The Strange Disappearance of Cooperation in America (2013) • Hacker News Board

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

#161

Post by cmurf » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 5:56 PM UTC

pm90 wrote: post #154

cmurf wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is fair. My dad grew up in the Great Depression in farmland, and the Federal government stepping in is what prevented widespread starvation. And during the dust bowl, again the Federal government came in and taugh everyone better soil management techniques. And from that, most people in that time and place were Democrats and expected that the government helped fund and organize the things that needed to be done…

Its hard for people like me to imagine what Reagan was as a president since his presidency cam before my birth. From what I've read though, it sounds like he had little understanding of how economics and government really worked and played on the fears of whites against the "welfare queen" phenomena, leading to significant defunding of mental health institutions leaving a lot of those people on the streets (i.e. home…

In my view Trump has already done more damage in 8 months than 8 years of Reagan, and in the end will far exceed it. The sheer damage being done at the State Department alone will take a decade to recover from already.

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

#162

Post by losteric » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 6:32 PM UTC

sol_remmy wrote: post #151

closeparen wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, visit inner-city Milwaukee, Detroit, or Gary sometime. Or, for that matter, some opioid-ravaged population-3000 former logging town in central Wisconsin. Social cohesion seems to evaporate along with jobs in the Midwest as everywhere else.

> some opioid-ravaged population-3000 former logging town in central Wisconsin You're buying a false narrative. Most midwestern town in states like Montana, the Dakotas, Utah do not have opioid problems. In fact, those states have the happiest and most satisfied people in this country.

Actually that is the false narrative. Those states may have the most satisfied people, but they also have the highest overdose death rates: http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2011/11/oregons_h...

(Google "National drug overdose rates" for more info - CDC and academia have plenty of studies, but no pretty graphs)

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

#163

Post by matt_wulfeck » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 6:55 PM UTC

tome wrote: post #137

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I'm saying the power and reach of our government into our personal lives has reached an unprecedented level, contrary to what GP was suggesting.

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

#164

Post by todd8 » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 8:24 PM UTC

adrianratnapala wrote: post #79

Animats wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The trouble with socialism is that it takes up too many evenings." -Wilde That's the problem with democracy. It's hard work.

One of the things that Tocqueville approved of in America is that everyone had some experience of government via jury duty. Which is compulsory (at least in principle, and in those days, probably in practice too). I've often wondered if random juries should play a larger role in day-to-day government. Forcing people to work like this is a huge tax and not to be taken lightly, but taxing peoples attention rather than…

Being on a jury is not an elevating experience.

I was on a jury deciding a driving while intoxicated case. The first vote was basically two of us against the rest of the jury. The reasons I heard justifying the guilty verdict votes were things like "Well, I'm a mom and I think drunk driving is terrible. That's why I think she is guilty".

Fortunately, there was one other educated person on the jury, and eventually, after discussing the actual facts of the case the rest of the jury understood and we acquitted the accused.

It was scary, during the selection process, the candidates mostly fell into two categories. Those looking forward to the $40 (as I remember it) allowance they gave us for each day of the trial and those that valued their time at more than $5/hour. The latter group all seemed to have some excuse for getting out of the trial. If it wasn't for the two of us on the jury, I believe the accused woman would have have been found guilty.

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

#165

Post by SpikeDad » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 8:59 PM UTC

cmurf wrote: post #161

pm90 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its hard for people like me to imagine what Reagan was as a president since his presidency cam before my birth. From what I've read though, it sounds like he had little understanding of how economics and government really worked and played on the fears of whites against the "welfare queen" phenomena, leading to significant defunding of mental health institutions leaving a lot of those people on the streets (i.e. home…

In my view Trump has already done more damage in 8 months than 8 years of Reagan, and in the end will far exceed it. The sheer damage being done at the State Department alone will take a decade to recover from already.

If you think State has been damaged you really don't want to see what's happening at EPA.

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

#166

Post by SpikeDad » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 9:01 PM UTC

humanrebar wrote: post #147

beachy wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I don't know what sort of scenarios you're alluding to. In the context of healthcare, universal healthcare means by definition that its available to everyone. But yes, unfortunate you if you get something that's not covered under the universal deal, e.g. some kind of leading edge cancer treatment. That's when you hope your private insurance (if any) will pick up the tab.

> In the context of healthcare, universal healthcare means by definition that its available to everyone. The government doesn't literally pay for anything you want or need. It picks what things it will pay for and what things it won't. You can't always ask government to make a special exception in extenuating circumstances like you could with a parent or cousin. I'm not saying family is always better. I'm saying ther…

You think Universal Healthcare is charity? Thanks for demonstrating the disconnect that many people have in the US and why lack of care about facts and information has us in the place we are right now.

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

#167

Post by SpikeDad » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 9:04 PM UTC

hueving wrote: post #133

willvarfar wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 en…

And here we have the Disappearance of Cooperation. The whole system is bad if the government does something you didn't want. Naturally if they do something you want then the whole system is good.

You know what cooperation means - it means that some of the time you don't get what you want and that's OK because the system gives you what you want (and need) also.

I dare you to describe a society where all services are provided on a voluntary basis. Go ahead I dare you.

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

#168

Post by croon » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 9:38 PM UTC

pdonis wrote: post #158

croon wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rest of the quote just describes the same thing in a euphemism. The quality of your life depends on your own responsibility (meaning you're SooL if you have any disabilities or are born poor/with less opportunities). But your quality of life also depends on someone else freely wanting to help you, so government shouldn't bother with it, which is basically just reiterating objectivism. Some people will help others…

> I think this whole argument is mostly a problem because some people view government as an adversary, instead of the product of populace cooperation. That's because government is an adversary to anyone who doesn't agree with what it's doing. There is no such thing as "populace cooperation" unless all of the populace agrees on what should be done. That is very rarely the case; most cases of "populace cooperation" are…

> That's because government is an adversary to anyone who doesn't agree with what it's doing. There is no such thing as "populace cooperation" unless all of the populace agrees on what should be done. That is very rarely the case; most cases of "populace cooperation" are a portion of the populace using the coercive power of the government to force everyone else to do the things that portion of the populace thinks are good ideas.

Cooperation doesn't mean that everyone gets their way. It's rare enough that two people want the exact same thing, even less a group of people. Having a country want the same thing is infeasible. Cooperating means compromising to maximise total utility.

> But if all the government does is "policing" in this sense--preventing people from oppressing others--then almost all of what governments do today would be off the table.

I didn't say that it is all it does, or should do, merely that the alternative to "government oppression" is oppression by individuals/corporations/groups, and you don't get a vote. Personally I think there are a lot more good things than just that aspect that our collective invention of government brings.

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

#169

Post by smokeyj » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 10:32 PM UTC

rusk wrote: post #141

smokeyj wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of it is game theory. If your community is your means of survival then being cooperative in your community increases the chance of reciprocation when needed. But I think the size of the community isn't something that can be institutionally grown to scale. A community without accountability devolves into anarchy very quickly. Instead of trying to get out what you put in, the game is to take as much and contribute…

Game Theory, is based on the premise that all individuals are selfish. It makes sense in an atomised society, where all relationships are utilitarian. It's an economic theory, not a sociological one, and it breaks down once you factor in actual "society" as a premise. If you take the position that society exists first, then the individual rather than the other way round it all becomes quite messy an unwieldy. A socie…

> Game Theory, is based on the premise that all individuals are selfish

Wrong. Selfish strategies aren't sustainable. Why should I continue with anything else you said? Your basic premise leads me to believe you don't have a rudimentary grasp on game theory, economics, psychology or sociology.

> If you take the position that society exists first

Yeah don't do that. Reason from first principle first and work your way up. Not the other way around.

https://xkcd.com/435/

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

#170

Post by Consultant32452 » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 11:44 PM UTC

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…

I never suggested that a government would be incapable of helping their populations thrive and live safely and comfortably. I said when the government says it's going to take on the role of feeding the hungry, that people tend to mentally check that mark off in their brain and are less likely to get involved in that issue in their area. This isn't some vast anti-government conspiracy. I'm not suggesting the government shouldn't have a role in things like feeding people. I'm just saying that private charity has an emotional bonding experience with your community that government assistance lacks.