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

What Happens When the Poor Receive a Stipend?

opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 163 posts

Re: What Happens When the Poor Receive a Stipend?

#151

Post by splitrocket »

notdrunkatall wrote: post #137
svantana wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Swede I'm not sure there's any base for this claim, other than that we now have racist politicians who make populist statements like this one without shame, referring to cherry picked data at best. Generally, if you're going to make racist statements, at least try to back them up with some data and/or source.

As a Swede, you're shockingly uninformed. https://www.google.com/search?q=sweden+welfare+immigration&o...

Currently I am at a cafe in Thailand, hanging out with a bunch of swedes from diverse backgrounds. Just asked them bout this. Apparently, notdrunkatall, according to my Swedish friends, you are incorrect, and that the welfare system is considered a massive success in Sweden and that the immigration problem is seen as a minor, short term issue that right wing politicians make a big stink out of to get nationalistic votes.

Re: What Happens When the Poor Receive a Stipend?

#152

Post by eli_gottlieb »

kabouseng wrote: post #123
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

South Africa is a very close approximation of what happens when you impose decades of apartheid and then let a small elite class of blacks in on the fun without actually dismantling the inegalitarian economic system itself.

:) And how would you go about dismantling the inegalitarian economic system?

Convert natural resources into commons trusts and industrial concerns into workers' cooperatives.

Re: What Happens When the Poor Receive a Stipend?

#153

Post by kabouseng »

kabouseng wrote: post #123
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

South Africa is a very close approximation of what happens when you impose decades of apartheid and then let a small elite class of blacks in on the fun without actually dismantling the inegalitarian economic system itself.

:) And how would you go about dismantling the inegalitarian economic system?

And what about the current owners? The state can't afford to buy them out. Disown them? Massive loss of international trade and investment trust as could be seen with other african countries (Zimbabwe is the most prominent example).

Re: What Happens When the Poor Receive a Stipend?

#154

Post by mcherm »

nahname wrote: post #128
mcherm wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Correction: this is what happens when poor Cherokee receive a stipend, but let's not pretend that the Cherokee are the ones we're worried about here. [...] Successfully repeating this experiment in poor black and latino populations a few times would [...] I can't be sure what you intended to say here, but the message it sounds to me like you are implying sounds quite racist to me. I DO care about poor Cherokee -- a…

>every one of the "racial differences" (especially the mental ones) that have been claimed have turned out to be baseless and untrue. You should re-phrase that to point at racist claims. There are quite a few differences between the races. Bone density is one example. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1863580/

You are correct. I should have said "nearly every one of..." instead.

(I want to avoid claiming that it's the racist claims that were proven untrue. For one thing, it begs the question: if they turn out to be true then I guess it wasn't racist after all.)

Re: What Happens When the Poor Receive a Stipend?

#155

Post by kabouseng »

nhaehnle wrote: post #109
kabouseng wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an alternative example to what happens when you give the poor a stipend, have a look at the government grant system employed in South Africa, and the absolute misuse and abuse that system is under. I believe the South African example is a closer approximation to what a society would look like with a basic guaranteed income.

Do you have some links to sources?

Ok I'm back. Just googling "South African grants misuse" will give you plenty of sources. I wont link the top results, but your more than welcome to look for yourself. The system is rife with corruption and abuse. Also of note is that about 2 - 3 million tax payers carry the burden of upwards of 12 million grant receivers. An unsustainable system collapsing under its own weight.

Re: What Happens When the Poor Receive a Stipend?

#156

Post by mercer »

goggles99 wrote: post #110
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #34

The researcher supposed that the reduced stressors in poor parents' lives allowed them to be more nurturing, resulting in reduced problems with their children. Seems like a no-brainer to do, considering this analysis: "Bearing that in mind, Randall Akee, an economist at the University of California, Los Angeles, and a collaborator of Professor Costello’s, argues that the supplements actually save money in the long ru…

Id be interested to see if even better effects would be realized if television was cut off from a group like this for a generation or two. Why did the parents of these poor kids do a terrible job of parenting before the stipend? They were drunk half of the time (literally 10-12 hours per day). They drank mostly because they felt sorry for themselves. Why? they felt disadvantaged and envious, they were basically pouti…

Could it be that it's primarily the feeling of being stuck, of not being able to move ahead, that causes this self-pity and self-destructive behavior?

I've found in most of my interactions with people, including the very poor, the feeling of control, the feeling of being able to shape your destiny, is what differentiates those who remain poor from those who work their way out of it. It differentiates those who spiral into depression or addiction from those who don't.

Alcoholism, self-pity, and/or ridiculous amounts of television watching are a problem, but seem to be a symptom more than a cause.

Re: What Happens When the Poor Receive a Stipend?

#157

Post by notdrunkatall »

splitrocket wrote: post #151
notdrunkatall wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Swede, you're shockingly uninformed. https://www.google.com/search?q=sweden+welfare+immigration&o...

Currently I am at a cafe in Thailand, hanging out with a bunch of swedes from diverse backgrounds. Just asked them bout this. Apparently, notdrunkatall, according to my Swedish friends, you are incorrect, and that the welfare system is considered a massive success in Sweden and that the immigration problem is seen as a minor, short term issue that right wing politicians make a big stink out of to get nationalistic vo…

The welfare system in Sweden IS seen as a massive success because it HAS been a massive success, and didn't have many serious problems because people respected it as a temporary thing, and receiving welfare came with a social stigma.

That is changing as a direct result of increasing immigration, and welfare reform is on the horizon across Europe, not just in Sweden.

Instead of asking them a loaded question in order to receive the answer that you want to receive, why not try asking them an unloaded question? Something like: do immigrants treat the welfare system differently than do native Swedes? Obvious answer is obvious.

But you've already said enough to refute your own argument: the immigration problem. It's a problem, is it not? And it's a problem because those people respect the system less than Swedes do, thus necessitating reform. It's not a major problem because the Swedes are proud of their system which has worked so well, with so little abuse, until just recently, and they're certain that they can figure this problem out as well before it gets too bad. But it is a problem nonetheless because, well, I'll just let you go back and read my original assertion.

How the fuck is it that a forum of supposedly intelligent people have such a massive problem with basic fucking logic?

Re: What Happens When the Poor Receive a Stipend?

#158

Post by goggles99 »

mercer wrote: post #156
goggles99 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Id be interested to see if even better effects would be realized if television was cut off from a group like this for a generation or two. Why did the parents of these poor kids do a terrible job of parenting before the stipend? They were drunk half of the time (literally 10-12 hours per day). They drank mostly because they felt sorry for themselves. Why? they felt disadvantaged and envious, they were basically pouti…

Could it be that it's primarily the feeling of being stuck, of not being able to move ahead, that causes this self-pity and self-destructive behavior? I've found in most of my interactions with people, including the very poor, the feeling of control, the feeling of being able to shape your destiny, is what differentiates those who remain poor from those who work their way out of it. It differentiates those who spiral…

I was not referring to the amount of time being wasted on television. If this were the case I would have mentioned video games as well as half a dozen other things.

The question is this. Why are people in the US wealthier then they have ever been, yet they act poorer and more depressed than ever? Comparing quality of life access to education and health care and relative wealth, "poor" people today would be considered in the middle (or even upper middle) class during the first third of 19th century. They ARE considered upper class compared to the majority of the people in the world today. Why they are they the laziest and have far more self pity then the fore mentioned groups?

The answer is that they FEEL disadvantaged and lacking opportunity relative to what they perceive as "everybody else". They FEEL helpless and hopeless. But this is really an illusion. This perception is formed mostly by watching visual media (television, movies, news ETC).

See really the stipend is a bailout of sorts. Something causes them to pity themselves (the false reality of media), and the money causes them to feel better about themselves. More aligned with that illusion.

What i am saying is - rather than a bailout, I wonder if just eliminating what caused the problem in the first place would be even better. I know that this is a fantasy because you can't just tell people to stop watching television.

The television thing is really just a symptom of a larger problem though. The main problem is the loss of Christianity and family. Even atheists cannot disagree with the fact that every legitimate study ever done about those with a strong belief in God concludes that they are harder working, far less depressed, commit far less crime, and stick with their spouses more ETC. (the same types of thing that this stipend seemed to help with). Take that away and of course there will be a big difference in crime, employment, divorce rate ETC. and how that affects future generations (the kids).

Re: What Happens When the Poor Receive a Stipend?

#159

Post by notdrunkatall »

splitrocket wrote: post #150
notdrunkatall wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have my position wrong. You people suck at this.

How do I have your position wrong? Please enlighten me. Telling me I suck at "this" is hardly informative or constructive. You indicated how a) this was a special case and that other types of people wouldn't behave similarly and that b) because other types of people wouldn't behave similarly this type of social policy shouldn't be enacted. Yes? What did I miss? Additionally, it is telling that you consider me to be p…

You still got it wrong, probably because you are a fucking twat.

Re: What Happens When the Poor Receive a Stipend?

#160

Post by mercer »

goggles99 wrote: post #158
mercer wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could it be that it's primarily the feeling of being stuck, of not being able to move ahead, that causes this self-pity and self-destructive behavior? I've found in most of my interactions with people, including the very poor, the feeling of control, the feeling of being able to shape your destiny, is what differentiates those who remain poor from those who work their way out of it. It differentiates those who spiral…

I was not referring to the amount of time being wasted on television. If this were the case I would have mentioned video games as well as half a dozen other things. The question is this. Why are people in the US wealthier then they have ever been, yet they act poorer and more depressed than ever? Comparing quality of life access to education and health care and relative wealth, "poor" people today would be considered…

I completely agree with you. Having spent a lot of time in a developing nation and one of the wealthy nations in the world, television and 'comparative wealth' are only a piece of the puzzle. Family plays a huge role, as does 'locus of control'.

So many people I met were very happy having a huge extended family, close ties with neighbours, and some scrappy shop that was just an extension of their home. Happier than most of the affluent managerial class I interact with on a daily basis nowadays. And yet they had televisions on, 24/7, that broadcasted this wealth. It affected them, and many were lured to a life they hoped would be better, but clearly it wasn't the decisive factor in their level of happiness.

I'm still very much trying to figure out how this works, but my deeply conservative Christian background often seems to provide answers, however uncomfortable that realization makes me at times.

Post reply on HN