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

Every day at my job I helped people just barely survive

metafilter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 337 posts

Re: Every day at my job I helped people just barely survive

#101

Post by sid6376 »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #88
philwelch wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly the position of Ayn Rand, especially the part about not really caring if poor people get to have things like libraries or housing or food. To Ayn Rand, a "rational" homeless person would rather stave to death on the streets than accept the first crumb of unearned bread or a single night's sleep under an unearned roof. The only reason there's no conflict for Rand is because Rand doesn't recognize a leg…

Rand doesn't recognize a legitimate interest in public goods,... This is simply false. In Atlas Shrugged, she explicitly acknowledges that providing public goods is a legitimate function of government, and taxation is legitimate insofar as at it used to pay for public goods. If I remember correctly (it's been a long time), it was Hank Reardon who states this point. I believe a (fair) judge was also allowed into Galt'…

You are right about that. It was Judge Narragansett.

Re: Every day at my job I helped people just barely survive

#102

Post by nimblegorilla »

xenophanes wrote: post #59
reinhardt wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3) for things that provide value but don't (necessarily) make money. And no, persuading people to voluntarily pay for these is not generally sustainable.

I knowingly, intentionally disagree with the public good argument. See: http://fallibleideas.com/public-goods

The dam building example illustrates exactly why the public good argument makes sense. Let's say a town of 100 farmers need a dam built and there is a net benefit even if only 50 contribute to building the dam. Now there is a huge incentive for the farmers to play chicken with each other to see who will pay up first. The "free riders" that don't pay for the dam will have extra money to buy more land or other resources to take better advantage of the new dam's benefits.

In this case it is fair for the town government to pay for the dam with taxes. Given the net benefits of the dam it is even plausible that the increased property values and job revenues near the dam would increase the tax base.

Re: Every day at my job I helped people just barely survive

#103

Post by philwelch »

true_religion wrote: post #94
philwelch wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crux of libertarian thought is that public services like the police can be entirely replaced by voluntary organizations--that the neighborhood watch or private detectives should assume the powers of, say, arresting people and putting them in jail.

The neighborhood watch can already commit citizens arrests in certain circumstances. Private detectives provide investigative materials that are used in civil courts. It's already happened. --- Now libertarian thoguht doesn't say just because you can replace something by a voluntary institution then you should . However, you should think about the scenario. The alternative, more mainstream viewpoint, is that the gove…

Libertarians are generally the ones making assumptions--that the private sector will provide health care to everyone without government regulation, that the private sector will provide housing, food, and other necessities to the poor and elderly without government assistance, that the private sector will refrain from pumping poisonous substances into the air and water without government regulation, and so forth. There's insufficient empirical evidence that any of this would happen, but it means less taxes and less government so it must be good.

There's a darker strain of libertarians who genuinely don't care whether the congenitally frail receive health care or whether the poor can afford food and shelter, because there's no human right to food and shelter, but there is a human right not to pay taxes. Even most libertarians shy away from this by asserting that somehow private charity will take care of it all, but the empirical evidence is insufficient.

Re: Every day at my job I helped people just barely survive

#104

Post by jellicle »

spindritf wrote: post #54
philwelch wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, the libertarian stance is closer to "I have an inherent human right not to pay taxes that outweighs the public good of having things like libraries." There's some handwaving about voluntary charity, but if voluntary charity worked, no one would have invented public services to begin with, and the typical libertarian doesn't really care anyway.

> if voluntary charity worked, no one would have invented public services to begin with Not to judge this particular use of tax money but of course they would -- it's in the direct interest of the reigning bureaucracy, or any bureaucracy, to expand its scope whether it's necessary or beneficial to the society. It's the same with departments fighting over budget and new hirees.

So, your argument is that the Romans built roads not because they were useful to society and under-provided by private enterprise but because the road-building bureaucracy was expanding its power.

Do tell us more.

Re: Every day at my job I helped people just barely survive

#105

Post by [deleted] »

urbanjunkie wrote: post #82
yummyfajitas wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What "massive positive externalities" are created by a library? The sole benefit you describe, namely the ability to borrow books, is a private benefit. I borrow a book, read it and enjoy it. What benefit does this create for anyone besides me? Since I am the sole beneficiary, the library can charge me for it, and prevent me from consuming it if I don't pay. Why should you be forced to pay for me to receive these ben…

> I borrow a book, read it and enjoy it. What benefit does this create for anyone besides me? That actually made me feel sorry for you. Are you really this much of an island, or do you just enjoy trolling? Is there no possible benefit for me that you might have learned something, or that perhaps you might now be able to tell me something I didn't know before? Is there no benefit to me that perhaps because someone in…

[deleted]

Re: Every day at my job I helped people just barely survive

#106

Post by urbanjunkie »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #100
urbanjunkie wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I borrow a book, read it and enjoy it. What benefit does this create for anyone besides me? That actually made me feel sorry for you. Are you really this much of an island, or do you just enjoy trolling? Is there no possible benefit for me that you might have learned something, or that perhaps you might now be able to tell me something I didn't know before? Is there no benefit to me that perhaps because someone in…

Is there no possible benefit for me that you might have learned something, or that perhaps you might now be able to tell me something I didn't know before? You are moving the goalposts. I asserted there is no "massive positive externality", not that there is no possible external externality. I do concede that maybe people who spend time in the library are more interesting conversationalists. I just don't consider thi…

You stated that "The sole benefit you describe, namely the ability to borrow books, is a private benefit. I borrow a book, read it and enjoy it. What benefit does this create for anyone besides me?"

Do we have different definitions of "sole" and "private" - those words feel fairly absolute to me.

Sure it may not be a massive positive and direct benefit to you, but I find it hard to understand how you think there's no possible benefit at all. Do you feel the same way about teaching people to read, write and count?

Re: Every day at my job I helped people just barely survive

#107

Post by philwelch »

_delirium wrote: post #97
philwelch wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly the position of Ayn Rand, especially the part about not really caring if poor people get to have things like libraries or housing or food. To Ayn Rand, a "rational" homeless person would rather stave to death on the streets than accept the first crumb of unearned bread or a single night's sleep under an unearned roof. The only reason there's no conflict for Rand is because Rand doesn't recognize a leg…

On the plus side, I don't think there are many hardline Randians. In technology, I would guess that libertarianism boils down to some mixture of: 1) being really annoyed about civil-liberties, EFF-type issues; 2) being moderately annoyed about regulations seen as unnecessary; and 3) being mildly-to-moderately annoyed about taxes. Varies by person, but I think if you took a vote even restricted to people in Silicon Va…

We're an odd bunch, and there are certainly plenty of technical folks who are logical-minded enough to get themselves into some hardline position or another, but hardline Randians are probably a minority of any group you could think of, except for the group of hardline Randians of course.

Re: Every day at my job I helped people just barely survive

#108

Post by philwelch »

jellicle wrote: post #104
spindritf wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if voluntary charity worked, no one would have invented public services to begin with Not to judge this particular use of tax money but of course they would -- it's in the direct interest of the reigning bureaucracy, or any bureaucracy, to expand its scope whether it's necessary or beneficial to the society. It's the same with departments fighting over budget and new hirees.

So, your argument is that the Romans built roads not because they were useful to society and under-provided by private enterprise but because the road-building bureaucracy was expanding its power. Do tell us more.

I'm sure the Roman empire had its share of expanding bureaucracy--after all the eastern chunk of the empire which later broke off did coin the term "byzantine"--but your point is valid.

Re: Every day at my job I helped people just barely survive

#109

Post by rquantz »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #61
neilk wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government is also useful for things which have massive positive externalities. Education is the paradigmatic example. Libraries are also an example of a good where maintaining the "option to buy" is potentially more important than any service you consume. In other words, having a big pile of books in a building, available for close to no cost, enables us all to act more freely -- knowing we can get more information…

What "massive positive externalities" are created by a library? The sole benefit you describe, namely the ability to borrow books, is a private benefit. I borrow a book, read it and enjoy it. What benefit does this create for anyone besides me? Since I am the sole beneficiary, the library can charge me for it, and prevent me from consuming it if I don't pay. Why should you be forced to pay for me to receive these ben…

Having an educated populace is essential to a democratic society. It's the same reason we have public education and also why the freedom of the press is enshrined in our constitution.

Re: Every day at my job I helped people just barely survive

#110

Post by mcantelon »

greggman wrote: post #65

If you want a community learning center with computers then why are you asking for a library? http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/library Words matter. People skim, people read headlines. If I read "libraries are in trouble" or "more support for libraries" needed I think "no, anyone with a free smart phone can access the entire internet". They can get a netbook for under $300 or probably a used one for under $5…

Yeah, "economic integration centers" or something might help frame their utilitarian value. People who can't integrate with the system end up integrating with the criminal world, so it's worth the social investment to provide computer access, etc.
Post reply on HN