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

Three ways people respond to a problem (other than solving it)

improvesomething.today

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 174 posts

Re: Three ways people respond to a problem (other than solving it)

#61

Post by cwmoore »

have_faith wrote: post #23
didgetmaster wrote: post #20

People often attribute the government's inability to solve a problem even after throwing billions of dollars at it; as a sign of incompetence. While there is plenty of incompetence within government; I think the 'Preserve the Problem' response is mostly to blame. If we 'solved' crime, homelessness, drug use, poverty, etc.; then budgets would decrease and political power would diminish. Those in charge of solving the…

Does anyone within the system genuinely feel threatened by the idea that something like "crime" can be "solved" to the point that they're avoiding solving too much crime? Same logic for the others.

The homeless provide a visible incentive to work harder and pay more in rent, and property owners and other taxpayers certainly engage city services (mostly enforcement) in competitive battle for the big bucks. There’s a lot of unrecognized coercion built into the incentive structure underneath the f** y* money tiers. About 50,000,000 hours every day are spent in incarceration, and however many salaries for corrections jobs. The same kinds of system have been around since medieval times.

Re: Three ways people respond to a problem (other than solving it)

#62

Post by izacus »

edoceo wrote: post #51
grim_io wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Big Pharma is trying to preserve cancer. Wake up sheeple!

Goldman Sachs asks in biotech research report: ‘Is curing patients a sustainable business model?’ https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/11/goldman-asks-is-curing-patie...

Famously, a pharma company.

Re: Three ways people respond to a problem (other than solving it)

#63

Post by tikhonj »

SoftTalker wrote: post #44
MattGrommes wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm genuinely curious about even a hypothetical more detailed example of how some group would go about preserving a problem like homelessness, even unintentionally. I can't wrap my mind about how it would actually happen beyond simplistic sayings. I live in Portland, OR where we have a large homeless problem and I continually hear that the groups being given money to help are incentivized to keep homelessness high fo…

In the homelessness example, it's not so much that the programs and groups want to justify their continued existence (though that might be happening too). It's that the programs themselves incentivize more of the problem. When they give things to homeless people, such as food, shelter, clothes, social services, even needles and a "safe place" to get high in some cases, and often with few or no conditions, they make b…

None of those things make homelessness appealing in any absolute sense. Like, if people had a (reasonable-to-them) path to getting a home, the vast majority would go for it even if there were a bunch of services available.

The real answer is that the electorate is vehemently opposed to providing paths like that if those paths feel even remotely like "unfair handouts". Votes hate that idea even if it would be empirically cheaper. We collectively preserve the problem of homelessness because we feel like people who can't/won't work deserve to be unhappy, because we believe that we need the threat of homelessness to coerce people into working, because we believe people on drugs/etc are undisciplined and immoral, because... well, you get the idea.

Re: Three ways people respond to a problem (other than solving it)

#64

Post by skinfaxi »

numeri wrote: post #49
skinfaxi wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, kind of obvious from the .gov right?

I read the comment you're replying to as saying, "in the US, but other countries may have different policies that result in lower recidivism, and that might change the conclusion; maybe people aren't inherently criminally insane, but can become useful members of society, if given a chance"

While I think your interpretation is possibly overly charitable, I agree my comment was unwarranted and unnecessary. I can't delete it at this point.

Re: Three ways people respond to a problem (other than solving it)

#65

Post by yongjik »

didgetmaster wrote: post #20

People often attribute the government's inability to solve a problem even after throwing billions of dollars at it; as a sign of incompetence. While there is plenty of incompetence within government; I think the 'Preserve the Problem' response is mostly to blame. If we 'solved' crime, homelessness, drug use, poverty, etc.; then budgets would decrease and political power would diminish. Those in charge of solving the…

The interesting twist is: now what does that tell us about people who say they will cut the waste of government incompetence?

Re: Three ways people respond to a problem (other than solving it)

#66

Post by Tangurena2 »

MattGrommes wrote: post #38
didgetmaster wrote: post #20

People often attribute the government's inability to solve a problem even after throwing billions of dollars at it; as a sign of incompetence. While there is plenty of incompetence within government; I think the 'Preserve the Problem' response is mostly to blame. If we 'solved' crime, homelessness, drug use, poverty, etc.; then budgets would decrease and political power would diminish. Those in charge of solving the…

I'm genuinely curious about even a hypothetical more detailed example of how some group would go about preserving a problem like homelessness, even unintentionally. I can't wrap my mind about how it would actually happen beyond simplistic sayings. I live in Portland, OR where we have a large homeless problem and I continually hear that the groups being given money to help are incentivized to keep homelessness high fo…

> would go about preserving a problem like homelessness

My state chose to outlaw homelessness [0] and to make it illegal for cities & counties to offer places to lawfully camp unless the campsites are basically enough to be KOA Campgrounds.

Actually solving homelessness is politically unacceptable, therefore it will be criminalized & preserved.

Notes:

0 - The crime is "unlawful camping".

Re: Three ways people respond to a problem (other than solving it)

#67

Post by Tangurena2 »

shermantanktop wrote: post #11
jagged-chisel wrote: post #6

> … they inadvertently perpetuate the problem “Inadvertently”? Seldom.

Do you think people look in the mirror and say “I’m going to be a terrible person today?” They look in the mirror and say “good job playing the hand you’re dealt - keep it up!” even while what they do is objectively terrible. Humans have an incredible capacity for rationalizing their own behavior.

> Do you think people look in the mirror and say “I’m going to be a terrible person today?”

There are plenty of people who are motivated by hurting/harming their "enemies". You may have heard them brag "own the libs", or similar rhetoric, while doing something objectively terrible.

Re: Three ways people respond to a problem (other than solving it)

#68

Post by HPsquared »

didgetmaster wrote: post #20

People often attribute the government's inability to solve a problem even after throwing billions of dollars at it; as a sign of incompetence. While there is plenty of incompetence within government; I think the 'Preserve the Problem' response is mostly to blame. If we 'solved' crime, homelessness, drug use, poverty, etc.; then budgets would decrease and political power would diminish. Those in charge of solving the…

It becomes a "problem farming" situation. Someone who profits from a problem existing, will work to preserve the problem either consciously or unconsciously, or perhaps even just through a process of evolution.

This applies to both public and private spheres. Just as justice systems farm criminals, dating apps farm romantically frustrated people and so on.

Re: Three ways people respond to a problem (other than solving it)

#69

Post by jcs »

black6 wrote: post #14

The company for which I work seems to be run by engineers. When learning to be an engineer you're taught that doing nothing is always a valid option. In Army leadership courses we were taught that ANY decision is better than NO decision. My company is stifled by a bunch of engineers in leadership positions who always choose to defer up the chain rather than make a decision themselves.

The person who decides owns the risk. The cost of waiting is spread across the whole team, so escalating is usually the safer move for the individual.

Re: Three ways people respond to a problem (other than solving it)

#70

Post by wat10000 »

edoceo wrote: post #51
grim_io wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Big Pharma is trying to preserve cancer. Wake up sheeple!

Goldman Sachs asks in biotech research report: ‘Is curing patients a sustainable business model?’ https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/11/goldman-asks-is-curing-patie...

That report proposed three pretty reasonable approaches to this problem, and none of them were "avoid curing diseases."
Post reply on HN