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

The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

sightlessscribbles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 510 posts

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#291

Post by InsideOutSanta »

dwedge wrote: post #261
0x3f wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in my experience bureaucrats fall into a position they enjoy. What possible kind of 'experience' could you have to judge such a thing, save for personal preconceptions and biases?

The only experience I can have is personal. In my experience of dealing with and working with them, only those that I've had experience with. I've worked in a variety of places. Public sector, banks, places with higher and lower levels of bureaucracy. As everyone else, I've also been on the receiving end of dealing with bureaucracy. There seems to be a big divide in how long people have been working at places like th…

"Assuming that it's a preconception and not observed is a bizarre assumption."

It's really not, it's basic psychology. People rarely change their opinions based on evidence.

Having said that, in 50 years on this planet and countless interactions with government employees, I haven't had a single bad one. I do try to be kind and accommodating because I know their jobs are often shit and they have to deal with asshats all day long, and maybe that has an impact on how they treat me.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#292

Post by elephanlemon »

perching_aix wrote: post #270

I found this story very surprising in a number of ways, so I gave some of the details a quick search. According to the docs linked, there are two forms at play, SSA-454 and SSA-455. The author likely had to have an SSA-455 filled, as his condition is of a "Medical Improvement Not Expected" type (this differentiation does exist). Seems that this needs to be done every 5-7 years. Both can be filled online apparently th…

The entire blog is probably generated by OpenClawd or the like. I don’t think it’s a real story.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#293

Post by maweaver »

RobotToaster wrote: post #151
raincole wrote: post #126

> It is a letter that arrives every few years from the government, asking a question that is medically absurd and philosophically insulting: "Are you still disabled?" It... doesn't sound like an absurd practice at all. There are curable disabilities. And what's curable changes along with the advance of technology. It sounds about right to review the situation every a few years.

> There are curable disabilities. True, but it should be obvious in 99% of cases if a condition is lifelong. >And what's curable changes along with the advance of technology. Very rarely tbh. I can't think of a single lifelong condition that was cured in the last decade. Even then it should be trivial to only review cases when a cure is available, by searching the database for people with that condition.

Relevant to this story, laser eye surgery was developed in the late 80s/early 90s and can improve sight to the level that some who were legally blind no longer are.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#294

Post by volkercraig »

john_strinlai wrote: post #59
wholinator2 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree wholeheartedly! This is exactly what i was thinking the entire time. Like, does this guy think this single woman is responsible for the kafka-esque trap they're both in? Will the 0.5% uptick in toner cost for the year cause the administration to rethink their requirements? He's just taken the immense weight and pain he holds for this process, undeservedly, and placed it upon another undeserving person, then l…

> then laughed at her anguish. anguish? as in, "excruciating pain" or "agonizing torment"? i dont understand where the "anguish" comes from. he didnt yell at her, berate her, hit her, cause her to be fired, submit a malicious complaint, or anything of the sort. he sent her a long fax. oh no! if i was in her position, i would shrug and hand my boss the 500 pieces of paper. if you are just a cog in the machine, it is n…

> if i was in her position, i would shrug and hand my boss the 500 pieces of paper.

yeah honestly. If I was in that position I'd probably think it's funny and just stick the whole stack in a folder and laugh about the dumb process.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#295

Post by idontwantthis »

tyingq wrote: post #18

Sounds like it's not real but... It reads like an indictment of the government employee personally, rather than the rules and constraints that employee is forced to use. Probably fair to comment on the interaction, whether the person was rude, and so on. But blaming them for not accepting email is kind of silly. They are not empowered to do that kind of thing.

The most unreal part is Karen calling him back. I never get called back by anyone in any office anymore.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#296

Post by card_zero »

Etherlord87 wrote: post #112
wholinator2 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree wholeheartedly! This is exactly what i was thinking the entire time. Like, does this guy think this single woman is responsible for the kafka-esque trap they're both in? Will the 0.5% uptick in toner cost for the year cause the administration to rethink their requirements? He's just taken the immense weight and pain he holds for this process, undeservedly, and placed it upon another undeserving person, then l…

I see this type of an argumentation very often and I strongly disagree. You're removing all responsibility from an actor that is a part of a bigger thing. Imagine if you slapped someone on his hand for doing something wrong, and he or someone else argued what you did is wrong because it wasn't that hand that has offended. I'm an antitheist but the Bible (gospels) put it well "The student is not above his master" [tra…

The Bible of course also says "if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee", which is where I thought you were going with this at first. The Bible says a lot of things.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#297

Post by InsideOutSanta »

dwedge wrote: post #268
iso1631 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody enjoys working in a call centre

This is a bit of a strawman. Not all customer facing roles are call centres, and not all bureaucracy actually comes from above. I'll give you an example. A couple of years ago I changed the address on my car but didn't receive the documentation and didn't realise for a few months. Then I realised the tax was due and I hadn't had a reminder or this paperwork - one of which is needed to tax it. I phoned them and they s…

> I'm baffled that people in this thread are acting like almost everyone hasn't had a similar experience at one time or another.

Nobody is saying that. Government employees have bad days, too, and some are probably just assholes. That's a far cry from saying malicious stuff like "bureaucrats fall into a position they enjoy. They often seem to take a perverse pride in this job."

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#298

Post by p_l »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #142
Etherlord87 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine what would happen if everyone did what the author did. The system would collapse. I think you put a wrong diagnosis that the author couldn't possibly affect the administration. Maybe not much, maybe there was only a chance, but statistically he did put some pressure on that organization.

More likely they'd just cancel the benefits.

The process described is literally an attempt at canceling benefits in "frog boiling" method. If Tories went straight to canceling benefits, they would end up in trouble, by making worst possible process they could put it in terms of "verifying eligibility and that benefit funds are not scammed out".

Similar approaches are utilized in other areas of british government, unfortunately.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#299

Post by gosub100 »

Etherlord87 wrote: post #112
wholinator2 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree wholeheartedly! This is exactly what i was thinking the entire time. Like, does this guy think this single woman is responsible for the kafka-esque trap they're both in? Will the 0.5% uptick in toner cost for the year cause the administration to rethink their requirements? He's just taken the immense weight and pain he holds for this process, undeservedly, and placed it upon another undeserving person, then l…

I see this type of an argumentation very often and I strongly disagree. You're removing all responsibility from an actor that is a part of a bigger thing. Imagine if you slapped someone on his hand for doing something wrong, and he or someone else argued what you did is wrong because it wasn't that hand that has offended. I'm an antitheist but the Bible (gospels) put it well "The student is not above his master" [tra…

This is exactly what I do with telemarketer scammers. I have no limit of depravity that I draw from in attempt to offend them. No limits. And exactly for the reasons you describe. Get them to crack and quit the company.

Re: The 'paperwork flood': How I drowned a bureaucrat before dinner

#300

Post by _DeadFred_ »

ryandrake wrote: post #208
Etherlord87 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see this type of an argumentation very often and I strongly disagree. You're removing all responsibility from an actor that is a part of a bigger thing. Imagine if you slapped someone on his hand for doing something wrong, and he or someone else argued what you did is wrong because it wasn't that hand that has offended. I'm an antitheist but the Bible (gospels) put it well "The student is not above his master" [tra…

> From the perspective of the effect, if you make life of an employee miserable, the employee is more likely to resign or ask for a raise, this does apply some pressure. Not meaningful pressure, though, at least for large organizations. This is a variant of the flawed "vote with your wallet" argument: One wallet changes nothing. Even 100 or 1000 wallets change nothing. These huge businesses and huge governments are t…

How's Target doing? Zero impact?
Post reply on HN