Live data from Hacker News

Buy Yourself a Latte

ritholtz.com

341–350 of 351 posts

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#341
Something this article really brought home for me was just how f*^king privileged I am. Not because I can trivially afford a $5 coffee each day. But because of all the linked terms in that article like "Stanford Marshmallow Experiment", "Fixed Costs", "Finite Willpower", "Delayed Gratification" and so forth that I implicitly understand and gloss over.

The fact that I can _read this very article_ is why I can trivially afford a $5 coffee. Maybe if we focussed on education instead of $5 coffees, we could get to the point where we could justifiably ignore the coffees.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not made up. You misunderstood about the developmental delays: she gave birth to her son, refused to nurse him, refused to even have him close to her. She did not go outside with him or interact with him in any way beyond what's necessary to sustain life. She was living in a 11 squaremeter apartment with him and did not let him explore, did not take him to the play ground, did not take him to child groups. For a…

No, they don't. And social workers and welfare officials that I know do tell stories like this - about the parents of children now in state care. Infants don't get left with mothers who refuse to nurse or hold them. Children who are found to be suffering from such severe neglect that they are developmentally delayed don't get left with those parents. I have no doubt you believe what you're saying, and I have no doubt…

Yes, they absolutely do. How is this even a question? You don't cure a drug habit by giving the person more money cause they'll just buy more drugs. You don't cure a reckless driver by given them a faster car. You don't cure a reckless spender by letting them spend more. It's not even a question you would contest if there was something on the line for you except defending your ideology

> state care

Of course child welfare services (Jugendamt) is on the case. They gave her a case worker that used to stop by to make sure it didn't get too bad. Of course she thought the job of that person was to Nany her son so she went through about three case workers in as many years. Btw, she picks fights with everyone. But the state of Germany is (rightfully) very reluctant to take kids away. Even with this amount of neglect it's hard to be sure that fostering the kid would produce better results plus we have double sordid history with this kind of thing. [1] [2]

Doctors tell her in no uncertain terms what she needs to do but wouldn't you know it, she always reacts exasperated "how dare he say it's not normal that a child doesn't call for his mommy at 2 years old, I DID EVERYTHING RIGHT.". She feels like she is a perpetual victim of all these people who are really trying to help her.

> I have no doubt that you are misinformed.

I am perfectly informed as I get near daily updates on this case. I am going to be honest, knowing this person has absolutely shifted my view from a systemic one to a personal one. You can't make a welfare system that can fix this. It's literally better to have none at all because any welfare system is just paying people like her to become ever more useless and degenerate.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensborn [2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/aug/22/germany-cold-w...

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Make your own coffee. Its a strawman to suggest anybody needs a $5 latte else they got nothing. Its just self-indulgence, and nobody 'needs' that. Its a first-world notion.

Since when is life about needs and nothing else? "small luxuries" like a nice coffee should not be exclusively available to the super rich.

...and there it is again. Its a $5 latte or nothing - a false dichotomy. Like I just said.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they don't. And social workers and welfare officials that I know do tell stories like this - about the parents of children now in state care. Infants don't get left with mothers who refuse to nurse or hold them. Children who are found to be suffering from such severe neglect that they are developmentally delayed don't get left with those parents. I have no doubt you believe what you're saying, and I have no doubt…

Yes, they absolutely do. How is this even a question? You don't cure a drug habit by giving the person more money cause they'll just buy more drugs. You don't cure a reckless driver by given them a faster car. You don't cure a reckless spender by letting them spend more. It's not even a question you would contest if there was something on the line for you except defending your ideology > state care Of course child we…

Fun fact: one of the single most effective interventions for homeless people who take drugs is to give them a place to live. It's an amazing example of how giving people resources helps them stop relying on unhealthy coping mechanisms.

What you describe is quite literally a textbook cause for removing the child from the mother in German law - an immediate risk to their opportunity to develop cognitively or emotionally. You may well be describing an amazing case where some half dozen welfare professionals have all seen a case that clearly evaluates to 'this child needs to be removed' and all done nothing, but ... the odds are low. And the idea that you can't be misinformed because of the frequency of updates? Oh dear.

I am sorry that hearing about this woman has impaired your ability to think about welfare as a system. Perhaps you should avoid the topic until you recover your ability to think beyond her.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#346
post #218
post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to live anywhere other than London.

OK, so that's your preference; yes, it'll cost you. (Personally, I wouldn't want to live in London even if it were cheaper than my current small-town location.) But please don't presume to speak for the UK in general just because you've picked a particularly expensive market.

It's a bit more complicated than that, no? I mean... if someone is a Londoner born and raised but has to leave in order to buy a home is a bit more complicated of a situation than "they picked a particularly expensive market" to live in.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the same time, I feel like we are talking in a bubble here about a lot of unreal examples. When people make these coffee arguments it is often to people like several of my friends who are making a low income to begin with. Where are they supposed to get this 'saving 10%' when they don't actually have any luxuries beyond their 5$ of coffee a day? Where are they supposed to take that from if they are already barely…

Make your own coffee. Its a strawman to suggest anybody needs a $5 latte else they got nothing. Its just self-indulgence, and nobody 'needs' that. Its a first-world notion.

Agreed. I have a cold brew kit that cost ~$20, and I found a cheap coffee that tastes great in it. Very little effort required (dump + rinse the bag once a week or slightly more often), less than $1 per day. Throw some grocery store dairy in there, still probably under $1. I get the social aspect of getting coffee with people, but if we're just talking about the value of the drink, there's no reason to spend that much regularly and it really is enough to make a difference if your non-negotiable expenses already push your limits. Paraphrasing another commenter, 5% of take-home might be 15+% of disposable, which is a huge bite out of savings.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#348
This article is pointing out the problem with individualizing environmental or social problems. "The reason people are so broke is because they don't have the moral fiber to not buy that $5 latte. If they were smart and frugal, their problems with money would be solved."

No amount of decreased latte consumption will make up for the underlying problems people face - stagnant wadges, increased prices on fixes costs, student debt.

It's the same shaming related to obesity. Has obesity risen because people are now more lazy than in the past, or is because we live in a culture saturated with the marketing and availability of energy-dense, nutrient-poor foods?

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#349
post #186

I grew up in a poor family, could never afford anything unless miracles happened, never went on any trips etc. I later scaled all the way up to much more than I needed as a software developer and lately I'm pretty much down to nothing. The main thing I learned over 42 years of going back and forth is that a warm place to sleep, good health, good food (and coffee) and nice, caring people are priceless. Money is the ul…

> Posting this here is likely karma suicide, but here we go; this is my perspective, and it's as valid as any other. Not all perspectives are equally valid. > Money is the ultimate drug, yet piling it up and walking over dead bodies to get ever more is seen as successful and worthy of admiration. I know a junkie when I see one, the fact that the drug is legal changes nothing. Saying that friends and family are more i…

By all means, go on and dig a bigger hole for yourself.

But its not my fault, you got yourself into this shit and you get to crawl out.

Everything is forgiven and released, always.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they absolutely do. How is this even a question? You don't cure a drug habit by giving the person more money cause they'll just buy more drugs. You don't cure a reckless driver by given them a faster car. You don't cure a reckless spender by letting them spend more. It's not even a question you would contest if there was something on the line for you except defending your ideology > state care Of course child we…

Fun fact: one of the single most effective interventions for homeless people who take drugs is to give them a place to live. It's an amazing example of how giving people resources helps them stop relying on unhealthy coping mechanisms. What you describe is quite literally a textbook cause for removing the child from the mother in German law - an immediate risk to their opportunity to develop cognitively or emotionall…

> single most effective interventions for homeless people who take drugs is to give them a place to live

Have a fun citation for me on that? Is it effective in absolute terms or just "most effective"?

> unhealthy coping mechanisms

It's very telling that when you can't get past indivual behaviour anymore you still find a way to put it on the environment. I wonder why there is one group of people, let's call them "victims" where everything they do is readily excused and dismissed, like turning west coast cities into open air toilets. It's like they have no agency at all. It's almost as if the left habitually dehumanizes the subjects of their 'empathy' in the process of advocating their policies.

> an immediate risk to their opportunity to develop cognitively or emotionally.

No, children are not just taken away in Germany. Period. As long as the child is fed, clothed and free from overt signs of physical abuse it's a process and she is in it.

The most charitable thing to say is that you are halucinating some deep knowledge about child wellfare practices in Germany in order to prop up your ideology which can't deal with the existance of this one women, let alone the fact that she is a representative of a large class of people on similar paths.

> Perhaps you should avoid the topic until you recover your ability to think beyond her.

I think you should avoid any topic as long as you mistake your ideology for actual knowledge of the real world and the real people in it.

Post reply on HN