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

The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013)

peterturchin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 189 posts

Re: The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013)

#131

Post by hueving »

ako wrote: post #128
tomohawk wrote: post #72

Cooperation used to be by free association through civic organizations. As the government has grown in scope, it has eclipsed these, and it really isn't surprising that civic society has declined as a result. When people freely participate in civic activities, they are being generous. There is no coercion. When government does the same thing, it is coercive. The activity does not occur unless taxes are collected. Cho…

It's called leading by example: do you want a government that shows people it's important to care about others, or do you want a government that doesn't care about it's people? A government that sets the example by lying, ignoring people that can't pay healthcare, can't pay for education, and basically shows it's all a fight about who gets to keep most money? What example would you have citizens rather follow? Also,…

It's coercion regardless of democracy unless everyone is voting 100% the same way.

If 60% of the people vote to tax everyone and use that money to bomb the moon, the remaining 40% are going to feel coerced into supporting it.

The government forcing people to support things is not leading by example at all, because any other organization would be breaking the law if it tried to force support. How would you feel if the local church just started taking 30% of your income?

Re: The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013)

#132

Post by hueving »

themacguffinman wrote: post #87
tomohawk wrote: post #72

Cooperation used to be by free association through civic organizations. As the government has grown in scope, it has eclipsed these, and it really isn't surprising that civic society has declined as a result. When people freely participate in civic activities, they are being generous. There is no coercion. When government does the same thing, it is coercive. The activity does not occur unless taxes are collected. Cho…

That must be why citizens of other countries like Australia and the UK are awfully uncooperative and uncharitable, right? /s I also hate this idea that helping the poor should be left to personal whim. "Programs that solve problems" sounds more effective and egalitarian than "people helping people" if you ask me.

Presumably the '/s' implies that they are very charitable. Do you have numbers that show that they were more charitable than people in the US used to be?

Re: The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013)

#133

Post by hueving »

willvarfar wrote: post #121
Consultant32452 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 19th century in the US was the great age of limited government. It was also the period of the greatest outpouring of charitable giving the world has ever known. This was the period when the first modern nonprofit community hospitals were created. It's when the Carnegie libraries were built, huge numbers of colleges were built. It's when the society of the prevention of cruelty to animals was built, the first inte…

Britain led the way in that enlightenment e.g. The 1848 Public Health Act. Except in Britain it was government that led it. In the US, you had to rely on the hoping that some of the rich did good (today: Gates, Buffet?) whilst all the rest did bad (today: Koch, Trump?)? This blame-the-government thing is uniquely American. In other parts of the world there are big governments that really help their populations thrive…

The difference between government and cooperation is involuntary vs voluntary. If your government is doing something, it's not voluntary for anyone who voted against it. Also, since tax evasion is a crime in nearly every country, any government activities are going to be supported by the citizens in a coercive nature.

So yes, big governments can certainly provide services that you like. They can also provide never ending wars funded by your income that you can't do a damn thing about.

Re: The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013)

#134

Post by hueving »

srssays wrote: post #61
Consultant32452 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. It seems to be that collectivism, ironically, has made cooperation impossible rather than individualism. The government has taken on the role of "taking care" of your neighbor, so everyone stopped. Government guarantees you healthcare and income in retirement, so there's no need to have a family big enough to take care of you. And as the kid, your parents are taken care of, so your role is diminished. Whe…

The US hardly lacks collectivism, it is merely on an incomprehensibly grand scale. Pay your taxes and the state will help you, evade them and the state will punish you. Certain African countries are strongly individualistic. The state is too weak to help or punish anybody. Infrastructure crumbles, crime and slavery abounds. You seriously don't want to visit let alone live in a country that lacks collectivism.

Collectivism != cooperation. The comment to which you replied also says the US has heavily collectivism. But due to its coercive nature, it killed the cooperation that existed before it.

Re: The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013)

#135

Post by tomohawk »

cmurf wrote: post #107
tomohawk wrote: post #72

Cooperation used to be by free association through civic organizations. As the government has grown in scope, it has eclipsed these, and it really isn't surprising that civic society has declined as a result. When people freely participate in civic activities, they are being generous. There is no coercion. When government does the same thing, it is coercive. The activity does not occur unless taxes are collected. Cho…

I think the coercion argument is nonsense. There are all kinds of coercion including economic coercion that happens in free markets. It also ignores vastly top end income tax rates for nearly 4 decades, which weren't less than 75%. And ignores the relatively higher taxes in other countries where people, where trust in government is much higher than in the U.S. Taxes should be seen as fair, and increasingly Americans…

Taxation is not voluntary. If you don't pay, there will be penalties. This is coercion. "Nice house you have there - too bad you didn't pay your taxes..."

If the collected money is then put to a purpose you don't like, or is incompetently managed, what can you do? Nothing in any realistic sense.

If you would have liked to have been generous with the money instead, too bad.

As an aside, tax rates are pretty meaningless. Revenues are at record levels.

Re: The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013)

#136

Post by tomohawk »

ako wrote: post #128
tomohawk wrote: post #72

Cooperation used to be by free association through civic organizations. As the government has grown in scope, it has eclipsed these, and it really isn't surprising that civic society has declined as a result. When people freely participate in civic activities, they are being generous. There is no coercion. When government does the same thing, it is coercive. The activity does not occur unless taxes are collected. Cho…

It's called leading by example: do you want a government that shows people it's important to care about others, or do you want a government that doesn't care about it's people? A government that sets the example by lying, ignoring people that can't pay healthcare, can't pay for education, and basically shows it's all a fight about who gets to keep most money? What example would you have citizens rather follow? Also,…

It's coercive because you will be penalized unless you pay the taxes. The example the government is setting is that it is OK to take wealth from people and give it to others as long as whoever's in power has noble intent. There is certainly noble intent behind Head Start, but its an expensive program that doesn't work. There are many examples.

You can't say that we as a people are being generous when we're only doing what we're doing to avoid massive fines or imprisonment.

Re: The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013)

#137

Post by tome »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #104
okaram wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government hasn't recently grown in scope, in any meaningful way. Since the 1980's, the government as percent of GDP has stayed about the same 30-35% ... our taxes are lower and our 'welfare' is arguably lower than in the 80s, so if it was growth of government, you'd see it it correlated with that I know it is cool to blame everything on the government, but ...

a percentage of GDP is a fairly meaningless measurement. We've entered into an era of unprecedented government surveillance and power. We have agencies such as the DEA, NSA, homeland security, etc that wield enormous power over the lives of Americans. Also the welfare programs are significantly more pervasive now. You have subsidized farming, subsidized food, subsidized business, subsidized housing, a subsidized econ…

> We've entered into an era of unprecedented government surveillance and power. We have agencies such as the DEA, NSA, homeland security, etc that wield enormous power over the lives of Americans.

You're claiming that people are less cooperative because the NSA is spying on them?

Re: The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013)

#138

Post by xaldir »

tomohawk wrote: post #72

Cooperation used to be by free association through civic organizations. As the government has grown in scope, it has eclipsed these, and it really isn't surprising that civic society has declined as a result. When people freely participate in civic activities, they are being generous. There is no coercion. When government does the same thing, it is coercive. The activity does not occur unless taxes are collected. Cho…

I don't think the scope of the government action has anything to do with civic activities. Take a step back and look across the Atlantic: plenty of European countries have both large government action and very active civic societies.

Re: The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013)

#139

Post by rusk »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #123
tasty_freeze wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is a massive hail storm and my neighbor's roof is damaged and needs to be repaired, the reason all the neighbors don't pitch in and give him a new roof is insurance, not the government. You know, free market insurance. The part of your story about people pitching in has more to do with the skill sets of people back then vs now; even with all the desire in the world, I couldn't raise a barn. And in the case o…

The question isn't why we didn't repair our neighbor's roof (I wouldn't know how either), but why we didn't invite them to sleep at our house while theirs was flooding.

What's this "we" business? I'd definitely invite my neighbours in if their house was flooded and they were out of options. I pay more than 50% tax when all is told. What's wrong with you?

Re: The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013)

#140

Post by tomohawk »

tasty_freeze wrote: post #95
tomohawk wrote: post #72

Cooperation used to be by free association through civic organizations. As the government has grown in scope, it has eclipsed these, and it really isn't surprising that civic society has declined as a result. When people freely participate in civic activities, they are being generous. There is no coercion. When government does the same thing, it is coercive. The activity does not occur unless taxes are collected. Cho…

If there is a massive hail storm and my neighbor's roof is damaged and needs to be repaired, the reason all the neighbors don't pitch in and give him a new roof is insurance, not the government. You know, free market insurance. The part of your story about people pitching in has more to do with the skill sets of people back then vs now; even with all the desire in the world, I couldn't raise a barn. And in the case o…

Having insurance is prudent, but really beside the point. If you can safeguard your valuables by paying for a service, why wouldn't you? This really has nothing to do with civic society.

In the case of hurricanes, it's only because of government intervention and subsidies that people build in imperiled areas. Flood insurance mostly subsidizes more wealthy people to the tune of $3B/year. They would likely not choose to live in imperiled areas without the subsidies. Is it really a social good to promote the building of dwellings in places where it is likely the dwellings will be destroyed every 20 - 30 years or so?

Having seen the devastation of Katrina in MS first hand, this seems like a remarkably poor choice of things to subsidize and promote. In fact, when we were there about a year after the storm, the only people who were helping the people who were left were voluntary associations. The government had pretty much pulled out.

Tocqueville wrote extensively about associations and their beneficial impact on society. You should give his book, Democracy in America, a read. Here's an intro: http://www.learningtogive.org/resources/philanthropy-describ...

Post reply on HN