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

Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

programmingisterrible.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 387 posts

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#351

Post by bmmayer1 »

scotty79 wrote: post #349
bmmayer1 wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a matter of fact, many Europeans I've met in the US have moved here to get away from "these social programs" which are strangling their economies and destroying opportunity. Come to think of it, most Europeans I've met in Europe are trying to leave, also.

You probably are strongly opinionated and people you meet are strongly biased subset of Europeans. I personally know no one that would want to live in US. Even the entrepreneurial types. They are aware about rampant litigation, exorbitant costs of even simplest medical procedures that is reflected in costs of health insurance and sheer volume of US tax code. I knew one person though, who went to US to buy some goods…

Actually, most of my European friends are socialists, but that's not the point. We live in a global economy, and people want to go where the opportunities are, and there are still a lot of opportunities here, especially for upwardly mobile young Europeans who are having trouble finding employment what with a near 50% youth unemployment rate in some countries.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#352

Post by scotty79 »

greghinch wrote: post #192
zacharycohn wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It is part of the maturation process and realize that the world is not a fair place, and no not everybody is equal and will live equally." I think the point of the article is that that's fucked up, and not how the world should be. And what I suspect the author realized is that it isn't the way he or she wants to be.

> I think the point of the article is that that's fucked up, and not how the world should be. That's the maturation process though: understanding that the world has been that way for all time . Look at nature, around you, some animals within any given group always do better than others. It's fine to be bothered by it, and want to do something to change it, but it's naive to think that a) you are the first person to n…

One calls it maturation, another calls it desensitization. I think it's same thing because what people call maturation is just nervous system getting more numb as it gets older and worn out.

The point is it's not better to accept it. It's not more grown up and responsive to stop caring about this. World is not the same as it used to be. It constantly get's more and more humane. I recomend watching http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violen...

If you accept homeless population in SF you are just closing your eyes to places that are much better to live than SF even with much less money in circulation.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#353

Post by mapt »

epsylon wrote: post #332
LekkoscPiwa wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

European nations would not be able to afford universal healthcare and all the welfare if they had to pay for their security. US bases in Europe are great financial aid. I never hear discussions about Iran or Russia being a possible threat in Europe. I do in the US. Which is funny because it really is much bigger problem for Europeans to have guys like Putin and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at their door steps. Never happens.…

> European nations would not be able to afford universal healthcare and all the welfare if they had to pay for their security. US bases in Europe are great financial aid. Bullshit. Not only are there examples of military independent countries (ever heard of France?) with better healthcare systems, but your whole theory about military expenses being the root cause for USA's less than ideal healthcare system is far too…

Ask yourself: If X invaded France, would the US spend more than France's military budget defending France? Would US-designed hardware and military R&D products be used? Would the US intelligence network be used to maintain situational awareness?

While Americans certainly tend to overstate the case, I've seen a lot of very proud Europeans claiming the US has had no stake in defending them, after half a century of Cold War left the US the sole standing military hegemon, maintaining an extraordinarily expensive reserve capacity to wage warfare on behalf of the West when it's not directly against their interests.

Universal healthcare is preferable because it's cheaper. The rest of the European-model social welfare state would be possible in the US if we didn't blow so much more than putatively 'military independent' allies on our military, and if we hadn't developed the popular culture we needed to justify that spending in opposition to "Communism". Guess what? We're kind of broke. Europe is going to need to buck up and raise its military spending as a proportion of GDP if it wants to remain in its comfortable non-tenuous position for the rest of the 21st century.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#354

Post by scotty79 »

gpvos wrote: post #343
greghinch wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the point of the article is that that's fucked up, and not how the world should be. That's the maturation process though: understanding that the world has been that way for all time . Look at nature, around you, some animals within any given group always do better than others. It's fine to be bothered by it, and want to do something to change it, but it's naive to think that a) you are the first person to n…

> the world has been that way for all time. (I'm not an expert on this, but as far as I know) many traditional/"primitive" societies have much less problems with homelessness and mental disorders because of stronger family support. (Of course, they have other problems that we don't have.)

Also because weak were getting killed.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#355

Post by cmdkeen »

arethuza wrote: post #282
LekkoscPiwa wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

European nations would not be able to afford universal healthcare and all the welfare if they had to pay for their security. US bases in Europe are great financial aid. I never hear discussions about Iran or Russia being a possible threat in Europe. I do in the US. Which is funny because it really is much bigger problem for Europeans to have guys like Putin and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at their door steps. Never happens.…

EU countries spend roughly half the amount on defence that the US does. Given that the US spends an insane amount on its military that seems plenty enough to me. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_European_Union Possibly also worth mentioning the tens of billions of dollars (and many hundreds of lives) that countries like the UK have spent in fighting mainly US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The USA spends around 18% of its GDP on healthcare already, which larger than any other big country, the Netherlands is next on 12%.

Given the military spend is 4.7% of US GDP it is patently untrue that military spending means that more couldn't be spent on healthcare. You could have a healthcare system that is 50% better than any other Western country, for everyone, just by reallocating the money already spent on healthcare.

Yes, money != outcomes, but it works roughly. Especially as there is so much low hanging fruit in the USA due to the shocking state of healthcare provision for the poor.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#356

Post by scotty79 »

ims wrote: post #163
ownagefool wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm Scottish and while I've not quite experienced it myself, I'm happy living in Europe where m taxes are spent on health care as opposed to bombs. It's not so much shocking as it is just really sad. :(

And the rest of the Western world, like it or not, is able to spend less on defense precisely because -- thanks to some unique events in the 20th century -- the US is effectively providing a defense subsidy for all of its allies. I'm not advocating, just saying. Perhaps European countries would have to spend more if the US did not concern itself with the rest of the world? Food for thought.

US is not doing any defense charity. It's present in Europe only because US commanders think it's in the best interest of US. Europe spends on its military half of what US does.

I don't believe that Europe would spend significantly more on military. Europeans after carrying two world wars on their soil seem little bit resilient to threats of war and to actual violence. When it comes to Americans it seems that goat fart spontaneously combusting on the other side of the planet constitutes experimental discharge of pyrochemical weapon potentially of mass destruction that ought to be carefully monitored by swiftly dispatched fleet of surveillance drones.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#357

Post by scotty79 »

ims wrote: post #296
jrochkind1 wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is in fact providing a defense subsidy to it's allies AND to it's enemies. EVERYONE gets their weaponry from the US (they bought it back when they were allies, now their enemies), and/or gets weaponry developed with US military R&D. It's certainly good for the US defense industry. You've got to buy more better weapons cause your enemy has bought more better weapons, and both sides buy em from the US defense in…

You're mistaking what I mean by subsidy. I'm talking game theory, not short term shuffling of monies. You are correct in that there are transfers of money and arms, the individual value and long term wisdom of which are always debatable. What I am talking about is a de facto subsidy, based on the fact that many other countries have in effect outsourced much of their security apparatus to the United States because the…

> many other countries have in effect outsourced much of their security apparatus to the United States

If any country had defense centered on such silly premise I think it migrated away from this since release of US cables that clearly show that US only cares about US and treats other countries not as venerable allies but as monkeys in their circus.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#358

Post by epsylon »

mapt wrote: post #353
epsylon wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> European nations would not be able to afford universal healthcare and all the welfare if they had to pay for their security. US bases in Europe are great financial aid. Bullshit. Not only are there examples of military independent countries (ever heard of France?) with better healthcare systems, but your whole theory about military expenses being the root cause for USA's less than ideal healthcare system is far too…

Ask yourself: If X invaded France, would the US spend more than France's military budget defending France? Would US-designed hardware and military R&D products be used? Would the US intelligence network be used to maintain situational awareness? While Americans certainly tend to overstate the case, I've seen a lot of very proud Europeans claiming the US has had no stake in defending them, after half a century of Cold…

> I've seen a lot of very proud Europeans claiming the US has had no stake in defending them

And I see a lot of proud Americans who state that they save the world out of pure altruism. I have breaking news for you: the "extraordinarily expensive reserve capacity to wage warfare" is here because it serves USA's interests, and no one else. I highly doubt that the military policies of your government are conceived with the interests of us Europeans in mind (although there is overlap between ours and yours). I'm pretty sure that, except for a few mistakes, it has been immensely economically profitable for the USA overall, allowing you to influence or overthrow governments, ensure a hand on strategic resources as well as allow you to export your goods and culture pretty much everywhere through strategic alliances (I'm thinking especially about Japan and South Korea). That's the reason why there are USA bases in Asia, Europe, the Middle East and everywhere else.

By the way, as a whole Europe is the 2nd military spender, with France and UK matching Russia's spendings, and when added together also matching China's spendings (despite having less than 200 times the population).

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#359

Post by arethuza »

mapt wrote: post #353
epsylon wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> European nations would not be able to afford universal healthcare and all the welfare if they had to pay for their security. US bases in Europe are great financial aid. Bullshit. Not only are there examples of military independent countries (ever heard of France?) with better healthcare systems, but your whole theory about military expenses being the root cause for USA's less than ideal healthcare system is far too…

Ask yourself: If X invaded France, would the US spend more than France's military budget defending France? Would US-designed hardware and military R&D products be used? Would the US intelligence network be used to maintain situational awareness? While Americans certainly tend to overstate the case, I've seen a lot of very proud Europeans claiming the US has had no stake in defending them, after half a century of Cold…

"Ask yourself: If X invaded France"

I can't get past this bit - try and provide a credible threat for some country who might be likely to invade France?

Someone invading France is about as likely as an invasion of United States - it's just not credible.

Re: Come here and work on hard problems – except the ones on our doorstep

#360

Post by arethuza »

berntb wrote: post #337
just_hobbyst wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, you really are confused! If a country is serious about national defence then it really needs universal health care, because it needs lots of healthy soldiers. Soviet Russia did a lot to make sure there was at least basic medical care available to everyone for exactly this reason - they needed millions of soldiers! Finland is doing the right thing when it takes care for it's citizens. Also, news flash for you: so…

I'd guess the Polish rant is based on that Soviet really did support the anti-nuclear weapon movement, and so on. Seing conspiracy theories like those, I am strengthened in the belief that the US extreme left and right are equally crazy. In Europe we mostly see the Chomsky brigade, some variation would make it less irritating.

That rant also ignores the fact that after the 1930s (and particularly after the Spanish Civil War) it was clear that the Soviets regarded any "socialists" who weren't under their direct control as more of a threat than their apparent enemies. Most socialists in Western Europe (e.g. the UK Labour Party) were more afraid of the Soviets than those on the political right.
Post reply on HN