity.
Post reply on HN