Live data from Hacker News

The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

theguardian.com

181–184 of 184 posts

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pay taxes in the US? You are directly enabling a country to harm others. You ever buy a phone? You are directly enabling a chain of groups to harm people (in the name of creating that phone). You ever give a dollar to a homeless man? You might be directly contributing to them harming themselves (or possibly just letting them buy food/drink). Heck even your example about your sister, I think some people would argu…

You can and should be making explicit choices in that framework. You should not buy phones connected to the mistreatment of the Uighur population - and that is doable. If you think the US is doing more harm than good, you are allowed to move and surrender your citizenship. And yes, that is literally why I don't support direct cash handouts to the homeless. You can feed them and house them, you can't throw money at th…

> If you think the US is doing more harm than good, you are allowed to move and surrender your citizenship.

Well, no, you aren't necessarily without paying a special additional tax to the US government, so it doesn't really solve the problem of believing that paying US taxes is active participation in morally intolerable actions.

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#182
One might as well say "the surgeon tried to cut out the cancer; took out some healthy tissue". Yeah, that's how it goes. The existence of side effects is not convincing as a reason not to do things. The objective is to get results while minimizing undesirable side effects, but the desirable amount of side effects is not zero.

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#183

My question is , why don't these people have bank accounts?

> With the changes, people became reluctant to make these transactions, Ornelas said, because they worry it will open them up for government surveillance or targeting by immigration authorities in the current intensified enforcement. Presumably, because it's hard to get a bank account in a country you aren't supposed to be in.

Unbanked folks are a large, legal population in the country. And immigration authorities recently have been less concerned about status vs if you look like you belong.

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pay taxes in the US? You are directly enabling a country to harm others. You ever buy a phone? You are directly enabling a chain of groups to harm people (in the name of creating that phone). You ever give a dollar to a homeless man? You might be directly contributing to them harming themselves (or possibly just letting them buy food/drink). Heck even your example about your sister, I think some people would argu…

You can and should be making explicit choices in that framework. You should not buy phones connected to the mistreatment of the Uighur population - and that is doable. If you think the US is doing more harm than good, you are allowed to move and surrender your citizenship. And yes, that is literally why I don't support direct cash handouts to the homeless. You can feed them and house them, you can't throw money at th…

> And yes, that is literally why I don't support direct cash handouts to the homeless. You can feed them and house them, you can't throw money at them and expect a good outcome.

You maintain this despite all the research showing that this is the most effective way to help people?

Post reply on HN