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

No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

robkhenderson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 600 posts

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#231

Post by [deleted] »

c22 wrote: post #224
inglor_cz wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NIMBY seems to be one of the intrinsic faults of democracy. Some people really don't like any change happening around them, and, once empowered, will go to great lengths to stop anything from happening. This is probably something that democratic states need to address by reducing such empowerment. Much like your neighbor cannot tell you what to cook for dinner - even if he is a vegetarian and hates the smell of meat…

Wtf? If all of your neighbors don't like the smell of meat they absolutely can tell you not to cook it. That's what democracy is. Don't like it? Be a king.

[deleted]

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#232

Post by Doches »

josefritzishere wrote: post #132

This article is riddles with biased language and seems generally unscientific. This undermines the premise being highly specific.

The author of TFA read Charles Murray's Coming Apart and has inexpertly regurgitated (to the extent of just copy-pasting the figures) that book's central thesis while failing to understand its nuance and context. If you're interested in this idea -- and you should be, because it's important! -- then you should just skip the article and read the (vastly superior) book.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#233

Post by pixl97 »

floatrock wrote: post #204
Zababa wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead of encouraging healthier diets which have lots of follow-on nutritional and long-term medical benefits This has been done for a while and mostly doesn't work.

Cool statement. Why not?

It does work for a small minority of society. For the rest it does not.

Also, it's very hard to make something work which huge monied interests design products in a manner to ensure you fail. Are you just going to ask your grocery store to stop putting salt-fat-sugar in bright packages right by the checkout, packages and foods that are being developed by well paid groups to get you to consume as much as possible.

It's also very hard when your body is designed to do one thing. Consume as many calories as possible so you don't starve to death, because your genes are screaming at you "Starvation is coming, it always does".

So the only 'cool' statement is yours by completely not understanding the situation at all.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#234

Post by jononor »

quacked wrote: post #128
bryanlarsen wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who do you think is building the houses that are being built? Without immigration we'd still have massive housing shortages because internal migration is much larger than external migration -- people moving from the hinterland to cities with jobs. But housing would be a lot more expensive because we would no longer have cheap labour to build & renovate our houses.

This is the constant refrain of pro-illegal/poor/migrant immigration. My answer is: "in the first world, businesses should operate by offering competitive wages, and the lifestyle costs of first worlders should be balanced against those wages". I am uninterested in living in a materially wealthy society that can only operate on the back of a recently-arrived serf class, and it's bizarre to me that so many people defe…

Those people would still exist though, just live in places with (even) less possibilities. And even without immigration, the first world is still very dependent on low cost labor, because of all the material goods produced abroad.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#235

Post by SoftTalker »

RobotToaster wrote: post #211
toomuchtodo wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Institutional housing ownership in the US is not a material contributor to housing price inflation [1]. With that said , we are approaching a housing shortage of +4.5M [2] units, and in concert with YieldStar's Backpage revenue maximization engine [3] (which is laundering landlord price fixing), renters are being squeezed (because where are you going to go if you can't afford to buy? you will pay, or you will be home…

YIMBY policies just end up with a small number of luxury condos being built. You need SHIMBY policies, social housing in my back yard.

As long as you're not tearing down 10 units to build 5, more supply is more supply. Doesn't matter nearly as much whether they are luxury or basic.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#236

Post by inglor_cz »

c22 wrote: post #224
inglor_cz wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NIMBY seems to be one of the intrinsic faults of democracy. Some people really don't like any change happening around them, and, once empowered, will go to great lengths to stop anything from happening. This is probably something that democratic states need to address by reducing such empowerment. Much like your neighbor cannot tell you what to cook for dinner - even if he is a vegetarian and hates the smell of meat…

Wtf? If all of your neighbors don't like the smell of meat they absolutely can tell you not to cook it. That's what democracy is. Don't like it? Be a king.

And if all of your neighbors don't like your skin color or religion, can they drive you out of town?

That is why no country in the world actually employs limitless democracy. There are usually guaranteed and protected civil rights that you can enjoy regardless of current majoritarian (and fickle) opinion in your town.

There are more systems in the world than absolute monarchy X absolute democracy that votes on everything all the time.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#237

Post by AnimalMuppet »

beaglesss wrote: post #228
inglor_cz wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NIMBY seems to be one of the intrinsic faults of democracy. Some people really don't like any change happening around them, and, once empowered, will go to great lengths to stop anything from happening. This is probably something that democratic states need to address by reducing such empowerment. Much like your neighbor cannot tell you what to cook for dinner - even if he is a vegetarian and hates the smell of meat…

Yep. My county deregulated housing. Literally no code checks. A permit was me drawing a square on a map, paying a few hundred bucks and it was rubber stamped in a few days. It was an absolute godsend. I built the house myself for 1/3 the price of even a clapped out trailer. Sure I could have built a firetrap but I have to live in the fucking house, so I did the best with what I can afford. We all have to live somehow…

May I ask which country?

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#238

Post by beaglesss »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #237
beaglesss wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. My county deregulated housing. Literally no code checks. A permit was me drawing a square on a map, paying a few hundred bucks and it was rubber stamped in a few days. It was an absolute godsend. I built the house myself for 1/3 the price of even a clapped out trailer. Sure I could have built a firetrap but I have to live in the fucking house, so I did the best with what I can afford. We all have to live somehow…

May I ask which country?

A county in USA

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#239

Post by Vegenoid »

Amezarak wrote: post #206
addicted wrote: post #177

> Those who sit at or near the apex of the social ladder (who decide what behaviors are prestigious) have decided that family stability is unimportant. The author unironically writes this after pointing out that research shows that affluent families the share of families with biological parents has only dropped to 85% from 95% while the share for poor families has dropped to 30% from 95%. The idea that the social ape…

I think they're making the argument that the upper classes make the argument that family stability is unimportant and should be de-prioritized in favor of "doing what makes you happy", but they don't actually believe that when it comes to their own families. The effect (according to OP) is that the upper classes are destabilizing the lower classes by advertising norms they don't actually believe in. > The people with…

> they're making the argument that the upper classes make the argument that family stability is unimportant and should be de-prioritized in favor of "doing what makes you happy", but they don't actually believe that when it comes to their own families

Yes, but they do not support this with data, just an anecdote.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#240

Post by katbyte »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #196
toomuchtodo wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Getting rid of institutional ownership would increase rental prices substantially, and that's bad for the poor and for the mobile. Extremes are unhelpful, we must find balance. Institutional ownership restrictions reduces monopoly pricing power, and rent controls de-risk against rents rising faster than wages. Outright outlawing of institutional ownership is not a solution, but allowing it to operate in a highly re…

The standard refrain is that the housing market is over-regulated, NIMBY's have made it too hard to build. Adding more regulation discouraging instutitions from building sounds like making the problem worse rather than better.

There are both bad and good regulations. Acting like all regulation is bad (say restrictive zoning or allowing people to block density) allows people to target the good (building codes, not building of garbage dumps or toxic materials) to get rid of

Regulations are not inherently good nor bad so please say what regulations are bad and what regulations should be changed because “less regulation” doesn’t mean things get better and can mean things get very very much worse (hey let’s allow toxic wast dumps under homes because that was too regulated before!)

Post reply on HN