Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes

#221

Post by rdtsc » Tue, Jun 04, 2013, 6:40 PM UTC

flagnog wrote: post #142

mikeash wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why exactly is this worth noting? Nobody jumps to point out that there's still somebody paying for the "free" tiers of Dropbox or GitHub or whatever. Yet the moment somebody mentions a "free" social program, people suddenly have to hammer on the point that somebody pays for it. We're not a bunch of imbeciles who think that social programs just rain from the sky....

Regardless whether or not people are imbeciles, they still have a habit of abstracting away common knowledge, and then forgetting that the common knowledge exists. I see this all the time in the computer industry. It's good to remind everyone now and again that free is not necessarily free.

Thinking about it though, if you are assuming people are operating at that level and don't understand what the "free" means in this context, do you really think a simple explanation will all of the sudden enlighten them?

Using the analogy and talking about common knowledge in computer industry, this is basic enough that's the equivalent of "most computers need an electrical supply to work". If you are talking to someone about building a data center or scaling out a database and then you need to remind them that computers don't work based on unicorns but on electricity not sure if it makes sense to even remind them or continue the conversation.

Re: Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes

#222

Post by anigbrowl » Tue, Jun 04, 2013, 7:01 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #213

anigbrowl wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most babies come with perfectly serviceable thumbs for this purpose.

Babies can't figure out how to suck their thumbs right off the bat. Mine took months to master it.

True, though some start in the womb; it is a semi-instinctual behavior. I favor it because I think it promotes cognitive development, whereas a pacifier does not. Admittedly the calculus of this looks a bit different when the baby wakes up at 4am, after finally going to sleep at 2am.

Re: Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes

#223

Post by Symmetry » Tue, Jun 04, 2013, 7:07 PM UTC

RyanMcGreal wrote: post #74

Now this is my kind of nanny state. A thought: This program started for low-income families but was extended after a few years to all families. The nice thing about universality rather than means testing is that a) middle class families are more apt to continue supporting it if they can experience its benefits first-hand; b) you save the money that would otherwise be spent testing, enforcing and auditing the system;…

Also (d), it doesn't create a disincentive increasing one's income. It's pretty easy to get into a situation in the US where you have more money making 30K a year than 35K, just because you lose access to means-tested benefits.

Re: Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes

#224

Post by at-fates-hands » Tue, Jun 04, 2013, 7:29 PM UTC

nawitus wrote: post #206

at-fates-hands wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great idea, until you remember Finland has a population of about 5 million. LA itself has a population of almost 4 million. While I think this a great idea, it's pretty easy to do with such a small population. Once you start talking about a scale the size of the US, it gets rather spendy in a hurry.

The cost per capita is the same, so your argument doesn't really make sense. By the way, I see that argument every single time when someone proposes the USA to do something better. "It's a big country, we can't fix anything".

Until you consider how the US Government runs any program into the ground, is blanketed with regulations and bureaucracy, and generally hurts the people who it's supposed to help.

Here's a few examples just in case you need some evidence:

The US Postal Service: http://www.economicfreedom.org/2012/12/12/stamping-out-waste...

The War on Poverty: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/062612-616212-war-o...

Medicare: http://www.aei.org/article/health/entitlements/medicare/why-...

Cash for Clunkers: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020488440457436...

You can also add these to the list:

Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, AmTrak, No Child Left Behind, and the Fair Housing Act.

I would be more in favor if the government had a good track record with some of these programs, but when you see how horrible these programs are run, you feel like we really can't seem to fix anything. Sad but true

Re: Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes

#225

Post by efa » Tue, Jun 04, 2013, 7:49 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #124

jan_g wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is worth noting that all this is not free, but paid for by the tax payer. Many European countries have similar arrangements. Personally, I think all this is money well spent by the governments as it gives nice financial boost to young parents and a sense that someone/something cares about them and their baby.

Why exactly is this worth noting? Nobody jumps to point out that there's still somebody paying for the "free" tiers of Dropbox or GitHub or whatever. Yet the moment somebody mentions a "free" social program, people suddenly have to hammer on the point that somebody pays for it. We're not a bunch of imbeciles who think that social programs just rain from the sky....

There are many imbeciles who think that social programs just rain from the sky. Maybe not so much here.

Re: Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes

#226

Post by mathieuh » Tue, Jun 04, 2013, 7:50 PM UTC

at-fates-hands wrote: post #163

RyanMcGreal wrote: post #74

Now this is my kind of nanny state. A thought: This program started for low-income families but was extended after a few years to all families. The nice thing about universality rather than means testing is that a) middle class families are more apt to continue supporting it if they can experience its benefits first-hand; b) you save the money that would otherwise be spent testing, enforcing and auditing the system;…

This is a great idea, until you remember Finland has a population of about 5 million. LA itself has a population of almost 4 million. While I think this a great idea, it's pretty easy to do with such a small population. Once you start talking about a scale the size of the US, it gets rather spendy in a hurry.

Did you not read about economies of scale when you were reading whatever libertarian crap you found?

Re: Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes

#227

Post by randallsquared » Tue, Jun 04, 2013, 7:55 PM UTC

tych0 wrote: post #214

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is in the nature of some people on the libertarian / autistic / engineering spectrum to look at any issue out there and reduce it to trivial financial arithmetic. It's not out of ill will, it's just that this is their entire reality.

His point was that the financial arithmetic isn't prohibitive. A box full of stuff costs the same amount whether you give out 5 million or 300 million (in fact, economics of scale says that the US could probably do it cheaper than Finland can). We have 300 million people (or whatever the birthrate is) which is certainly more than Finland has, but we also then have 300 million taxpayers. Sure, the absolute cost is hig…

Well, about 300 million people, but less than 100 million taxpayers. About 130 million workers in the US [1], of whom about 30% have a negative income tax rate[2]. Doesn't completely change your point, since less than half of Finland's population works as well[3], but I thought it worth mentioning.

[1] http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/05/employed-persons-1999-2...

[2] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/09/18/w...

[3] http://www.tradingeconomics.com/finland/employed-persons

Re: Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes

#228

Post by nawitus » Tue, Jun 04, 2013, 7:59 PM UTC

at-fates-hands wrote: post #224

nawitus wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost per capita is the same, so your argument doesn't really make sense. By the way, I see that argument every single time when someone proposes the USA to do something better. "It's a big country, we can't fix anything".

Until you consider how the US Government runs any program into the ground, is blanketed with regulations and bureaucracy, and generally hurts the people who it's supposed to help. Here's a few examples just in case you need some evidence: The US Postal Service: http://www.economicfreedom.org/2012/12/12/stamping-out-waste... The War on Poverty: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/062612-616212-war-o... Medicare:…

"Until you consider how the US Government runs any program into the ground, is blanketed with regulations and bureaucracy, and generally hurts the people who it's supposed to help."

Sounds exactly like the complaints I read on my social feed from fellow Finns :).

Re: Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes

#229

Post by bzbarsky » Tue, Jun 04, 2013, 8:06 PM UTC

Trufa wrote: post #123

bzbarsky wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because some people basically go batshit crazy when they find out and start getting you super-strongly gendered stuff, and you want to put off having to deal with that crap for as long as possible is one reason. For example, if you have a baby shower _before_ the birth (yes, ok, you're having a baby shower to start with) and you haven't told people the gender, there's only so much bad they can do along those lines...

Interesting perspective, thanks!

No problem. :)

Note that my experiences with this are all in the US. Now that I think about it, in cultures where there is more pressure to have kids of the "right" gender, there are other really good reasons to not tell people the gender even if you know...

Re: Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes

#230

Post by snowwrestler » Tue, Jun 04, 2013, 8:19 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #124

jan_g wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is worth noting that all this is not free, but paid for by the tax payer. Many European countries have similar arrangements. Personally, I think all this is money well spent by the governments as it gives nice financial boost to young parents and a sense that someone/something cares about them and their baby.

Why exactly is this worth noting? Nobody jumps to point out that there's still somebody paying for the "free" tiers of Dropbox or GitHub or whatever. Yet the moment somebody mentions a "free" social program, people suddenly have to hammer on the point that somebody pays for it. We're not a bunch of imbeciles who think that social programs just rain from the sky....

I disagree, there is a tremendous amount of discussion here on HN about the real cost of "free" services, particularly in light of the recent end of Google Reader, sale of Instapaper, etc.