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

Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

programmingisterrible.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 387 posts

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#121

Post by lotharbot »

CodeMage wrote: post #36
glesica wrote: post #18

I think that when people say "hard problems" they mean "problems that almost certainly have solutions if you are willing to put in the effort". Poverty on the other hand is a much, much harder problem than that. In fact, no one quite knows how to solve it in a general way (there are things that seem to work in certain contexts but not in others, many special case half-solutions). And on top of that, there probably is…

Poverty on the other hand is a much, much harder problem than that. In fact, no one quite knows how to solve it in a general way (there are things that seem to work in certain contexts but not in others, many special case half-solutions). Everyone keeps saying that, as if there were only two alternatives: 1) completely fix poverty in a general way or 2) keep the status quo (and allow it to get worse). There has to be…

Speaking of wealth inequality:

http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2011-01-10-inequality-in-equ...

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#122

Post by aidenn0 »

CodeMage wrote: post #36
glesica wrote: post #18

I think that when people say "hard problems" they mean "problems that almost certainly have solutions if you are willing to put in the effort". Poverty on the other hand is a much, much harder problem than that. In fact, no one quite knows how to solve it in a general way (there are things that seem to work in certain contexts but not in others, many special case half-solutions). And on top of that, there probably is…

Poverty on the other hand is a much, much harder problem than that. In fact, no one quite knows how to solve it in a general way (there are things that seem to work in certain contexts but not in others, many special case half-solutions). Everyone keeps saying that, as if there were only two alternatives: 1) completely fix poverty in a general way or 2) keep the status quo (and allow it to get worse). There has to be…

There is nothing intrinsically morally wrong with high levels of wealth inequality. If wealth distribution were to stay as unequal as they are now, but total per-capita wealth increased at a steady rate, that would be a wonderful outcome for everyone.

The issue is that the high levels of wealth inequality are used to capture nearly all of the wealth that is created, thus increasing the wealth inequality even more. That is a clearly unsustainable system.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#123

Post by ownagefool »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #4

The guy's Scottish, he thinks it's about San Fran specifically, it's really about AMERICA. Maybe San Fran puts it even more in your face. But compared to most any other country even half as rich as America, the lack of social safety net in the U.S. is kind of shocking. People in Europe don't really realize the extent of it.

I'm Scottish and while I've not quite experienced it myself, I'm happy living in Europe where m taxes are spent on health care as opposed to bombs. It's not so much shocking as it is just really sad. :(

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#124

Post by bradleyjg »

axus wrote: post #108
beat wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee The solution is simple. You simply give every adult citizen enough money every year to insure that they can afford food, shelter, and other basic needs. Give it to everyone, rich or poor, same amount. BAM! No more poverty, except in self-inflicted cases (drug addiction, for example), or things like severe and very expensive illness (which are covered by other means)…

Wouldn't this cause inflation? The price of food, shelter, and basic needs is determined by peoples' ability to pay. I'd expect the price to rise until a percentage of people were unable to pay, again.

It would only cause monetary inflation if an equal amount of currency were not removed at the same time (through e.g. progressive taxation). Even if it did cause monetary inflation, that wouldn't necessarily lead to price inflation (depending e.g. on the slack in the economy). Even if there was price inflation it would likely not be uniform across goods and services.

In short, while it would be possible to design a self defeating basic income program it is not inevitable. That said, I prefer the employer of last resort scheme being pushed by the Australian MMT crowd.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#125

Post by VMG »

pfortuny wrote: post #89
VMG wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those "precious few" will probably not come from unfit parents who already have six children. Broken families and lack of family planning lie at the heart of crime and poverty. (I can already see the "eugenictler" strawman being put up in the distance)

You -as well as I- most probably come from unfit ancestors with lots of children. And that is irrelevant, as far as I can tell. So your argument is?

Going back far enough, you and I probably came from rape and lack of contraception as well.

Your argument is?

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#126

Post by tracker1 »

madaxe wrote: post #28
maheart wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with agriculture, but how are banks unprofitable? EDIT: I should say "unprofitable without legislation"

In a recent timescale, there was a multi-billion dollar bailout of failed institutions. It was pretty big news. Most of the banking sector would have gone bust without it, which would, as happened in Iceland, have left verdant territory for a new breed to spring up in. In a more general scale, the entire banking sector is propped up by protectionist policies that allow: > Fractional lending (this is called reserve ba…

Can't speak for anyone else, but I'd have rather taken Iceland's approach and let them fail... their assets would have been redistributed and bought out, and things would have probably recovered much faster, though a harder short term. Which may well have been better than what seems to be a long drawn out recovery.

I'm also against a lot of the subsidies that are out there.. if we really want available food for the poor, then those expenses directed at the farmers directly are the wrong place. I mean we have food stamp programs, and school lunch programs that could be expanded to cover more people, or even everyone domestically.

I'm against the expanded protectionisms in copyright and patents as well. I think they are important to have, but the terms are far to broad and lopsided. Corporate personhood is a directly related problem... I'd much rather see corporations far more limited, including requirements on distributing profits to shareholders, and not being able to make corporate donations to charities (especially politically driven ones) or for that matter employ lobbyists. If an investor wants to directly employ a lobbyist more power to them, the protection of a corporate vail is definitely abused.

I believe personal freedom and ensured competition are key to advancement of society, and protectionist corporatism is just as bad as outright communism, or extreme/fascist socialism for that matter. Then again, people often confuse what it means to be pragmatic, or a libertarian for that matter.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#127

Post by aidenn0 »

run4yourlives wrote: post #81
beat wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee The solution is simple. You simply give every adult citizen enough money every year to insure that they can afford food, shelter, and other basic needs. Give it to everyone, rich or poor, same amount. BAM! No more poverty, except in self-inflicted cases (drug addiction, for example), or things like severe and very expensive illness (which are covered by other means)…

While I like the idea of a Basic Income, and have actually come to support it heartily, (if you don't, take a look at some of the economists who have, and why they do) you are being naive to think that "self-inflicted cases" are somehow anything other than a vast majority. Almost all homeless have mental illness and/or substance abuse issues. That's why they are unable to act on one of the endless options that exist…

correction: Nearly all chronic homeless have mental illness and/or substance abuse; the chronic homeless make up only about 1/8 of the homeless at any given time.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#128

Post by gummify »

Not too far north along the west coast, the homelessness situation is mirrored in Vancouver, Canada. I have friends who have volunteered with non-for-profit agencies that support homeless people in identifying their needs and allocating resources to them if possible, such as social housing. My friends have told me that the people she has interviewed from the streets nearly 75% are mentally or physically handicapped or have fell into drug abuse and would never be able to function as a normal tax paying citizen again. There are cases where she has met people who where once normal people with normal jobs but because of a couple bad choices or traumatic situations, have gone into debt or turned to drugs and alcohol. One man was once a lawyer who lost his family over night and couldn't handle the stress and turned to gambling, drugs, and alcohol and probably suffered from PTSD and then sooner or later ended up on the streets.

In Canada, homeless/unemployed receive around $300/month from the government and if you have a psychical or mental disability, I believe you receive a little more financial assistance. Some homeless people just stay on the assistance instead of trying to get employment.

However, there is hope but we cannot rely on the government to sort it out. There is a privately funded organization called UGM that has a men's shelter and rehab program in the core of the homelessness district (equivalent to Tenderloin here) and are working on opening a women's and children's rehabilitation program. I volunteered there once and was taken aback on how well put together the program is. It's costly though, to build the building and support the program costs millions. They take in about 40 homeless people and puts them through a 6 month program. There are strict rules and guidelines in the program but in return they receive bedding, food, clean clothes and clean environment to live in, classes to help you finish your high school diploma, computer lessons, emotional and spiritual support, and career counselling, etc. It's still a newer program but they've seen a pretty high success rate, with many graduates becoming outreach works in the community.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#129

Post by jbattle »

stingrae wrote: post #105
nsxwolf wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're smearing missionaries a bit - they haven't ALL engaged in forcible conversion of natives. Quite often it is a voluntary decision. But anyway, my point is that culture changes, and you can't stop it. Think of it as a culture free market. You can try to put up protectionist barriers to stop it, but you won't succeed. Not even the Amish are totally successful at it. I grew up in Redmond, WA in the 70s and…

>I think you're smearing missionaries a bit - they haven't ALL engaged in forcible conversion of natives. Quite often it is a voluntary decision. I would disagree on this point, Sure not all were "forced." There are invisible points that cause native nations to collapse. The missionaries didn't have to force them to come, there presence alone had enough effect on the region to force them to move to the missions. Espe…

Getting way off topic - the same underlying forces still play out today worldwide, largely through american/japanese/indian(?) movies and music.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#130

Post by dragonwriter »

run4yourlives wrote: post #99
VMG wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fundamental problem is separating the cheaters from those who really deserve help. In a system where the individual can decide where to put the money, everybody can decide who is deserving of help. If you mandate wealth redistribution, you need to create a complex ruleset that decides who is eligible. The rules are established by the ineffective and opaque processes of politics and government. The resulting syste…

There is no redistribution. Everyone is entitled to the same benefit, just like they are entitled to fire protection. Over a certain amount of income earned however, the benefit becomes negligible.

> There is no redistribution. Everyone is entitled to the same benefit, just like they are entitled to fire protection.

This type of thing (even when it involves fire protection) is redistribution. One set of people are taxed to pay for things, another set of people get the benefit -- even if it is the same set of people the distribution of the tax and the benefit aren't the same, and the difference is redistribution.

Note that I am not saying this is undesirable, merely that it clearly is redistribution.

Post reply on HN