The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’ • Hacker News Board

Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’

#31

Post by jmkni » Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 4:18 PM UTC

vondur wrote: post #19

I grew up poor. I don’t know how my dad managed it. I’m thankful every day that I don’t have to worry like my parents did.

Likewise. My parents raised myself and my siblings well, and somehow managed to give us all a good education and life despite both being on minimum wage.

As an adult, I'm angry at my younger self for being annoyed at the things I used to be annoyed at, now I realise I couldn't have done it any better (probably a lot worse).

Luckily, we are all doing well now, and we have a good relationship with them, and get to pay it back via buying them gadgets, sending them on holidays etc, and just being there for them.

Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’

#32

Post by pcdoyle » Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 4:18 PM UTC

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #11

rfugger wrote: post #7

And this is in Canada, where the author's surgery and other medical care was covered in full by universal health care. Without that, her situation likely would have been far worse, and yet we can still do so much better.

I was under the impression that Canada’s health system does have a yearly deductible for perceptions at least. $750 I thought. Edit: Yes, this was for BC or Alberta and is still the case in at least one of those.

It's different in every province. The Federal Government has a very narrow jurisdiction in Canada, and healthcare is not in it. In BC I pay for my prescriptions but it's heavily subsidized for most of them.

Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’

#33

Post by hackermailman » Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 4:19 PM UTC

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #11

rfugger wrote: post #7

And this is in Canada, where the author's surgery and other medical care was covered in full by universal health care. Without that, her situation likely would have been far worse, and yet we can still do so much better.

I was under the impression that Canada’s health system does have a yearly deductible for perceptions at least. $750 I thought. Edit: Yes, this was for BC or Alberta and is still the case in at least one of those.

Every province has their own system, some provinces extort their population with all kinds of fees/deductibles and some don't depending on how shady the regional ruling regime is. This article is about Ontario's system but there's much worse, such as looking up the FVRD's policy of ordering hospital beds be turned faster by using a taxi to dump patients, sometimes in different jurisdictions https://globalnews.ca/news/5033260/chilliwack-mayor-fraser-h...

Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’

#34

Post by chimi » Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 4:20 PM UTC

mhh__ wrote: post #22

chimi wrote: post #5

With all the hands out on that web page, I think it's The Guardian that's broke.

The Guardian isn't run like most newspapers

Clearly. A full page piece on a semantic argument. Most newspapers don't waste our time like that. There's nothing of value in that article.

Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’

#35

Post by chrisseaton » Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 4:21 PM UTC

0xcde4c3db wrote: post #12

> I often hear my friends say, “I’m too poor” when they’re frustrated about what they can’t have. Maybe it’s a trip they can’t afford, a renovation they want to start right now or a pretty pair of shoes they spotted in a shop window. I'm pretty sure I've literally never heard someone describe that as being "poor". Maybe this is some regional language thing?

Sounds like normal usage to my British ears. ‘Too poor to go out this weekend’ for example.

Poor means you don’t have enough money. Too poor to do something means not enough money to do that thing.

Too poor to buy a super-yacht sounds normal usage to me even.

Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’

#36

Post by ChristianBundy » Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 4:21 PM UTC

johnkpaul wrote: post #18

cm2012 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard this often growing up in NYC.

Wow, maybe this is a New York thing? We answered at the same instant.

It's also common on the West coast, at least in California and Oregon.

Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’

#37

Post by hrnnnnnn » Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 4:22 PM UTC

dymk wrote: post #28

johnkpaul wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, maybe this is a New York thing? We answered at the same instant.

Well I’m from Utica and I’ve never heard anyone use the phrase

Not in Utica, it's an Albany expression.

Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’

#38

Post by PorterDuff » Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 4:22 PM UTC

chimi wrote: post #34

mhh__ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Guardian isn't run like most newspapers

Clearly. A full page piece on a semantic argument. Most newspapers don't waste our time like that. There's nothing of value in that article.

They probably didn't pay her very much.

Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’

#39

Post by HelloFellowDevs » Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 4:23 PM UTC

johnkpaul wrote: post #18

cm2012 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard this often growing up in NYC.

Wow, maybe this is a New York thing? We answered at the same instant.

I definitely think it's an NYC thing too, the COL is pretty crazy here. Rent/Metro definitely cuts into my discretionary spending. All of my friends are in the same boat, we're just all young 20 somethings who are all cash poor paying student loans.

Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’

#40

Post by chimi » Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 4:23 PM UTC

malvosenior wrote: post #24

rfugger wrote: post #7

And this is in Canada, where the author's surgery and other medical care was covered in full by universal health care. Without that, her situation likely would have been far worse, and yet we can still do so much better.

If you are poor in the US your healthcare costs will mostly or entirely be covered. This includes major surgery.

Which I never understood. USA provides free healthcare for people who are poor because they don't work and healthcare for people who are retired and don't work.

But the USA does not provide healthcare for people who work and keep machine turning.

Hmm... I wonder if it's a political lobbying by healthcare industry to get more money for people who wouldn't provide it on their own by extracting it from the tax payers who do work and can (barely) afford insurance, etc.