Live data from Hacker News

The Unexotic Underclass

miter.mit.edu

161–170 of 309 posts

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#161
post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jack Monroe has a political agenda behind her claims. Note that she voluntarily gave up a full time public-sector job (emergency services dispatcher) with a decent salary to go on benefits. Why does she have a child if she doesn't have the income to support them? Where is the father?

"agenda": The word you use when you want to dismiss someone's issues without actually addressing them. Most of your questions are answered here: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/01/richard... "Why does she have a child?" News for you: Sometimes people's circumstances can change. It's impossible to be sure you're income will be stable for 20 years.

I was actually surprised when I read the summary, because that would be a surprising level of poverty in the US. If anything, we are unnecessarily generous with the food stamps here. (Which I am not necessarily complaining about, just observing that they are relatively easy to get.) And lo, it turns out this was in Britain, so saying they can't afford $44 is sort of deceptive. I well believe she couldn't afford £44.

There's a certain segment in American politics who really doesn't like to talk about this, but for all the drama, the poor in America are still better off than they are in almost any other country, which, yes, includes all (AFAIK) the European countries, and while that doesn't prove anything about what we do or do not need to do in that area, it does suggest that rhetoric about poverty in the US can occasionally get overblown. (It's a political thing where, let's be honest, there's a lot of incentives to keep promising more. I started listing them all out and the list of people interested in increasing poverty payouts got too long for a parenthetical. Again, not necessarily a complaint, but let's not pretend here that these interests don't exist. If you'd like, celebrate that often comes from something so crass as base political pandering ends up benefiting so many people, instead of a narrow interest group.)

I live in the Midwest and I don't know anyone living in abject poverty, but I know a lot of struggling families (as in, friends of the family that we socialize with frequently, not just "people I've heard of"). There's plenty of them that could afford $44, if you were somehow bringing something to them that was worth it. Which is, after all, the entire point here, to bring them something that will somehow improve their lives more than the cost of buying it, not to just pointlessly drain their wallets. This may very well only work right now in the US, where, yes, even the poor and struggling can afford $44, if it's worth it somehow. And on the flip side, while it's perhaps harder than you might initially think to bring $44 of value to somebody, it is also a very feasible goal. You don't have to work out how to bring them $5000 of value. (Although if you can somehow, awesome. That said the only thing that leaps to mind where you can pay back thousands for a small investment is budgeting apps, and that space is covered. The problem there wouldn't so much be writing the app as getting people to use it.)

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

These days you can buy no-name android tablets from Walmart for $44. For example: http://www.walmart.com/ip/Ematic-7-Tablet-with-4GB-Memory-an... That's cheap enough that there's no reason for a poor person NOT to have one.

I take it you've never been actually poor? $44 can be a hell of a lot to invest in technology when you don't have enough money to cover the bills every month.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#163
post #155

This has been alluded to in other comments, but without any data. The "unexotic underclass" has virtually no money to spend compared to the upper classes. The bottom 40% in the US has only 0.2% of the wealth! Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth#mediavi...

Wealth != income.

Do you know how many lottery tickets are purchased by the "unexotic underclass"? There are those with "virtually no money to spend," to be sure, but there are plenty of working poor with a combined large amount of money passing through their hands that never generates wealth because it is immediately spent, both to meet needs (often inefficiently), and to meet wants (often with little long-term thinking, which for various reasons can be entirely rational in given circumstances). The opportunities lie in trying to identify improvements in that cashflow (which is hard to do if you are so disconnected from the "underclass" that you can't even fathom why someone would spend so much on lottery tickets, and thus how you would ever convince them to spend money on your service instead...)

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#164
I built language learning applications that reached over 10 million users in the developing world and my brother built a startup that employs only ex-cons in one of the worst neighborhoods in America.

We learned a few things from actually doing this:

TL;DR its really expensive to make products for the 'forgotten underclass' due to many unforeseen issues.

1) Poor areas are overrun with corruption and graft. Its very hard to do the right thing, when individuals with power will actively work to put a bribe barrier between you and your work. Its like these individuals smell out good intentions and attempt to tax them for the perceived weak-minded good intentions. An example would be, after my brother created several successful startups using ex-cons, he wanted to turn the program over to the City. He quickly learned without a politician attached and 'sitting on the board' you couldn't do this. The price of this? Paying him 70% of the donations coming in to support the program. I have numerous examples more blatant in 2nd and 3rd world nations.

2) Economy of Scale. You must serve more customers in order to make up for lower prices the market will bare. This is easy to say and very very hard to do. As you scale, you can't afford more workers, so your quality inevitably goes down. Other things like support, QA and tasks that don't scale past 1:10 user rations become very poor quality, turning off people to the product and making you ashamed of your work.

3) Not knowing what the problem is. You can guess at problems for a class of people you aren't a part of, but its pretty hard to design a new solution for them. Your instincts are often wrong and you have to do a lot of expensive testing and research you can't afford to get the right solution. See problem 2.

4) Distribution to customers. Want to get the product to this underclass? Do they have smartphones? Do they have computers? Often no. How are you going to ensure they see your product let alone purchase it? Maybe they do have smartphones, but they use everything from dumb-phones to android 2.3 devices to Nokia-whatevers. Development for all those things will cost you 5x as much as just making a food iPhone app. (see 2 again)

5) Value offer. This becomes very very hard when your target market is low on funds and often makes anti-self-interest choices. The individual who uses what little money they have to feed their family with fast food is going to pay money for your education app? Its pretty unlikely, they have more pressing needs in their hierarchy that they are often too scared and desperate to solve properly.

6) Their problems can't be solved with software. Often these people have real-world problems that require hands on work and real product to solve. My brother worked very hard to add software where possible but needed to do mostly 'real world' labor to get to his customers. Software is inherently cheap to produce compared to hardware and manual labor.

Finally, this work will eat you away until you have very little left. Your rent will go up as your friends sell their startups. You won't have time or money to rebalance your life with exercise or entertainment. You will becomes socially isolated from those who have the money to support your work. You will put immense pressure on your significant other to either make up your losses financially or support you. You will put your children's future in jeopard. You won't have children. You will see little return on your effort. You will be fighting a society which applauds your effort but is unwilling to help you continue.

In short, you might become part of the class you are trying to help.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#165
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do the government or organisations which have the money get out of it?

Let's say you create an application which allows unemployed find jobs easier - you go to your local council, say that by deploying this app in all local job centres they can reduce unemployment by 50%. By doing so, they increase their own popularity with people, and every politician likes that. Obviously this is just a made up example, but I am saying that there is money to be made on helping poor people,it's just no…

The political benefit politicians get out of buying something is much lower than creating their own program.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#166
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…

It seems today's fast track to helping communities is:

1) Equip them with internet-enabled smartphones 2) Give them software to get things done more efficiently

I just wish there was one more thing:

3) Decentralize the networks so there's no need to pay for an expensive mobile internet plan in order to communicate in your own neighborhood.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#167
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do the government or organisations which have the money get out of it?

Let's say you create an application which allows unemployed find jobs easier - you go to your local council, say that by deploying this app in all local job centres they can reduce unemployment by 50%. By doing so, they increase their own popularity with people, and every politician likes that. Obviously this is just a made up example, but I am saying that there is money to be made on helping poor people,it's just no…

(Dis)claimer: I do real-world, boots-on-the-ground, ministers-in-government politics.

If solving poverty and unemployment was really popular, we'd have done it already. It's not, in the population. It is popular with a vocal minority of wealthy middle-class people who occasionally vote.

If you go to voters with a plan for this stuff and start knocking on random doors, I can tell you what you'll find because we find it all the time: "Where are they going to live? Not near me I hope."

I wish I could fix this, but we have to run the campaigns that people will vote for. That's democracy, and in our democracy, people are far more interested in voting against things they don't like than in voting for ideas to make society better.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#168
post #29

I can sum this up so very simply. The way to make the most money is to get as close to money as possible. Hence why finance is such a lucrative career. We are seeing the obvious flaws of capitalism now that capital is no longer tied to low skill labor for manufacturing. Want to make a ton of money 1 year from today and have good credit? Spend your days with an MLS subscription finding under-priced homes to flip in a…

Absolutely right. Find opportunities to either facilitate for pay or to tax transactions between other actors. Try to convert facilitation situations in which you have to be the lowest bidder into taxing situations where you only accept the highest bidders.

The only way to come across these opportunities is to socialize with the wealthy.

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#169
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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.

> All progress is aimed at the rich

Oh what tosh. Most of brand new inventions might be aimed at the rich. After that, most iterative improvement is aimed at making the invention cheaper, more reliable, and easier to manufacture - i.e., gradually more accessible to poor people. What separates a Benz Patent Motorwagen from a Civic today if not a whole ton of progress?

Re: The Unexotic Underclass

#170
post #155

This has been alluded to in other comments, but without any data. The "unexotic underclass" has virtually no money to spend compared to the upper classes. The bottom 40% in the US has only 0.2% of the wealth! Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth#mediavi...

Wealth != income. Do you know how many lottery tickets are purchased by the "unexotic underclass"? There are those with "virtually no money to spend," to be sure, but there are plenty of working poor with a combined large amount of money passing through their hands that never generates wealth because it is immediately spent, both to meet needs (often inefficiently), and to meet wants (often with little long-term thin…

According to data pulled from here:

http://www.wealthandwant.com/issues/income/income_distributi... (Summary Table 1. Effective Federal Tax Rates, 2005)

The bottom 20% makes around 4% of the total income, so I grant that income is not as lopsided as wealth. And sure, you could potentially build a successful business targeting that. But it certainly doesn't seem like nearly as attractive a demographic to target as the other 80% with 96% of the cash flow.

For what it's worth, I favor a greater amount of wealth redistribution than we currently have not only because I think it's the morally right thing to do, but also because I think it would result in greater overall spending. (e.g. people who have a lot of surplus money now are less likely to spend those incremental savings than those who need more money to live comfortably now.)

Post reply on HN