Cards Against Humanity Redistributes Your Wealth • Hacker News Board

Re: Cards Against Humanity Redistributes Your Wealth

#181

Post by rficcaglia » Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 4:08 PM UTC

edanm wrote: post #176

FLGMwt wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Happy to! First, I chose the word "objectively" in the sense that win/wins are still possible in consumeristic markets. I think most businesses would have taken a flexible $100k USD and spent it on marketing or expansion or something. The fact that this was distributed freely to people who self-identified as having use of it is good . Second, flawed/unfair/biased/imperfect does not mean that something can't have net…

You're making a few assumptions that I disagree with. 'First, I chose the word "objectively" in the sense that win/wins are still possible in consumeristic markets.' Well, I think most economists will tell you that almost every non-forced transaction in a consumeristic market is a win-win. Otherwise, it wouldn't happen! You have $x, but you want to have whatever I'm selling more than you want to have those $x, theref…

Having studied economics and married to a PhD in behavioral science, I would urge you to separately consider the academic utility of the models of “most economists” from real life. Economic theories and models have a lot of value, just not applied to anything to do with real humans.

Better said here [0]: “Economics is plagued by the spurious exactness of mathematics. It neglects human behaviour and grovels before its paymasters in government and commerce. Its forecasting is as much use as Mystic Meg and the astrologers.”

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/06/econom...

Re: Cards Against Humanity Redistributes Your Wealth

#182

Post by zild3d » Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 5:34 PM UTC

lobotryas wrote: post #97

FLGMwt wrote: post #31

Oh hey, on top of the prevalent skepticism and detractions in the current discussion, I'll just throw out that, on its own, this is objectively a Good Thing. I won't dismiss the fact that this is good PR for CAH, but it is still morally-motivated positive impact for some fixed number of people. A company took some profit they had and exceptionally distributed to some of their less fortunate customers. Don't immediate…

>objectively a Good Thing Could you please defend this assertion? They themselves admit that their redistribution method is flawed (see the FAQ). I see this as an empty publicity stunt and something that doesn't help in the least.

> and something that doesn't help in the least.

You spoke to the 100 people and found it didn't help them?

Re: Cards Against Humanity Redistributes Your Wealth

#183

Post by op00to » Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 6:37 PM UTC

jquery wrote: post #104

mikekchar wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be suffering from the same thing I did: not understanding what this is about. I recommend taking a look at the FAQ (which is relatively difficult to get to from the original article): https://www.cardsagainsthumanitysavesamerica.com/#faq It's a "complicated promotion" and in this phase they are redistributing wealth to the poorest of the group who paid -- not to the poorest people in the country. I had origin…

Past college, living hand-to-mouth is in the USA is largely an issue of financial education and self-control. I was living hand-to-mouth when I met my wife, who made half what I did and had substantial savings. Get housemates instead of keeping a house to yourself. Get roommates instead of a room to yourself. Get rid of your subscriptions. And so on. Sustenance is remarkably cheap unless you're in poor health. I blam…

Are you kidding me? What if someone is unable to go to college? How about someone making minimum wage?

Re: Cards Against Humanity Redistributes Your Wealth

#184

Post by danpalmer » Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 6:41 PM UTC

throwawaycloud wrote: post #46

ridgewell wrote: post #12

>We excluded all Canadians. They already have universal healthcare. They’ll be fine. Yikes. I certainly got a laugh out of that, then an overly reflective period of what I'm grateful for, especially the benefits afforded from being north of the border.

Throwaway for privacy. I've been concealing cancer symptoms for years, mostly because I can't afford to get a colonoscopy. Even the cheapest clinics run well over $1k, which is totally out of reach. The secondary reason is an unhealthy fear of needles and a desire to live without a colostomy bag. I know I need to see a psychiatrist or a therapist to help me get over these irrational fears, but you guessed it: I can't…

> The secondary reason is an unhealthy fear of needles

I realise this isn't the only problem, but with a fear of needles you will be more likely to make bad decisions for your health than you would otherwise make.

I know because I resisted life changing medication for several years because it required regular blood tests.

About 18 months ago I decided I didn't want to do that anymore and sought help for my phobia. I was at the stage that one of my biggest fears was having an accident and waking up attached to IVs. I would likely have hit someone who would come at me with a needle. I would leave the room if someone had a fake needle pen (trigger warning: https://cdn.thisiswhyimbroke.com/images/syringe-pens1-640x53...). I would cover the backs of my hands involuntarily just having a conversation about needles.

I saw a therapist (on the NHS, free) for 8 sessions over the course of about 3 months, who guided me through a course of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), in my last session I held a needle (with it's cap on). Afterwards I was able to continue applying the techniques I learnt in therapy, and got better to the point where I started having blood tests in July. I've since had 7 blood tests and have been noticeably more able to cope with each one.

This is a fixable problem. This isn't part of you, it's just a bug in your brain, and CBT is a technique that you can learn to train your brain to work around the bug. There's a ton of evidence behind it, we know it works, it really is just this "one weird trick".

I highly recommend trying it, and while I was taught it by a trained professional, I suspect you'd be able to get significant value out of reading online. Find someone who can learn with you and have them keep you on track.

I say all this as someone who is skeptical of "therapy" and as someone who has seen very clear progress from CBT. It works, it's supported in research. Don't let a phobia be the reason you don't get medical help. If there are other reasons then tackle them, but a phobia will give you a reason not to even try so fix it.

Feel free to email me if you want to chat.

Re: Cards Against Humanity Redistributes Your Wealth

#185

Post by sctb » Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 6:43 PM UTC

jquery wrote: post #86

petercampanelli wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're casting so much judgement here. Anyone can spend money on whatever they choose, just like the recipients can spend the $1000 however they like. We have no business criticizing these people.

If Cards Against Humanity is going to demand wealth redistribution to support these people, you're goddamn right I can judge the financial choices of their champions.

You've broken the guidelines a lot in this thread by commenting uncivilly and/or unsubstantively. Would you please re-read them and then stop?

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Cards Against Humanity Redistributes Your Wealth

#186

Post by jnbiche » Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 8:58 PM UTC

harryh wrote: post #180

jnbiche wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people living in subsidized housing will have a stove, because Section 8 requires it from landlords. However, I know a lot of people who may be slightly above the poverty line who don't have a working stove. That included me for a while.

It would be very unusual for access to an appliance to decrease as income rises. Do you have any data to support that claim beyond your individual experience?

Did you not read what I just wrote? Section 8 housing requires these appliances. But you have to be below a certain income level to quality for Section 8 housing. It would be very reasonable to assume that once your income is above that required for Section 8 housing ($36,000 for family of 4), then if your appliance broke, it might be difficult to replace it because you don't have several thousand dollars lying around. If you've never tried to raise a family of 4 on ~$37,000, let me assure you that you will likely run into that situation sometimes.

But no, other than my personal experience, I have no data to support my claim. Just as you have none to support your counter-claim.

Re: Cards Against Humanity Redistributes Your Wealth

#187

Post by jnbiche » Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 9:03 PM UTC

harryh wrote: post #179

jnbiche wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, in that article they basically say it's likely one factor among many, which is exactly what I'm saying.

They say that it is a very minor factor.

Well, thank god that we don't have the replication crisis hasn't engulfed economics, and that we can totally rely on the conclusions reached by a single working paper.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/about-40-economics-ex...

But in any case, among all the factors I listed, I agree that it's probably the smallest factors. In fact, I didn't even initially list that factor, and only came back and inserted it after my initial post. So the fact that it's a small factor doesn't refute any of the other ones.

Last comment from me. You go ahead and rebut all you want. But if you think getting poor people to eat better is just a matter of educating them and instilling a sense of self-discipline, you're quite wrong. Like many difficult problems, this one has multiple causal factors.

Re: Cards Against Humanity Redistributes Your Wealth

#188

Post by jnbiche » Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 9:33 PM UTC

1123581321 wrote: post #163

throwawaycloud wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have no idea how much I want to, but $1k for a colonoscopy is wildly optimistic. It's probably going to be $3k or $4k minimum. I make $750 bimonthly, which barely pays the rent. My roommate pays the rest of our living expenses. There's $1,800 in the bank. What do I do? Show up and say "There's no way I can ever pay for this, but see me anyway"? I literally have no idea, and I'd feel like a complete scumbag for do…

If your income is $18k/year like you said, it is low enough that you should qualify for a healthcare subsidy. I just checked. If you won't get insurance, apply for financial aid in the healthcare system you use. They'll cover most or all of the cost based on hardship if your situation is that bad. Once you're received financial aid, it will probably apply for most of your medical expenses for several months to a year…

> If your income is $18k/year like you said, it is low enough that you should qualify for a healthcare subsidy. I just checked.

You checked? For a single adult? Most states don't even cove Medicaid for a single adult with no kids, regardless of income. And for those that do, I'd be surprised if $18,000 qualifies him in most of them.

> If you won't get insurance, apply for financial aid in the healthcare system you use

Healthcare system he uses? You realize he's in the US, right? What healthcare system are you referring to?

I'd recommend that the poster go to the ER and tell them his symptoms. I'd say they'll almost certainly do tests on you. Ask to talk with a social worker if needed, and ask them about payment plans, and then if you can't pay, don't worry about it. With you income, it's highly likely they'll be willing to write most of the cost off. It's our fucked up system that's left necessary medical care unaffordable to you. If you were in a reasonable country, either:

a) there would be universal health care or single-payer insurance and you'd not have to worry about paying, or

b) care would be much, much more affordable and you could afford it. In Mexico, a colonoscopy would be a few hundred dollars, and a fecal occult blood test maybe 20-30 dollars.

Because of the corruption of our political officials, and the greed of our insurance companies, pharma companies, hospitals, and doctors, you're left without the recourse that 90% of the world has. So go to the ER and get it taken care of. Even if you have cancer (and it doesn't necessarily mean you do), you won't always end up with a colostomy bag. But the longer you wait, the more likely that becomes.

Re: Cards Against Humanity Redistributes Your Wealth

#189

Post by 1123581321 » Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 10:47 PM UTC

jnbiche wrote: post #188

1123581321 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your income is $18k/year like you said, it is low enough that you should qualify for a healthcare subsidy. I just checked. If you won't get insurance, apply for financial aid in the healthcare system you use. They'll cover most or all of the cost based on hardship if your situation is that bad. Once you're received financial aid, it will probably apply for most of your medical expenses for several months to a year…

> If your income is $18k/year like you said, it is low enough that you should qualify for a healthcare subsidy. I just checked. You checked? For a single adult? Most states don't even cove Medicaid for a single adult with no kids, regardless of income. And for those that do, I'd be surprised if $18,000 qualifies him in most of them. > If you won't get insurance, apply for financial aid in the healthcare system you us…

Yes, $18k national average for a single adult should be low enough for a plan subsidy. I assume he is in a higher income state due to the rent cost.

Healthcare system meaning “St Jude” or “OSF” or “Kaiser.” These Are medium-to-large organizations in the US that many doctors and hospitals fit into to provide service. These orgs are large enough to provide charity if you do a little paperwork.

Re: Cards Against Humanity Redistributes Your Wealth

#190

Post by scott_karana » Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 11:05 PM UTC

akkat wrote: post #169

scott_karana wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Women, especially single moms, make less and often need to spend more to survive. Plus, while Pedro and Ian have women on the pictures, it sounds like those were sent after receiving the gifts, so that couldn't have been part of the selection process. Plus the trans individuals, whose identity or desired direction of transition I won't guess. At the end of the day, who even gives a shit who they're helping? It's a pr…

I'm not complaining. I just think that it's interesting to see the demographics of the winners. On another note, I can understand why single moms would have more expenses. But why would a woman who is not a mom have more expenses?

Hmm. I just did a poor job combining two sentences into one. Not sure if that's the case at all for non-moms. :)