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

141–150 of 174 posts

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

#141

Post by tchalla »

skinfaxi wrote: post #64
numeri wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The overly charitable comment is exactly how I meant it. Let me phrase it a bit differently, if this study would be let’s say from Finland … it would have been the most straightforward comment to make. But it’s the US so it’s not.

You don’t need to delete your comment. It’s not a big deal. We all have different days.

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

#142

Post by gblargg »

Nevermark wrote: post #132

This is a gross oversimplification of my experience with conservative vs. liberal friends. But there is enough truth in it to at least be worth the humor. My conservative friends respond to a problem by mashing all its symptoms, and often operate on assumptions they have never tested. And would resist testing. My liberal friends respond to a solution, veering away hard from the solution's costs, without first asking…

Do you have any concrete examples of this? I'm having trouble picturing these.

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

#143

Post by inigyou »

conception wrote: post #127
inigyou wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The market would probably solve it if you fired all the bureaucrats but there may be other side effects to that

Because there was no homeless before government programs. It’s like history was the first casualty of late stage capitalism and no one knows about the new deal or the war on poverty.

They had homes, cardboard box homes. Then the government said a home couldn't be a cardboard box, and confiscated the cardboard boxes and now they sleep on benches.

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

#144

Post by inigyou »

brabel wrote: post #139
DeluluDon wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was homeless for 6 years in the PNW due to PTSD. A lot of people do not, under any circumstances, feel comfortable sleeping next to a violent offender, child abuser, or gang member. So they sleep outside and risk a lot instead. When I was there, I counted about 2 drug users out of 100 people in a shelter in Spokane, Washington. The rest were either ex convicts, disabled/mental issues, or just simply lost their home…

I thought most homeless were drug addicts?! It’s hard to believe a healthy person could fall into homelessness. Maybe as OC mentioned only those who don’t do drugs go to shelters.

Suppose you got surprise evicted tomorrow and you didn't have any family nearby, you'd be homeless too.

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

#145

Post by inigyou »

gblargg wrote: post #142
Nevermark wrote: post #132

This is a gross oversimplification of my experience with conservative vs. liberal friends. But there is enough truth in it to at least be worth the humor. My conservative friends respond to a problem by mashing all its symptoms, and often operate on assumptions they have never tested. And would resist testing. My liberal friends respond to a solution, veering away hard from the solution's costs, without first asking…

Do you have any concrete examples of this? I'm having trouble picturing these.

I think GP means "masking" instead of "mashing"? And then:

Conservative: "homelessness is a problem! make homelessness illegal and people will get homes because they are homeless by choice!" ("is there any evidence that people are homeless by choice?" *crickets*)

Liberal: "defund the police!" ("but who would deter petty crime?" *crickets*)

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

#146

Post by mettamage »

mettamage wrote: post #115
golly_ned wrote: post #94

My favorite is ignoring or downplaying a problem. 95% of apparent 'problems' are best ignored in favor of solving the worthwhile 5%. Sometimes this means 'creating' a new problem by pointing to something unconsidered that's 10x more important.

I do this at work a lot and often the problem goes away because the stakeholders above me couldn't agree on the problem being important enough to solve for a long enough time. When a problem survives this, usually it's worth solving.

I normally don't write stuff like this but I did not expect 9 upvotes. I expected a karma hit (but I prefer to just write honestly what I think). That's informative, thank you.

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

#147

Post by wqaatwt »

im3w1l wrote: post #124
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…

I think you could solve homelessness really simple by allowing something like a favela. It will be an eyesore so pick an area out of sight of rich people. Then split it into like idk 200sqft plots. Give everyone enough corrugated steel to build a primitive shelter. Have like a central sanitation place with a shitton of toilets and showers.

[dead]

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

#148

Post by jryle70 »

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...

They asked a tough question that needs to be addressed. It's as necessary as "is there a place for assisted suicide?" question.

They proposed 1) Address large markets; 2) Address disorders with high incidence; and 3) Constant innovation and portfolio expansion.

Does that sound like to you they proposed not curing patients?

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

#149

Post by brabel »

inigyou wrote: post #144
brabel wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought most homeless were drug addicts?! It’s hard to believe a healthy person could fall into homelessness. Maybe as OC mentioned only those who don’t do drugs go to shelters.

Suppose you got surprise evicted tomorrow and you didn't have any family nearby, you'd be homeless too.

You only end up on the streets if a lot of things go really wrong :

No family nearby. No friends willing to take you. No money to pay for rent even in the cheapest areas. No cheap temporary accommodation nearby of any sort. No government provided emergency housing available.

If you want to make it personal, I live in Sweden. There are lots of options available and no one lives on the streets if not for a mental illness that prevents you from seeking help, as help is available and easy to get. You can get a salary for indeterminate amount of time and pay for your own accommodation as long as you show you’re looking for jobs. If your job pays too little you can get a stipend from the government to pay for rent and food. So yeah I am sure I would never get homeless even if everything went wrong for me. If you live in a country where that’s not the case, you should really question what should the priorities of your country be (notice that basically all developed countries in the world and even many developing ones provide everything I mentioned above, with possibly one single, big exception).

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

#150

Post by x3qt »

inigyou wrote: post #145
gblargg wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any concrete examples of this? I'm having trouble picturing these.

I think GP means "masking" instead of "mashing"? And then: Conservative: "homelessness is a problem! make homelessness illegal and people will get homes because they are homeless by choice!" ("is there any evidence that people are homeless by choice?" *crickets*) Liberal: "defund the police!" ("but who would deter petty crime?" *crickets*)

I grew up in Minsk (2M people) and seen obviously homeless person just once in my entire life. It's not illegal to be factually homeless, but illegal to do everything homeless people usually do, unlike in Berlin, where I live nowadays, like sleeping outdoors, camping (insane!), being intoxicated etc. In Minsk such people instantly removed into correction facilities, thus cities are clean and more importantly safe.
Post reply on HN