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

Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

roy.marples.name

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 233 posts

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#221

Post by kelnos »

Frondo wrote: post #182
michaelmrose wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are objectively wealthy enough that everyone could have a place to live, enough food to eat, free medical care even to the point of expensive cancer treatment, free education if so much of our resources weren't directed towards enriching so few without sacrificing essential items. Even calculations about what is and isn't a reasonable expenditure are inherently polluted with the presumption that the current cost s…

For one of those -- homelessness -- the costs to society for not housing everyone exceed what it'd take to simply give everyone some fixed shelter. We still give medical care to homeless people, we jail them (at costs far greater than housing would be), we offer a variety of social programs that aren't housing, and it all adds up to much more than they had a stable place to live. We'd be jailing fewer of them, and th…

Not sure why you've been downvoted, as this all tracks with what I've read. SF has been spending $5k per month per tent in the "sleeping villages" set up for homeless people during the pandemic[0]. That $5k could easily pay for a decent studio apartment, utilities, groceries, a phone plan, etc.

[0] https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2021/03/05/san-francisc...

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#222

Post by account42 »

kelnos wrote: post #220
kortilla wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The counter evidence is simple, it costs $300 billion a month to provide 300 million adults with $1,000 a month. That’s $3.6 trillion a year. That’s the entire federal tax revenue consumed by UBI. So you need to double everyone’s income tax to get back to even. Of course there is evidence giving people free stuff improves their lives. The problem is that’s an insane amount of money that has to come from somewhere. To…

Despite the "U" in UBI, I would assume these $1k/month payments would phase out at a certain income level. Someone making $20k/month, perhaps even $10k/month, does not need their basic needs propped up. UBI would likely replace most welfare programs, so that'd just be moving budget around. I'm finding a bunch of numbers for US welfare spending, some of them not really consistent with others, but welfare spending is e…

> Despite the "U" in UBI, I would assume these $1k/month payments would phase out at a certain income level. Someone making $20k/month, perhaps even $10k/month, does not need their basic needs propped up.

Rather than phased out the idea is usually that everyone gets exactly the same UBI (thus removing overhead and friction associated with existing welfare schemes) but it is cancelled out for the wealthy by an additional/increased regressive income tax.

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#223

Post by fastball »

grecy wrote: post #218
fastball wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We are objectively wealthy enough that everyone could have a place to live, enough food to eat, free medical care even to the point of expensive cancer treatment, free education if so much of our resources weren't directed towards enriching so few without sacrificing essential items. I'd love to see your math on this.

At least a dozen counties already achieve basically all of this, today. They have done for a couple of decades. That's plenty of proof.

Care to name them? Medical care without limitations definitely does not exist in ~dozen countries, and education isn't entirely free in most of the places that have nationalized healthcare either.

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#224

Post by fastball »

kelnos wrote: post #221
Frondo wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For one of those -- homelessness -- the costs to society for not housing everyone exceed what it'd take to simply give everyone some fixed shelter. We still give medical care to homeless people, we jail them (at costs far greater than housing would be), we offer a variety of social programs that aren't housing, and it all adds up to much more than they had a stable place to live. We'd be jailing fewer of them, and th…

Not sure why you've been downvoted, as this all tracks with what I've read. SF has been spending $5k per month per tent in the "sleeping villages" set up for homeless people during the pandemic[0]. That $5k could easily pay for a decent studio apartment, utilities, groceries, a phone plan, etc. [0] https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2021/03/05/san-francisc...

That would require less NIMBYism in SF though, which doesn't look to be happening any time soon.

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#225

Post by PhilosAccnting »

path411 wrote: post #164
trav4225 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure that most opposition to UBI has little to do with lack of empathy, but rather with practical economic reasoning and general beliefs about the role of government in society.

Maybe I'm just too indoctrinated by reddit at this point, but someone would really have to give me a lot of real world evidence counter to not only the examples where UBI and other programs targeted towards the poor have benefited the economy. But even just to counter the pretty basic logic that more productive members of society helps the economy, and more money in the hands of people spending money, not hoarding mo…

A huge part of this depends on your philosophical axioms about the inherent morality of individuals. Are people default-good or default-bad?

Frankly, this view is the major divide between conservative and liberal. And, it'll directly affect all practical implementations such as giving everyone free money. It's also profoundly philosophical in questioning the essence of the soul, so most people like to get unphilosophically political (which is like trying to make software without knowing a language).

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#226

Post by arthur2e5 »

samblr wrote: post #37

I believe open source work is amongst the greatest works of charities ever. It is just staggering the amount of work that goes building/maintainer open source. And I possibly wonder every week on who are these wonderful people creating/maintaining them. My heart goes to maintainer & family. Everybody in this forum needs to do a bit. Request everybody to donate generously via paypal mentioned in the link.

wrt FOSS as charity, the IRS has been resisting FOSS orgs applying for 501(c)(3) status for a while. Not the best world to live in.

https://opensource.org/node/840 https://www.beavandenberk.com/ip/computer-internet/developin...

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#227

Post by deanCommie »

will4274 wrote: post #173
path411 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly I think the people who are against UBI now, really don't care about anything like that. If someone is so devoid of empathy that they don't want to provide such a basic financial safety net for people in their own country from living in homelessness/poverty, I don't think they really care about paying people who's work they've used unknowingly.

Come on. The world isn't divided into people who agree with you and psychopaths. That's such a juvenile and unhealthy way of looking at the world. People who oppose UBI generally worry about cost (which they feel they will pay) and the potential for shifting incentives to result in a worse society - they have just much as empathy as you, they are just empathizing with different people (the lower and middle class payi…

I don't believe that. Here's why. EVERYONE is/should be worried about the cost of UBI. I'm as progressive as they come, but I worry about it too. The reason is there is no one simple answer for how it will be paid, and so until we come to a position of actual debate on the details of the implementation it's not certain how it will be funded.

The difference then is in motivations. Are you motivated to make UBI work or aren't you? Those that are believe that fundamentally, our society must be able to bear it. We know we have the total wealth generated to support it, sot he rest is an implementation detail. If you prioritize it as a key aspect of a successful human-orientated society, it is achievable.

The people that are against UBI are not psychopaths. But they ultimately do not believe in the idea and use costs and other such concerns to justify not moving towards that direction. The reasons why they don't support it can be diverse, but mostly it comes down to a lack of empathy for others. They truly feel that others do not deserve help or support, and base the rest of their beliefs around it.

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#228

Post by grecy »

fastball wrote: post #223
grecy wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least a dozen counties already achieve basically all of this, today. They have done for a couple of decades. That's plenty of proof.

Care to name them? Medical care without limitations definitely does not exist in ~dozen countries, and education isn't entirely free in most of the places that have nationalized healthcare either.

Running through a filtered list of OECD countries: (here's 16)

Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#229

Post by will4274 »

deanCommie wrote: post #227
will4274 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come on. The world isn't divided into people who agree with you and psychopaths. That's such a juvenile and unhealthy way of looking at the world. People who oppose UBI generally worry about cost (which they feel they will pay) and the potential for shifting incentives to result in a worse society - they have just much as empathy as you, they are just empathizing with different people (the lower and middle class payi…

I don't believe that. Here's why. EVERYONE is/should be worried about the cost of UBI. I'm as progressive as they come, but I worry about it too. The reason is there is no one simple answer for how it will be paid, and so until we come to a position of actual debate on the details of the implementation it's not certain how it will be funded. The difference then is in motivations. Are you motivated to make UBI work or…

I'm motivated to make the world better, not to support any particular policy. If UBI is a good policy, I'm motivated to make it work. If UBI isn't a good policy (e.g. if the expenses or changing incentives would cripple society), I'm not.

I think if you reread your post closely, you would see the circular reasoning. You've assumed that UBI is a policy with positive outcomes, as part of your argument for why folks should support UBI. That's "begging the question" (the classical meaning of it).

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#230

Post by Mandatum »

grecy wrote: post #228
fastball wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to name them? Medical care without limitations definitely does not exist in ~dozen countries, and education isn't entirely free in most of the places that have nationalized healthcare either.

Running through a filtered list of OECD countries: (here's 16) Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland

Granted the line for elective procedures or medicine varies by country, but necessary medical treatment is very well covered in all of the above countries. Most will pay for travel to other countries for specialist treatment if it doesn't exist within its own borders and is approved within their own system.
Post reply on HN