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

671–680 of 817 posts

Re: Poor in Tech

#671

Post by bluecalm »

istjohn wrote: post #576
bluecalm wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opposition to welfare programs happens in countries without race related problems as well. How do you distinguish between such opposition if you're going along with "that affects particular race more that's why they oppose it" argument. You can paint everyone to be racist this way.

Opposition to welfare is not racist per se. But it has been used by politicians and pundits in the US as a dog whistle to drive a racial wedge between white and Black Americans. It's not explicit, and that's the point [0]. 0. https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/exclusive-lee-atwa...

Yeah, it has been used but the way the argument goes it's impossible to form an argument against a welfare program without being painted a racist.

What I mean is that a line of reasoning so often used these days: "this affects race X more therefore it's racist/racially motivated" is just incorrect thinking.

Re: Poor in Tech

#672

Post by Applejinx »

bsanr2 wrote: post #273
Applejinx wrote: post #155

"Three paychecks is a month and a half of income (rent and two car payments by my fevered calculations, which never stop)" Pay attention to those last three words. This is very important. I've been on both sides too, and to me those words are like a slap in the face: stark reality. If you're poor enough (relative to the costs of your life) you are at a constant exhausting deficit because you CANNOT stop calculating a…

Tl;dr Poor people (and racial and ethnic minorities, and women, and queer folk) are not dumb. They just have to turn their equal cognitive resources towards things other (and more fundamental to survival) than their magnum opus/business idea/etc. Those who overcome this are HIGHLY effective, but it's not fair that we ask it of them. That's not how an effective or efficient or just society runs, and we leave money on…

OP here: more like, if people's resources are NOT equal (and people's abilities are not really fungible: you can have someone who's not that great but has a novel POV, or a helpful trait) then this tilts things harshly against them.

You wind up with people who are not the brightest and greatest, burdened by massive cognitive overhead, hindered rather than groomed for success, and then as a society we turn around and look at the ones who were a bit better at stuff and point to their opulence and go 'look how MUCH better this person is!'

People don't have to be equal for this to be a concern. It's a matter of whether you think society's best served by finding the most exceptional person and then having them rule everything. Even if you were able to do that, even if the person IS quite superior, they will never measure up to the bar society sets for them. They're good, but they're not nearly as good as their wealth would make it appear.

And you look at poor people or people who are flat out failing at life. They're not good, but they're not NEARLY as not-good as their poverty would make it appear. You're seeing them at their worst, and it's a wasted resource on a colossal scale.

So this is basically the argument for 'create UBI under capitalism and dominate the world through the proliferation of cool GDP you create out of all your small business people'. Basically, 'one Elon Musk is useless compared to ten thousand folks a tenth as good as him'. :)

Re: Poor in Tech

#673

Post by giantg2 »

ryanbrunner wrote: post #644
giantg2 wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are farmers markets BS? "If you draw the food desert line at "no Whole Foods and no farmers market"" I don't think anyone is claiming that.

The idea that farmers markets are commonplace in rural areas is mostly BS. They exist in cities for sure, but you pretty much need an urban population (and probably a fairly well-off population) to really support a farmers market. Just because farms exist in an area doesn't generally mean the people in that area are getting their food from those farmers (at least directly). That's mostly a relic of an old vision of f…

Sure, the truly rural people aren't going to farmers markets, but the people in small towns and suburban areas do (this is in contrast to the "big city" in the original comment). Most rural people use a store for most stuff and then go to farm stores/stands/neighbors for other things.

There are still farms that produce a variety of produce. Many of them only produce them as a small percentage of their operation. For example, the dairy farm down the road plants sweet corn, tomatoes, peppers, watermelon, cantaloupe, and (not food, but) manure. I know of several other farms that do similar things.

Re: Poor in Tech

#674

Post by bluecalm »

jschwartzi wrote: post #608
bluecalm wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The society would benefit the most from policies that encourage smart and successful people to have more children.

I can think of at least one society that formed in the 1930's for which this was an absolute mandate! But I don't recall reading much about them past about 1945, so perhaps you should do some further research.

Yeah and welfare programs and heavy redistribution programs were tried by a society that caused several times more deaths and suffering than the one you mentioned over way longer period which we don't hear from anymore either. What kind of argument is that, seriously.

Re: Poor in Tech

#675

Post by berns »

kelnos wrote: post #631
tasuki wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just trying to put into perspective "poor people around the world" vs "poor people in the US". From my pov, if one can afford a car, it's a little rich to call oneself poor when compared to all the people who can't afford basic necessities. And no, a car isn't a basic necessity, not even in the US.

In most places in the US, if you don't have a car, you can't get to your job. Or you can, but it involves a fragile set of bus transfers that take you 2 hours (when driving would take 30 minutes) each way, and if you miss a transfer (because the transfers don't actually line up with any reasonable schedule), you're late and risk getting fired. So instead you add a 30 minute buffer in the morning and waste even more o…

Why aren't scooters more popular in the US? Does it have to do only with the weather?

Re: Poor in Tech

#676

Post by sillysaurusx »

lenocinor wrote: post #664
twic wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if we shadowbanned all comments for half an hour, or an hour?

I think this could be useful. Or maybe something like suppress the first half hour of comments and then show them all at once but in reverse chronological order.

It’s possible that the current system is fine as it is, and that Dan is simply explaining how it is. Suppressing comments is an interesting idea, but there are all kinds of second order effects — if it’s a disaster story, people need to communicate. If it’s not, the ranking algorithm would need to be adjusted, since the suppressed comments have an unfair time penalty. And so on.

Re: Poor in Tech

#677

Post by tasuki »

kelnos wrote: post #631
tasuki wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just trying to put into perspective "poor people around the world" vs "poor people in the US". From my pov, if one can afford a car, it's a little rich to call oneself poor when compared to all the people who can't afford basic necessities. And no, a car isn't a basic necessity, not even in the US.

In most places in the US, if you don't have a car, you can't get to your job. Or you can, but it involves a fragile set of bus transfers that take you 2 hours (when driving would take 30 minutes) each way, and if you miss a transfer (because the transfers don't actually line up with any reasonable schedule), you're late and risk getting fired. So instead you add a 30 minute buffer in the morning and waste even more o…

Agreed that everything is harder when one doesn't have money. Agreed that with kids, time is a lot more precious.

But in general... walking 5 miles each way doesn't sound impossible? Back before the pandemic, I walked 6km each way to a social gathering every week. I often walk errands up to ~8km each way.

Cycling... I used to cycle to work 12km each way year round, in temperatures as low as -10°C. Challenging? Yes (I didn't have especially fancy clothes and my hands were freezing). Impossible? No.

Re: Poor in Tech

#678

Post by kevinskii »

dang wrote: post #689
dang wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a case of the contrarian dynamic: an initial wave of objections to the article, followed by a wave of objections to the objections. The latter get upvoted, and so we end up with a top comment saying "I can't believe the comments in this thread" or (as in the current example) "the comments here are so $bad_somehow". Recent explanation here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27145616 . More: https://hn.algol…

Replies are welcome, but I've collapsed this subthread to prevent the page from going too far off topic. Sorry—I know that my comment is just as off topic. But it has an educational function (at least under optimistic assumptions) and that requires people seeing it.

Many of the "initial" comments here are at least as deliberate and thoughtful as the ensuing "objection" comments, including the one you replied to.

I agree that such a contrarian dynamic likely exists on HN, but you're not quite being fair in this illustration of it.

Re: Poor in Tech

#679

Post by sillysaurusx »

pnutjam wrote: post #462
Applejinx wrote: post #155

"Three paychecks is a month and a half of income (rent and two car payments by my fevered calculations, which never stop)" Pay attention to those last three words. This is very important. I've been on both sides too, and to me those words are like a slap in the face: stark reality. If you're poor enough (relative to the costs of your life) you are at a constant exhausting deficit because you CANNOT stop calculating a…

I noticed where the writer found out they were the lowest paid person. This is how the wealthy class really keep people from moving up. Your pay is forever tied to what you used to make. It's hard enough to break the circuit in your mind, it's near impossible to do so with your employer. At my current employer, they offered me a 10% paycut to convert from contract to FTE. I could not afford that, but I also can't aff…

Don’t ever tell a new company how much you currently make. And if you’re not looking for a new company, you’re selling yourself short. Of course the current company isn’t going to give much; why would they?

Everyone here is talking about it like the company owes you something. They don’t owe you anything. And it goes both ways: you don’t owe them. So get out on the job market and get yourself what you’re worth.

Re: Poor in Tech

#680

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

>> I knew I was the only poor person at my tech startup because people kept bragging their bodily purity based on what they would not eat or drink, and I could only feel pity for them.

Is it common to use "bragging" in this way?

Post reply on HN