The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired • Hacker News Board

Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired

#101

Post by kevinmgranger » Thu, Feb 11, 2021, 3:37 PM UTC

logicchop wrote: post #83

colechristensen wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was once involved with a young woman in a homeless program which was entirely defeated by this exact "wrong person" attitude. Get a homeless person an apartment? Great. But it didn't end there, there was a constant stream of documentation requirements, your employer had to, monthly, sign paperwork about how much you earned (advertise to employers that you are/were homeless). The program punished you for making mone…

Fraud is real, and vast, and if it creeps in it undermines the whole thing. What's the alternative?

Do we have evidence that fraud progressively gets worse in the case of housing programs?

Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired

#102

Post by badsectoracula » Thu, Feb 11, 2021, 3:37 PM UTC

nathancahill wrote: post #3

Spent a long time reading about how vast bureaucratic inefficiencies are created by people worrying that "the wrong person" will benefit from government programs or that someone "undeserving" might get theirs before I do. This falls squarely in that bucket. Tragic.

There is a comment exactly about this in the article:

> Last week a local vaccine site had extra doses nearing the end of the day and word spread. Ultimately, they put them in the arms of whoever could get there in time.

> I personally know two unrelated people who raced there and got vaccinated, despite not meeting the criteria mentioned in the article. The only criteria that mattered in this instance were being present and being willing.

> This was also in Houston and at an “official” site. I attempted to get similarly lucky at the same site the next day by visiting at closing time. The worker that turned me away told me that because of complaints from those who missed out the day before, they were told to no longer accept walk-ins. I’m content to wait my turn, but that experience combined with this persecution story...I have to wonder how many doses are going to waste in my community.

Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired

#103

Post by mumblemumble » Thu, Feb 11, 2021, 3:37 PM UTC

happytoexplain wrote: post #8

nathancahill wrote: post #3

Spent a long time reading about how vast bureaucratic inefficiencies are created by people worrying that "the wrong person" will benefit from government programs or that someone "undeserving" might get theirs before I do. This falls squarely in that bucket. Tragic.

This is the root of a lot of problems. We spend far too much energy making sure "bad people" get what they "deserve" and don't get what they "don't deserve", and put in too little of that same energy in the case of "all people".

This is a huge part of why, perhaps surprisingly, libertarian think tanks in the US have started pushing for universal basic income. The sheer weight of the bureaucracy that has accumulated due to this way of thinking means that replacing it with a straight-up program of unflinching wealth redistribution would actually make the government smaller.

And also make markets freer. The amount of rent-seeking behavior around programs like WIC is just staggering. And it serves the interests of neither WIC recipients nor the general public; it's only there because pearl-clutching is easy to co-opt for financial gain.

Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired

#104

Post by colechristensen » Thu, Feb 11, 2021, 3:37 PM UTC

logicchop wrote: post #83

colechristensen wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was once involved with a young woman in a homeless program which was entirely defeated by this exact "wrong person" attitude. Get a homeless person an apartment? Great. But it didn't end there, there was a constant stream of documentation requirements, your employer had to, monthly, sign paperwork about how much you earned (advertise to employers that you are/were homeless). The program punished you for making mone…

Fraud is real, and vast, and if it creeps in it undermines the whole thing. What's the alternative?

Do your verification at the application stage, don't attach income requirements, re-evaluate (gently) with yearly reviews of W-2 income. Don't punish people for successfully getting themselves further towards exiting their troubled situation.

Accept that some people getting help will need it less than others.

There's "fraud" and then there's homeless people trying to get their lives on track. People who need help and support. Saddling them with complex frequent requirements and then calling failing to meet them "fraud" is not helping people.

Be interested in helping people instead of helping only the "right" people.

Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired

#105

Post by ip26 » Thu, Feb 11, 2021, 3:38 PM UTC

nathancahill wrote: post #3

Spent a long time reading about how vast bureaucratic inefficiencies are created by people worrying that "the wrong person" will benefit from government programs or that someone "undeserving" might get theirs before I do. This falls squarely in that bucket. Tragic.

It's not just selfishness, I think we've run into something fundamentally unintuitive for people's lower brain. For much of human history, shutting out cheats & freeloaders was an important part of making good use of a resource. These days, we have hit a point where the bureaucratic overhead of shutting them out can become more expensive than just letting them in. That's not intuitive for people.

Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired

#106

Post by Igelau » Thu, Feb 11, 2021, 3:38 PM UTC

golemotron wrote: post #26

rjbwork wrote: post #5

This is just Kafkaesque. People in a position of authority with blind adherence to rules intended for optimal scenarios. They're literally saying he should have just thrown them away instead of distributing them as best he was able. This whole thing is a logistical clusterfuck and they're trying to throw this dude under the bus. It's obscene.

It makes sense when you think about it. Without the rules, there's excuse to -not- find the people the vaccine is meant for and use it yourself. Anyone who thinks that this would not happen doesn't know human nature very well. They are welcome to post situations where such excuses haven't been taken advantage of. I'll take lack of replies as acceptance of my point.

People who don't give a hoot about the rules are more prone to be spreaders anyway. After medical staff, we have the prioritization of who should get vaccinated completely inverted.

Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired

#107

Post by fortran77 » Thu, Feb 11, 2021, 3:38 PM UTC

ivanbakel wrote: post #42

rjbwork wrote: post #5

This is just Kafkaesque. People in a position of authority with blind adherence to rules intended for optimal scenarios. They're literally saying he should have just thrown them away instead of distributing them as best he was able. This whole thing is a logistical clusterfuck and they're trying to throw this dude under the bus. It's obscene.

> They're literally saying he should have just thrown them away instead of distributing them as best he was able. I wouldn't necessarily object to that particular policy. It's a shame to waste perfectly good medicine in a pandemic, but would we feel the same if he had not found anybody vulnerable who was available, and instead ended up vaccinating his own children, who are fit and healthy? What if, instead, he taken…

Listen -- we all need to get vaccinated in the next few months. The order in which it happens makes little difference.

Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired

#108

Post by abfan1127 » Thu, Feb 11, 2021, 3:38 PM UTC

kiba wrote: post #78

asmos7 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our education in the US is in the same position. We spend far more time, energy and money on problematic students who don't give a rip than we do on dedicated/motivated students. The goal posts aren't there. If a certain number of students fail it creates red flags for the district and if those students are a certain minority that can viewed as evidence of institutional racism and open up legal liabilities as such th…

Chance are, the dedicated/motivated students likely have a far more supportive environment than the kids on the bottom. Increasing resources and support to the top kids will surely increase inequality, while also improving the top's capabilities. Meanwhile, the kids at the bottom get left behind.

its important to say that the vast majority of kids at the bottom get left behind because of the parents. Parents that aren't involved, don't review homework, don't instill good study habits, set their kids up for failure. There are plenty of reasons why parents don't get involved. Those reasons range from working too much, to they don't give a shit.

Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired

#109

Post by mc32 » Thu, Feb 11, 2021, 3:40 PM UTC

alasdair_ wrote: post #91

logicchop wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fraud is real, and vast, and if it creeps in it undermines the whole thing. What's the alternative?

Universal basic income.

Negative taxes are better. No need to give to the wealthy in the first place to come back and tax them later.

Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired

#110

Post by snarf21 » Thu, Feb 11, 2021, 3:40 PM UTC

logicchop wrote: post #83

colechristensen wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was once involved with a young woman in a homeless program which was entirely defeated by this exact "wrong person" attitude. Get a homeless person an apartment? Great. But it didn't end there, there was a constant stream of documentation requirements, your employer had to, monthly, sign paperwork about how much you earned (advertise to employers that you are/were homeless). The program punished you for making mone…

Fraud is real, and vast, and if it creeps in it undermines the whole thing. What's the alternative?

I think there are alternatives. The question becomes: is the fraud detection cost higher than the potential fraud? and even if it is, is it significantly so? I don't think the current system has no fraud in it either.