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

Techies Are the New Puritans

newrepublic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 150 posts

Re: Techies Are the New Puritans

#91

Post by aaronem »

betterunix wrote: post #18
aaronem wrote: post #2

> In the Puritan model of charity, the rich have an obligation to do good for the poor—but the poor also have an obligation to the rich, to try to be a useful part of the same society. The article's author not only disagrees, but considers this model so obviously erroneous that she doesn't see any need to explain what's wrong with it. I find this unhelpful, because it fails to explain why subsidizing people who contr…

"I find this unhelpful, because it fails to explain why subsidizing people who contribute nothing to society, in such fashion as to provide an incentive to continue contributing nothing to society, is in any way a good idea." That is the price of having a social safety net. You are not just subsidizing people who contribute nothing. Some day you might be in need of some help despite all your productivity.

That seems a rather selfish way of looking at the matter, to say nothing of how you carefully ignore the dependent clause beginning 'in such fashion...'

But, since you bring personalities into it: No one can eat pride, of course, and if I'm in a tight enough spot, I don't kid myself other than that I'll do what's needful to stay alive, and wait to earn back my self-respect until I can afford it again. But on the day I beg for succor, I hope I have the good fortune so to do from someone who respects me highly enough to let me work for what I need, instead of offering mere unearned largess by means of which to enhance his own opinion of himself at the cost of my humiliation.

Re: Techies Are the New Puritans

#92

Post by aaronem »

pron wrote: post #25
aaronem wrote: post #2

> In the Puritan model of charity, the rich have an obligation to do good for the poor—but the poor also have an obligation to the rich, to try to be a useful part of the same society. The article's author not only disagrees, but considers this model so obviously erroneous that she doesn't see any need to explain what's wrong with it. I find this unhelpful, because it fails to explain why subsidizing people who contr…

She doesn't explain because because this model really is so obviously erroneous, but only after you accumulate enough experiences in life, or, if you want a shortcut, after you read enough books written by those who have experienced a thing or two. Some things can't be explained in a few sentences, because they are not mathematically true, but happen to be true in this particular world of ours. Sometimes, it's hard t…

You do me the compliment, sir, of mistaking me for a child, and I thank you for it. But perhaps you will consider that not everyone's experience leads to the same conclusions you draw from your own.

Re: Techies Are the New Puritans

#93

Post by aaronem »

gaius wrote: post #21
aaronem wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Philosophical traditions, is it? How about "By the sweat of thy brow shalt thou earn thy daily bread"? And, while I'm at it, "The poor will always be with you"?

And Marx wrote "from each according to his ability" before "to each according to his need". How did non-contributors fare in Marxists states? Well they were sent to forced labour camps where they worked or they starved.

I tend to consider the Soviet experiment a subset of the general Progressive one, which sheds no complimentary light on the latter -- but, for those who cleave to it, "no true Scotsman" seems spackle enough to cover the cracks.

Re: Techies Are the New Puritans

#94

Post by Segmentation »

pg wrote: post #61

This all based on a tiny amount of anecdotal evidence: one post and a reply by his friend. It's like a pyramid balanced on its apex. The interesting thing about this article, to me, is what it shows about how much demand there is for this idea.

> This all based on a tiny amount of anecdotal evidence: one post and a reply by his friend.

Maybe, but the reaction on Twitter and in this thread is proof that a lot of techies have this puritan attitude toward homeless. The blog was being sensational to expose this.

Re: Techies Are the New Puritans

#95

Post by Crito »

jarrett wrote: post #73
Crito wrote: post #17

I suppose the elephant in the room is whether or not 'techies' are repulsed by the homeless because accusations like "...[they] spit, urinate, taunt you, sell drugs, get rowdy..." have a basis in reality. I don't live in SF, so I can only go off what I hear (from the accused 'techies', so I'm only getting one side of the propaganda here..), but what I have heard is that 1) the homeless really seem to love SF, preferr…

First, we need to distinguish between homelessness and poverty on the one hand, and crime on the other. The two may overlap for some individuals (just as wealth and crime overlap for some), but they're by no means synonymous. The legitimate complaints about the homeless in SF seem to always revolve around criminal acts: Assault and vandalism, mostly. (The less legitimate complaints are usually a variant on "I shouldn…

I agree that whatever the situation, remembering that not all of the broader group are responsible for all of the publicly visible actions. It may be the homeless, bar hoppers, or students that are causing elevated crime in some area, but it is important to remember that not every homeless person, Friday night drinker, or student is a public menace by association.

Still, if we want to know why the general public is displeased with college students in some hypothetical town, we should ask ourselves if there really is a problem with bored college students lobbing beer bottles through windows for fun. The hypothesis "The general public is frustrated with the local college kids because a highly visible minority of them wreck up the place" should probably be examined before we jump on board with less... direct.. hypotheses.

Re: Techies Are the New Puritans

#96

Post by aaronem »

wdewind wrote: post #84
jarrett wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, we need to distinguish between homelessness and poverty on the one hand, and crime on the other. The two may overlap for some individuals (just as wealth and crime overlap for some), but they're by no means synonymous. The legitimate complaints about the homeless in SF seem to always revolve around criminal acts: Assault and vandalism, mostly. (The less legitimate complaints are usually a variant on "I shouldn…

Even the ones who do commit assault and vandalism are deserving of compassion, perhaps even more so.

Of course! They'll never have a chance to improve themselves if they're never shown the error of their ways.

Re: Techies Are the New Puritans

#97

Post by 7Figures2Commas »

Crito wrote: post #17

I suppose the elephant in the room is whether or not 'techies' are repulsed by the homeless because accusations like "...[they] spit, urinate, taunt you, sell drugs, get rowdy..." have a basis in reality. I don't live in SF, so I can only go off what I hear (from the accused 'techies', so I'm only getting one side of the propaganda here..), but what I have heard is that 1) the homeless really seem to love SF, preferr…

That's not the elephant in the room.

The elephant in the room is the fact that tech companies and startups have been setting up shop in the very parts of the city where homelessness, crime and the behavior described have long been problems.

That doesn't mean that these issues shouldn't be addressed, but I cannot for the life of me understand why "techies" have been flocking to areas of San Francisco where the average person would likely not feel safe the minute the sun goes down.

As an example: I once went to an event at a venture-backed startup that chose to locate itself in an unsightly part of town in what was previously an auto body shop. It was literally right next door to an adult entertainment shop. Who in their right mind does this and doesn't expect to encounter unseemly behavior?

Re: Techies Are the New Puritans

#98

Post by ars_technician »

busterarm wrote: post #83
jjoonathan wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly! I come from a middle-class background. Not trust-fund level, but enough to shield me from the catch-22s of poverty. It disturbs me, when I reflect back on my life, just how many "steps to success" would have been complicated had my family been lower on the economic totem pole. It disturbs me even more how many of my peers (disproportionately many of which share the same background) don't acknowledge this fac…

> It's easy to be a libertarian when the market is treating you well. I'm really glad that my brief flirtation with libertarian ideas didn't even last into my 20s. It was more like an unfortunate stepping stone from growing up in a Limbaugh household to being the radical lefty I am today. Though I try not to identify with any of that either. At least I can understand where libertarians are coming from. It's really th…

>It's really the objectivism and the worship of Ayn Rand in privileged and powerful economic/political circles that makes me worry about the future.

Be honest. How much Ayn Rand have you actually read? It's a very common strawman to pretend that Ayn Rand was promoting social darwinism. If you truly are just worried about objectivism, what is it that you have a problem with? People being shunned for harming instead of contributing?

Re: Techies Are the New Puritans

#99

Post by lolwutf »

Crito wrote: post #17

I suppose the elephant in the room is whether or not 'techies' are repulsed by the homeless because accusations like "...[they] spit, urinate, taunt you, sell drugs, get rowdy..." have a basis in reality. I don't live in SF, so I can only go off what I hear (from the accused 'techies', so I'm only getting one side of the propaganda here..), but what I have heard is that 1) the homeless really seem to love SF, preferr…

It's natural to be repulsed by another person who will "...spit, urinate, taunt you, sell drugs, get rowdy..." in front of you in public.

But the key here is understanding the root cause and showing compassion towards the misguided.

...not constructing an us vs. them mentality, like Greg.

Re: Techies Are the New Puritans

#100

Post by ars_technician »

DerpDerpDerp wrote: post #80
SDGT wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a homeless individual can approach me in an honest, respectful manner, I'd be more inclined to help. This has not yet been the case. I prefer to reward civility with civility.

How, exactly, would you want them to approach you?

Without their genitalia exposed would be a start and preferably without spitting.
Post reply on HN