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

Poor in Tech

megelison.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 817 posts

Re: Poor in Tech

#501

Post by CountDrewku »

istjohn wrote: post #413
fmajid wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much racism in America is actually classism. That's why something like Henry Louis Gates being profiled by a neighbor and a policeman as he was trying to get back to his Harvard home makes the news: Gates is an educated upper-class black man, and in this case he was treated as the latter rather than the former.

I think you could argue that the opposite is true. Much classism in America is actually racism. For example, opposition to welfare programs have often been motivated by racist tropes like welfare queens. The truth is that racism and classism in America are deeply intertwined.

Explain how opposition to welfare programs is racism. Also, please explain why impoverished minority communities have not vastly improved regardless of the constantly increasing money tossed into welfare programs.

Re: Poor in Tech

#502

Post by proxyon »

StavrosK wrote: post #355
username90 wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First point: I live in Scandinavia. Poor people are just as dumb here as in USA, but we take better care of them. USA assumes that poor people should be able to take care of themselves, which doesn't work. Taking care of them doesn't make them smarter, but it makes their lives better which is the point.

That's not about smartness or dumbness, though. I don't think intelligence is correlated with poverty much, but poverty is additional difficulty, so they have to work harder for the same thing as someone who isn't poor.

> I don't think intelligence is correlated with poverty much

There is a perfect correlation between the two

Re: Poor in Tech

#503

Post by [deleted] »

culturestate wrote: post #5

To me, this reads more as a list of "from outside the valley bubble" signifiers than it does as a list of things that people who've grown up in poverty might do, even if the former was a result of the latter. There are some exceptions - not noticing missed paychecks is the biggest - but most of it is just stuff that happens every day in other offices. Making your lunch at the office and not bringing Advil from home?…

[deleted]

Re: Poor in Tech

#504

Post by proxyon »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #455
username90 wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, intelligence is mostly inherited. If your biological parents were smart then you will almost surely be smart and vice versa. And smart people end to earn more money, so intelligence is indirectly correlated with parental wealth. But when you put kids from poor parents into rich households they will continue to do poorly. They do a bit better, but their biological parents still matters more. If it was easy to prod…

> But when you put kids from poor parents into rich households they will continue to do poorly. Have you considered it’s because being a poor child is itself a traumatic experience that isn’t magically cured by being ripped away from family and put into an environment of material abundance?

> Have you considered it’s because being a poor child is itself a traumatic experience that isn’t magically cured by being ripped away from family and put into an environment of material abundance?

What you've said is unfalsifiable voodoo mumbo-jumbo. Even if someone proved you wrong here and started the experiment with the poor child at newborn level, which is what people do when these bad faith criticisms are lobbed, you'd just claim that the DNA of the baby inherited generational trauma, which is what people with your bad faith criticism resort to once the criticism is inevitably proven wrong.

Re: Poor in Tech

#505

Post by Tade0 »

stavros wrote: post #425
Tade0 wrote: post #106

I read the whole thing trying to find something I could relate to, as I grew up in a place that was a proper third world country as recently as in the 90s. This appears to be American poor - which I think is in its own category, because comparing to American rich it's just so much worse off. It's not that she's necessarily materially poor. It's just that there's no one around who can even begin to understand her pred…

What did poverty look like for you? I am also from somewhere very different from this, though I can't say I grew up poor, we did okay.

For me it was mostly not being able to afford school books and clothes, shoes other than Chinese supermarket stuff - so something that wouldn't last two seasons. Also five people living in a 45m2 apartment - thankfully only until I was twelve or so.

We reached a low point as a family when I was in college and my father, who left a few years earlier, stopped supporting us. Fortunately by that time I had a part-time job and could at least pay for my own food and cleaning products most of the time.

My SO had it worse though - four people in a studio apartment until she was about eleven and her father, the sole consistent breadwinner, left when she was a teenager, from which point on they had to sustain themselves on alimony and occasional jobs their mother would take.

Re: Poor in Tech

#507

Post by isoskeles »

8fGTBjZxBcHq wrote: post #281
username90 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are getting fatter and fatter. It is much worse now than 20 years ago, and even much much worse than 40 years ago. Any explanation you can come up with needs to be able to explain this as well. Does poor people have worse access to food today? Do they have less money for food today? If we put poor people in the same conditions they had 40 years ago they would be slimmer than rich people today.

Yes I know where you stand on this, I don't need more information about your opinion. I asked if you see the conclusion of this view, and if you endorse it. To be very very clear it goes like this: if poor are fat because they make bad choices and for no other reasons, then you can reasonably conclude that that is also why they are poor. That they deserve to be poor for that reason. Is that a fair summary of your vie…

That's not a fair summary of anyone's view, and you know it.

Re: Poor in Tech

#508

Post by proxyon »

periya wrote: post #452
username90 wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, intelligence is mostly inherited. If your biological parents were smart then you will almost surely be smart and vice versa. And smart people end to earn more money, so intelligence is indirectly correlated with parental wealth. But when you put kids from poor parents into rich households they will continue to do poorly. They do a bit better, but their biological parents still matters more. If it was easy to prod…

Intelligence is not completely due to genetics as you are suggesting and has to do more with socio-economic conditions. Read “guns germs and steel” for why human development through the ages has a lot do with just being at the right place at the right time.

> Intelligence is not completely due to genetics as you are suggesting and has to do more with socio-economic conditions

This goes against all of the scientific literature we have. Intelligence is determined by genetics. It can be artificially lowered via poor socio-economic conditions, but it mostly cannot be lifted by higher socio economic conditions. In laymans terms, a traumatic life can make a child who was otherwise going to be smart not so smart, but a good life cannot make a child who was going to be dumb intelligent. Socioeconomic conditions can lower the intelligence determined by genetics, they cannot improve intelligence determined by genetics.

Re: Poor in Tech

#509

Post by metalforever »

strken wrote: post #176
isomorph wrote: post #116

Many of the comments on this article are so cold. I can’t believe it. When I read the original article I was imagining all the constructive ways HN readers would interpret it and hold a mirror up to their own behaviour. Some commenters are doing this. But it surprises and depresses me how many people are commenting saying “no, this list isn’t what it says it is, it’s a list showing the author has a negative mindset /…

In some ways it's a laundry list of ways rich people in the Bay Area act like wankers, which is interesting, but also quite irritatingly stereotypical. There are plenty who don't refuse to talk to the cleaning staff, lecture others on their choice of tampon, or snob fat people at the gym. I don't want people from outside the bubble (e.g. me, three years ago) to read this and think they'll be surrounded by wall-to-wal…

I came from a family of coal miners and moved to the bay for a tech job. The second paragraph is more of the truth than I think people want to admit. People are nice, but they are also wankers. It’s not that there’s anything wrong with them a lot of the time, it’s just they are extremely, extremely naive and sometimes in their naive ness and lack of perspective say incredibly offensive things. You have to shrug it off like you are part of the in group even though they just insulted your family. No one told me about this part of the job in college.

Re: Poor in Tech

#510

Post by CountDrewku »

giantg2 wrote: post #121
DigitalSea wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are quite a few papers out there on the subject. As someone who has studied a little bit of sociology, I can tell you there are numerous sociological factors which basically determine that wealthier people have access to better food, better medical care and live healthier lives in comparison to lower-socioeconomic people. Where you live alone determines your health equity, if you live in a remote area or small…

"if you live in a remote area or small town away from a large city, your access to fresh and non-processed foods is heavily reduced." This simply isn't true. Most food deserts are in the poorer areas of the cities because nobody is bringing fresh produce in there to sell. If you live in the country or small town, many of these places have farm stands, farmers markets, and local farmers providing seasonal produce to t…

>ost food deserts are in the poorer areas of the cities because nobody is bringing fresh produce in there to sell.

Talking about things that simply aren't true.... Every major city in the US has a large farmer's market present and typically more than one happening in neighborhoods all over the city. These cities also have free/cheap public transportation to get people to the farmer's market. Additionally, you don't need a farmer's market to obtain healthy food, supermarkets are just fine.

The is just trope along the same lines of black people can't get their own ID's or figure out the internet. It's an incredibly racist way of thinking. They're not stupid or incapable people. If they want to they can certainly obtain healthy food.

Post reply on HN