This is a teenager • Hacker News Board

Re: This is a teenager

#671

Post by defrost » Wed, Apr 17, 2024, 5:15 AM UTC

Newlaptop wrote: post #652

Aeolun wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s more that we routinely see very poor and mentally ill people in the US get zero support? It’s not a great stretch to go from there to assume they don’t have any social security at all. If it’s available but many people cannot or do not know to make use of it, is it really social security? If they do make use of it and it’s still not enough, does that change things?

> I think it’s more that we routinely see very poor and mentally ill people in the US get zero support? The state of California alone has spent $24,000,000,000 on homelessness in the last 5 years. The government spends about $50,000 per homeless person. See: https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/california-homeles... You can certainly argue that the support they're being given isn't working, but it's very far fro…

> The state of California alone has spent $24,000,000,000 on homelessness

should very probably read "paid $24 B over 5 years to third parties on programs claiming to 'fix' homelessness"

This would include urban architectures and installions that seek to deter homelessness making sidewalks unsuitable for tents, benches unusable for sleeping, removing access to water and public toilets, etc.

Such things would not count at all as "support" for the homeless.

Regardless it seems remarkably ineffective and one has to wonder, as with military spending, how much goes to end use and how much is $$$ profit! for the contracters.

What would $24 B of affordable public housing look like, employing the homeless as labour?

Re: This is a teenager

#672

Post by petesergeant » Wed, Apr 17, 2024, 5:17 AM UTC

defrost wrote: post #661

petesergeant wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, with the caveat that I much prefer the British system... > nearly 40% of americans from being forced to put off needed medical care Hard to interpret UK NHS waiting-time figures, especially given the political weight given to them, but these[0][1] paint a picture of 6 month to >1 year waiting times. 0: https://www.boa.ac.uk/resource/boa-statement-on-nhs-app-show... 1: https://www.rcseng.ac.uk/news-and-events/m…

It might be worth stressing for US audiences that the UK NHS waiting times quoted are for elective non life threatening procedures; osteoarthritis surgeries that decrease pain for people already with a degenerative joint disease, hip and knee replacements, etc. The long wait times, 22 weeks mean average, > 63 week in 8% of extreme waits, are regrettable but not indicitive of waiting for urgent emergency life threaten…

I don't think your portrayal captures the reality of this well. Again, generalizing about numbers when it's such a hot political issue is difficult, and it's super-easy to cherry-pick, but take three NHS trusts in the South East, which for non-Brits is the rich part of the country -- I've chosen these three because I'm somewhat familiar with the hospitals themselves, and they're all big enough to have multiple specialties. I suspect if anything they understate rather than overstate the problem.

0: https://www.myplannedcare.nhs.uk/seast/royal-surrey/

1: https://www.myplannedcare.nhs.uk/seast/oxford/

2: https://www.myplannedcare.nhs.uk/seast/buckinghamshire/

For each specialty, there's a waiting time, which is the time between you seeing your local doctor and then seeing a specialist, and then there's a waiting time given from when the specialist refers you for a treatment -- they need to be added together. Cardiology is 17+21 weeks, 10+12 weeks, and 25+28 weeks, urology is 12+18 weeks, 18+23 weeks, and 25+20 weeks. Orthopedics (for your osteoarthritis example) is at 17+24 weeks, 22+46 weeks, and 20+25 weeks.

> not indicative of waiting for urgent emergency life threatening

Hospitals in the US can't turn you away if you show up presenting urgent, emergency, life-threatening symptoms either, and I suspect those are not the types of medical care that people in the US are generally putting off for cost reasons (although I'm sure there are a few cases where they are).

Re: This is a teenager

#673

Post by sabarn01 » Wed, Apr 17, 2024, 5:18 AM UTC

Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #606

batshit_beaver wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The outcome of this has been to make it harder to fail as a kid. I'd like to go a little further and suggest that more recently there's been a trend of not holding the adults accountable either. Instead of trying to improve outcomes for all, we seem to have decided to choose the path of collective failure.

When do the greater communities need to pay their dues? Schools cost money to run but taxpayers balk and cry over every cent increase. There are crumbling schools with toxic air and water that lack adequate HVAC paying their teachers unlivable salaries. This is the result of neglect to preserve and invest which is a condemnation of those who allowed such neglect on their watch when they should have championed such pl…

My kids school is terrible and they get about 22k per student per year in a rich area. The system is failing because it's designed to fail.

Re: This is a teenager

#674

Post by defrost » Wed, Apr 17, 2024, 5:22 AM UTC

petesergeant wrote: post #672

defrost wrote: post #661

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be worth stressing for US audiences that the UK NHS waiting times quoted are for elective non life threatening procedures; osteoarthritis surgeries that decrease pain for people already with a degenerative joint disease, hip and knee replacements, etc. The long wait times, 22 weeks mean average, > 63 week in 8% of extreme waits, are regrettable but not indicitive of waiting for urgent emergency life threaten…

I don't think your portrayal captures the reality of this well. Again, generalizing about numbers when it's such a hot political issue is difficult, and it's super-easy to cherry-pick, but take three NHS trusts in the South East, which for non-Brits is the rich part of the country -- I've chosen these three because I'm somewhat familiar with the hospitals themselves, and they're all big enough to have multiple specia…

> I don't think your portrayal captures the reality of this well.

"My" portrayal is a summary of the information in the links that you provided.

Re: This is a teenager

#675

Post by demondemidi » Wed, Apr 17, 2024, 5:22 AM UTC

waihtis wrote: post #662

ascorbic wrote: post #649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's great, and I'm genuinely glad to hear you've done well, but your story in no way negates the data in the article. It's not claiming that nobody coming from an adverse childhood succeeeds - just that it's a lot harder. Your post is a great example of survivorship bias. I doubt that there are many people in poverty who post to HN.

[flagged]

That is not what the person said, you are unfairly mischaracterizing the reply because you obviously did not understand it. I agree with the poster that it is great that person succeeded but I think the Op is rather crass to spend a hundred words describing how they succeed with literally no explanation. Which safety nets? What did he/she do to overcome? Feels more like BS without some details about the important parts.

Re: This is a teenager

#676

Post by xeyownt » Wed, Apr 17, 2024, 5:22 AM UTC

waihtis wrote: post #662

ascorbic wrote: post #649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's great, and I'm genuinely glad to hear you've done well, but your story in no way negates the data in the article. It's not claiming that nobody coming from an adverse childhood succeeeds - just that it's a lot harder. Your post is a great example of survivorship bias. I doubt that there are many people in poverty who post to HN.

[flagged]

Nope. The point is that one story doesn't compensate the result of an experience over 1000 stories.

Re: This is a teenager

#677

Post by sabarn01 » Wed, Apr 17, 2024, 5:26 AM UTC

Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #595

chefandy wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We don't hold kids back anymore and we don't suspend kids anymore. Does that contradict real data that shows holding kids back and suspending them makes them more successful?

Real data on holding kids back is actively harmful. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03055698.2014.93... The same holds for suspensions. https://edsource.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Noltemeyer_W...

In both cases the point is benefit the system at the expense of the child with the issues. One kid should not be allowed to ruin a class. My kids school has emotionally disturbed kids in the classroom making it impossible to have regular lessons.

When I was kid we had people that brought guns to school and were kicked out it seemed reasonable to me. I also think alternate school is a reasonable answer for kids who are violent or have been otherwise expelled. I was suspended for fighting and it seemed like an appropriate punishment.

Re: This is a teenager

#678

Post by nicolas_t » Wed, Apr 17, 2024, 5:27 AM UTC

komali2 wrote: post #587

noisy_boy wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I agree on your take. Mental strength in people in adverse conditions is not the rule, it is the exception. Most won't have enough of it to overcome the difficulties and will instead fall prey to easy traps like drugs etc. It is easy for most of us, who have managed well enough to be commenting here which probably implies a baseline amount of mental strength, to take the shining examples and think that these…

A lot of cozy people underestimate the willpower challenge of poverty. I meet so many tech bros that victim blame. "the mom working two jobs has at least an hour at night. She can use that time to take free coding classes, teach herself to code, upskill and get a high paying programming job. It's not easy but it's possible." Some variation of that said to me so many times. "my family grew up poor and I figured it out…

> "my family grew up poor and I figured it out! My dad came to this country with five dollars in his pocket etc etc."

People also drastically underestimate the negative changes in social mobility since 1980. You mentioned one with housing but access to good education is another aspect.

I know the situation in France more than the US but at least in France, there used to be a lot more upward mobility. I went to a very well ranked engineering school that was created in the 60s with the goal of giving access to higher education to everyone. When they opened, 30% of students had parents who were farmer or factory workers (65% of the population had those type of jobs back then). By 2005, 7% of students had those kind of background (compared 39% of the population did those kind of jobs). I was in the school administration concil back then and this was already seen as a big problem. I know for a fact that the students coming from less advantageous background has been further reduced.

It's a generalized trend, increasingly all the best schools mostly admit from a small selection of students that come from a select number of good schools.

There's a lot of factors that changed and, surprisingly, evolution of upward mobility is poorly studied. My mother always thought that she succeeded because she went to boarding school in middle school and high school. Back then it was normal for people living far in the countryside like her. She thinks that boarding school allowed her to get a rest from her stressful and toxic home environment. Thanks to it she was able to read, study in peace and able to succeed. She later became a teacher and she was saddened by some of the kids she saw that grew up in an adverse environment with no real way out.

> The psychological burden of a hopeless situation is enormous.

Fully agreed on the psychological burden of a hopeless situation. When you are perpetually stressed about money, it's hard to gather the required energy to do anything besides surviving.

Re: This is a teenager

#679

Post by ascorbic » Wed, Apr 17, 2024, 5:27 AM UTC

waihtis wrote: post #662

ascorbic wrote: post #649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's great, and I'm genuinely glad to hear you've done well, but your story in no way negates the data in the article. It's not claiming that nobody coming from an adverse childhood succeeeds - just that it's a lot harder. Your post is a great example of survivorship bias. I doubt that there are many people in poverty who post to HN.

[flagged]

I'm suggesting nothing of the sort, and it's disingenuous to suggest I did. I'm just saying that him being one of the purple group in his cohort doesn't in any way contradict the fact that that group is smaller than among people with easier childhoods.

Re: This is a teenager

#680

Post by AzN1337c0d3r » Wed, Apr 17, 2024, 5:32 AM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #483

thfuran wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If we go by this philosophy, the most import decisions are when you were born, where, and into what environment. Isn't that basically the gist of TFA?

TFA? Trifluoroacetic acid? Tenant Farmer Association? Can't find any appropriate acronym

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=TFA