The Unexotic Underclass • Hacker News Board

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#61

Post by aianus » Wed, Sep 03, 2014, 7:22 AM UTC

potatolicious wrote: post #46

eddyparkinson wrote: post #22

"Make something people want." - is on Y-combinator t-shirts. It is not about class, it is about solving a want or a need in a sustainable way.

> "It is not about class, it is about solving a want or a need in a sustainable way." Of course it's about class. YC (and everyone else in this industry) is very good at solving a want that they understand, and very bad at solving wants they don't understand. And our industry is consisted almost exclusively of upper-middle class white urban men. In fact, this demographic is even more prominent in the entrepreneur cla…

All progress is aimed at the rich. The first people with light bulbs were rich, the first people with indoor plumbing were rich, the first people with cell phones and automobiles were rich, etc, etc.

It's not nearly as much fun to solve poor people's problems since often the solutions already exist; they just can't afford or otherwise access them.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#62

Post by callmeed » Wed, Sep 03, 2014, 7:31 AM UTC

To those who commented on the financial or regulatory hurdles in serving these people:

Maybe another way to look at this is: instead of creating a startup to serve veterans or single mothers–why not create a startup that can employ veterans AND single mothers?

One of the biggest problems facing single mothers is the high cost of childcare. In many instances, it makes going to work almost pointless because it eats 50%+ of your paycheck. So, why not a crowdsourcing service (a la mechanical turk/crowdflower) that employs single mothers at home in the United States? (personally I think people would eat that up and even pay a premium for US-based workers)

Veterans could also do crowdsourcing work, on-demand security, and on-demand driving/moving off the top of my head.

Yet another way to tackle this could be to go into an industry that already has the means/access to help these people and partner with them. I'm mainly thinking of education. California's community colleges (there are over 100) cater to these people already. They have night classes and veterans offices. They have programs for in-demand jobs like nursing. Yes, there's the same bureaucratic/regulatory issues since they're a government institution ... but if Starbucks can do a deal with Arizona State, surely a founder who is ambitious enough can get something done.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#63

Post by eli_gottlieb » Wed, Sep 03, 2014, 7:42 AM UTC

cbd1984 wrote: post #47

rattray wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no one gives fuck all about the poor. That's blatantly untrue. People care. Ask yourself; how many of your friends "don't give fuck all about the poor"? I find it hard to believe that a majority of people would not wish a better life on poor people. But solving their problems is intimidating, difficult, and probably unprofitable. If the true problem is that poor people are poor because they don't have any money, th…

> some problems aren't best solved through technology, or through "people caring", but simply through better governance. And here you run up against a religious belief named "The Government Is The Problem", which is utterly intractable and ineradicable in someone with an advanced case, and will never die off because it's founded on either blatant self-interest (A regulatory body is harming my profits!) or soured opti…

>It's related to cynicism, which has posed as maturity for so long some people honestly cannot tell the difference.

It's worse than that: I often see paranoia and even outright malice posing as maturity, and it seems most people cannot actually tell the difference.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#64

Post by smm2000 » Wed, Sep 03, 2014, 7:53 AM UTC

gohrt wrote: post #34

Afforess wrote: post #7

Maybe I lack vision - but I don't see how any of the problems of the white collar and working poor can be solved by Silicon Valley. It would be impossible for a startup to work with the government in processing Veterns claims, for example. The regulations barriers are immense and the security and compliance problems are legion. Similarly, how are startups supposed to improve the earning potentials of the working poor…

> It would be impossible for a startup to work with the government in processing Veterns claims, for example. This is changing" http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/08/11... > MOOCs? Don't make me laugh. Most of these people wouldn't want to take one, they are not interested in an Education. They can barely fit in their current paycheck to paycheck lifestyle into their current schedule. That's an ob…

Studying using MOOC requires level of self-motivation that most people - both poor and rich - simply lack. Realistically speaking most MOOC do not add much value on top of a book you can get for free from any public library or buy for $30 on Amazon. Every time new medium is created people think that it will revolutionize education but the last time it was true was when printing press was invented. Radio lectures, TV, CD lectures and now MOOCs are fads and nothing more at that.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#65

Post by julian_t » Wed, Sep 03, 2014, 7:58 AM UTC

incision wrote: post #26

patio11 wrote: post #15

I like parts of this article more than others. For example, while I share a certain sense of frustration that SV seems to spend a disproportionate amount of resources on mobifotosocialgames, smartphones and their downmarket progeny are an enormous quality-of-life improvement for broader America. There's virtually nothing a cash-poor-responsibility-rich person needs to do that having a smartphone does not make them be…

>'Commute to work? Apply for benefits? Schedule appointments with doctors? Successfully keep those appointments? Keep tabs on kids while working/errands? A smart phone makes you better.' Spot on. Years ago, I maintained a couple of desktops in a sort of 'job center' where people could submit electronic applications for various low-end, entry-level positions. The most common issue - no email address. Second most commo…

> The most common issue - no email address. Second most common - has email, but has to take the bus to the library to check it.

Absolutely. We have come to know a couple of guys, one ex-homeless, who have real troubles here. We lent one an old iPad and that, together will free wifi in coffee shops and malls, has enabled him to talk to government agencies and job centers.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#66

Post by capisce » Wed, Sep 03, 2014, 8:10 AM UTC

callmeed wrote: post #62

To those who commented on the financial or regulatory hurdles in serving these people: Maybe another way to look at this is: instead of creating a startup to serve veterans or single mothers–why not create a startup that can employ veterans AND single mothers ? One of the biggest problems facing single mothers is the high cost of childcare. In many instances, it makes going to work almost pointless because it eats 50…

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your viewpoint and how the profits get distributed) there tends to be more money in replacing people with automation than in employing them. And even when employing them there is always the incentive to pay the least amount that the market will bear. Crowdsourcing etc also provides very little in the way of job security.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#67

Post by orbifold » Wed, Sep 03, 2014, 8:17 AM UTC

SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #53

3pt14159 wrote: post #17

Let's take a look at the real problems facing America and the rest of the developed world: 1. Mismanaged IT in critical infrastructure. 2. Misallocated funds in programs helping the destitute. 3. Cyclical loops of depression-lack of opportunity-lack of skill building. 4. Health disorders on a massive scale, like metabolic disorder, that can be solved with very simple things like diet and exercise. These places are no…

>that can be solved with very simple things like diet and exercise. "Very simple", applied to diet? Try very controversial. There are tons of different "good diet" theories, and many of them are mutually contradictory. I've tried several, and done a lot of research. I've settled on "low carb" as sustainable, healthy, and actually effective -- and it doesn't need to be terribly expensive (though it's likely more expen…

I think with "sugar diets" he specifically refers to diets that contain a lot of Fructose, cooked potatoes contain starch, the liver and muscles convert an excess of that in glycogen and a relatively small amount of fat. Glycogen is actually really useful. Getting a rush afer having eaten an energy rich meal is what is supposed to happen. It's Fructose which is dangerous in large quantities and is linked to type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome. Among other things it also blocks Leptin signalling to the brain, so the brain does not properly register how much energy it just gained, leading to overeating and no desire for physical activity.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#68

Post by tormeh » Wed, Sep 03, 2014, 8:21 AM UTC

NoPiece wrote: post #33

dasil003 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That flippancy cuts both ways. The solution to the western diet is right there around the edges of the supermarket, and probably most people by now realize it's there, but they keep buying the flavor-enhanced processed grains because they taste good and are addicting. There is no red tape from people solving this problem for themselves, and that problem (#4 from pi) is about 10000 times greater than whatever problems…

But how do people know to go to the edge of the supermarket when the government has been telling them, and schools have been teaching them go to the middle? This is the food pyramid the government was pushing from 1992-2005. You should have 6-11 servings of bread, rice, pasta, and cereal a day! It was red tape and ignorance that pushed people to the middle of the market. http://i.imgur.com/QtDfDAl.jpg

That's still not very bad advice. I'm guessing it would be a great improvement on the average lower class American diet. Cut out most of the fruit, fish and vegetables, increase sweets and meat and you've got the average modern lower class diet. Carbohydrates make you eat a bit more, but they're golden otherwise and they're really cheap. And if you look at the other categories it seems they use the word "serving" a bit different than you and I.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#69

Post by ownagefool » Wed, Sep 03, 2014, 8:44 AM UTC

idlewords wrote: post #9

bokonist wrote: post #2

Here is the basic problem. When you build a product for savvy people, your interests are aligned. Savvy people will only pay you money when you build a good product. Thus, the only way you can make money is by actually doing good, by creating a product useful to other people. This is the happy coincidence that draws so many to entrepreneurship - we get to build things, create value, and get paid $$$. When you build a…

Your assume that poor people are poor because they lack the savvy to be born into the upper middle class. That's a common misconception. Poor people are actually poor because they don't have any money. The easiest way to make money is not by tricking the poor, but by tricking the rich (they're the ones who have most of it, after all). Unfortunately, that same money allows even the dumbest rich people to aggressively…

It probably depends where you're from, but where I'm from, anecdotally, the poor lack money because they're "stupid". Of course it's not really that simple, it has more to do with confidence, stereotypes and drive, but they do have themselves to blame if you consider people have any responsibility for themselves.

That said, I believe most people are just a construct of where they're from and some of us are just luckier to have been born into a culture of drive, some the opposite, and we'd live in a better socitey if we tried to tackle those differences, instead of finger pointing.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#70

Post by onion2k » Wed, Sep 03, 2014, 8:50 AM UTC

declan wrote: post #12

>what with government penniless and gridlocked Um, the U.S. federal government will be spending something like $3.4 trillion in the fiscal year beginning at the end of this month. That's pretty much the exact opposite of truly "penniless." As for gridlocked, sure, it's going to be difficult for the Dems to expand Obamacare, and it's going to be difficult for the GOP to repeal Obamacare, so by that crabbed version of…

Imagine I give you $20. Then I tell you that you have to spend all of that $20 on x, y, and z. Are you penniless? Yes. You have no money.

All of the government's $3.4 trillion is budgeted for, allocated and spent. What makes the government penniless is the fact that they can't do anything else because they have no budget for it.