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

Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

schools.nyc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 494 posts

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#311

Post by hpoe »

blunte wrote: post #252

I find it fascinating that it seems so many people are against (sometimes vehemently) against others getting free food and shelter. There is no excuse for a modern civilization to not ensure that everyone has basic human needs met. Sure, we can argue some details like, "Is Netflix really a basic human need?"... joking aside, we as humans should endeavor to ensure that all people have their Maslow pyramid filled in.

I want to help other people I donate a decent chunk of my paycheck to humanitarian and other charitable efforts. I hate seeing people hungry, I grew up in a difficult situation and I hate seeing children go hungry.

My problem isn't that I am against people getting free food and shelter I am opposed to being forced into charity at the point of gun by the state, and my liberties being eroded by moral busiebodies that fail to understand the very things that led us have a society that even has the capability of eliminating hunger are the very things they are trying to destroy.

Every advancement, every push for "just a little bit more welfare", or "think of the children" has behind it the unspoken assumption that the government can do a better job with my means to help people than I could. This same government with a 13% approval rating and that is universally despised in most everything they try and do.

Every inch of additional power that the government gets is an advancement that is set in stone and can only be rewound with great effort.

So please don't paint me as an amoral monster, I do care, but I also recognize that sometimes emotionally driven responses that are executed without much thought and planning, like California banning plastic bags, can cause a lot more harm than good, especially in the long run.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#312

Post by atlantacrackers »

bobwaycott wrote: post #243
Justsignedup wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the point. It should. If we remove the fear of starvation (we can afford to feed everyone twice and barely put a dent in our military budget) a lot of people will have a HUGE improvement in their day-to-day happiness. This is one of those obvious huge moral positives we can do. The only "down side" is there will never be fear of starvation. Edit: The one progress I can see in a society is when we can basically…

To add to your basics, don’t forget clothing and education. I think those are the 5 basics that are necessary to ensure every person can participate in society without fear or shame .

Cool cool. Are you talking like Nike shoes free for everyone? Because, I would be ashamed to show up at the mall in some ratty sneakers. Definitely should have government pay for that so I am without shame in my sneaks.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#313

Post by leetcrew »

derefr wrote: post #256
Cpoll wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we remove the fear of starvation (we can afford to feed everyone twice and barely put a dent in our military budget) 327,000,000 people * 365 days * $5/person/day = $596,775,000,000 yearly Or $596 billion $693 billion is the Wikipedia number for DoD budget, so that actually checks out. Of course, that's more than "put a dent in the budget," but I'm sure you meant those in need, and not every American (which is t…

I think the suggestion is that we can afford to oversubscribe a program like this, because it'd be a guarantee that you'd be able to eat (i.e. food on demand), not a push-based delivery of the resources (money/food stamps/etc.) required to be able to eat, that people would then feel that they "should" use up, thus using less of their own money. Any American who didn't take advantage of a demand-driven food supply pro…

are you envisioning some mechanism to prevent people from having filet mignon and caviar every night for dinner? I'm not poor, but my grocery purchases would change a lot if I didn't have to pay for it myself.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#314

Post by kryogen1c »

tren-hard wrote: post #18

One of those things I wish could out last this virus. We'd be so much better off as a society if we could at least keep our people fed. The comments in here seem a little negative currently but this is great news. Think of all the people in NYC who didn't have access to clean and regular food before the virus.

>We'd be so much better off as a society if we could at least keep our people fed.

this is not a statement you can make without qualifying. it is either a useless tautology (society would be better if society were better), or an actual argument about policy and procedures (if wealthier people paid more taxes, we could feed poorer people and society would be better).

of course, no one says the second thing when that's what they mean because it is not self-evidently true. the core issue is complex and then the second- and third- order consequences are even more complex. this is to say nothing about which morals you presuppose about what a "better" society would be.

> I wish could out last this virus.

I have been wishing the opposite. my greatest fear is that the virus and soon-to-be depression will be used to push through some extreme political policy that will reshape America in a near-uncontrolled way.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#315

Post by Loughla »

3fe9a03ccd14ca5 wrote: post #122
Loughla wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes we do, but they are charities, and generally related to religious organizations. My experience with homelessness and lgbt issues taught me that relying on the charity of others, and not a formal social safety net, will only drive marginalized people further to the margins. Relying on someone else wanting to feel good about themselves to get what you need to survive isn't a good model.

I’m sorry you feel this way. The food bank I’ve volunteered with “in order to feel good at myself” literally just puts a bag of groceries in your trunk, or as much as you can carry.

That statement isn't intended to be mean or hateful. It's a statement of fact. Our current foodbank system is reliant on people wanting to help. There is no obligation. Many do it because it makes them feel good inside, and that's fine.

The rest of my argument is still valid. Relying on charity for human survival is not a good system.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#316

Post by nexuist »

hpoe wrote: post #311
blunte wrote: post #252

I find it fascinating that it seems so many people are against (sometimes vehemently) against others getting free food and shelter. There is no excuse for a modern civilization to not ensure that everyone has basic human needs met. Sure, we can argue some details like, "Is Netflix really a basic human need?"... joking aside, we as humans should endeavor to ensure that all people have their Maslow pyramid filled in.

I want to help other people I donate a decent chunk of my paycheck to humanitarian and other charitable efforts. I hate seeing people hungry, I grew up in a difficult situation and I hate seeing children go hungry. My problem isn't that I am against people getting free food and shelter I am opposed to being forced into charity at the point of gun by the state, and my liberties being eroded by moral busiebodies that f…

> This same government with a 13% approval rating and that is universally despised in most everything they try and do.

Because there are many in and out of government that don't want the government to do its job, so that they can point at ineffective government and say "look, a private company [like mine wink wink nudge nudge] could do so much better than that."

Have you noticed that it is only American government (outside of dictatorships) that is highly despised by most of its citizens? Where is this anger from European, Canadian, Asian, South American citizens towards their governments? Could it be that those countries have a functional government that, despite failing in some areas, overall exceeds in providing basic necessities (i.e. healthcare) to its populace?

The idea that government will always fail is itself an unspoken assumption you are making. It doesn't have to be that way. We could have an efficient government if we wanted - the first step is to believe it's possible, like it has been possible in 100+ other countries.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#318

Post by derefr »

leetcrew wrote: post #313
derefr wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the suggestion is that we can afford to oversubscribe a program like this, because it'd be a guarantee that you'd be able to eat (i.e. food on demand), not a push-based delivery of the resources (money/food stamps/etc.) required to be able to eat, that people would then feel that they "should" use up, thus using less of their own money. Any American who didn't take advantage of a demand-driven food supply pro…

are you envisioning some mechanism to prevent people from having filet mignon and caviar every night for dinner? I'm not poor, but my grocery purchases would change a lot if I didn't have to pay for it myself.

Nope; just assuming that the number of people taking advantage of this would be a power-law distribution rather than a gaussian, and so the economics would still work out in favor, even with people "abusing the system."

That, and perhaps the dollar-cost of your "free" food purchases would be taken into account in calculating your tax bracket.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#319

Post by JSavageOne »

kryogen1c wrote: post #314
tren-hard wrote: post #18

One of those things I wish could out last this virus. We'd be so much better off as a society if we could at least keep our people fed. The comments in here seem a little negative currently but this is great news. Think of all the people in NYC who didn't have access to clean and regular food before the virus.

>We'd be so much better off as a society if we could at least keep our people fed. this is not a statement you can make without qualifying. it is either a useless tautology (society would be better if society were better), or an actual argument about policy and procedures (if wealthier people paid more taxes, we could feed poorer people and society would be better). of course, no one says the second thing when that's…

If you're going to make a rebuttal, then make a rebuttal. So far you haven't really said anything to refute his statement that society would be better off if everyone was guaranteed 3 meals per day.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#320

Post by john_fushi »

kryogen1c wrote: post #314
tren-hard wrote: post #18

One of those things I wish could out last this virus. We'd be so much better off as a society if we could at least keep our people fed. The comments in here seem a little negative currently but this is great news. Think of all the people in NYC who didn't have access to clean and regular food before the virus.

>We'd be so much better off as a society if we could at least keep our people fed. this is not a statement you can make without qualifying. it is either a useless tautology (society would be better if society were better), or an actual argument about policy and procedures (if wealthier people paid more taxes, we could feed poorer people and society would be better). of course, no one says the second thing when that's…

Yeah, you're right. The USA right now is in a good state on the matter of social policy, and I don't see any way it could be improved.

Especially if it takes taxing the "rich" more. Imagine the chaos that would ensue...

In fact, I'd go as far as to say that the current problem in the USA is that market is not free enough. Trump should definitely lower taxes on higher incomes and cut services. This can only push innovation! Think about how quick this whole "crisis" would be solved if it weren't for government intervention!

That would certainly make for a better society!

Post reply on HN