Live data from Hacker News

This is a teenager

pudding.cool

691–700 of 868 posts

Re: This is a teenager

#691
post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My context is Canada where getting killed at work wouldn't been an issue. In the context I'm speaking about it would likely drive opportunity in low income neighborhoods. Canada also have horrific city planning, so when I say people need to travel far I mean they need to spend up to 3 hours in some major (major for us) cities just to get groceries. The US is a whole other can of worms, I don't know how to solve those…

> 3 hours in some major That doesn't sound plausible. Got some examples?

I live in Los Angeles. Driving to work takes 15 minutes. Taking the bus _home_ from work takes an hour. Taking the bus _to_ work would require extra time -- leaving early to make sure I don't miss the bus. And this is only a 3-5 mile ride, where the bus picks up half a block from my work and drops me off a block from home.

There's a shopping center with multiple markets and Walmart and Kohl's that the bus comes up along then turns away from on the way to work; I can use this as an example of shopping from home, as I can probably get 90% of my living supplies there. Ralphs, Target, Walmart, Kohls, Trader Joe's, etc are all here. The bus transfer here is not an easy one, though, as the bus timings overlap going in both directions, meaning you have to leave early and get back later (about 1 in 4 trips I can transfer without waiting. _Not_ good odds with an hourly bus).

0:00 5 minutes: walk to bus stop 1.

0:05 5 minutes: wait for the bus (best to be at the stop early in case your bus is early, though this bus is usually exactly on time)

0:10 10 minutes: take the bus to stop 2.

0:20 3 minutes: cross the street to get on the other bus

0:23 12 minutes: wait for the next bus 2, the previous one left while you were crossing (yes, seriously)

0:35 10 minutes: take bus 2 to stop 3 where the shopping center is

0:45 90 minutes: cross the parking lot to get to the store (5~10 minutes), then try and get all your shopping done in under 40 minutes so you can take the next bus back home. Nope, today you had to go to the supermarket pharmacy, which is a 20 minutes walk across the shopping center, wait for your meds, _and_ walk back to the cheaper market to do your shopping as well.

2:15 30 minutes: shopping is done a bit early. Yay. You have time to walk back to the bus stop and wait in the sun until the next bus 2 comes. Yay.

2:45 10 minutes: Bus 2 comes. Take it back to the transfer bus stop.

2:55 15 minutes: Cross the street again, and wait for bus 1 so you can get home

3:10 10 minutes: take bus 1 home.

3:20 15 minutes: Now you're a block away from home, carrying bags of groceries, _and you had to get off 2 stops early so you could use a crosswalk_, because there's no crosswalks on this street and people don't stop. Walk home.

3:35. Tadah. You're home. Just a bit over 3.5 hours!

Unfortunately, since you don't have a car, you're limited to buying what you can carry. I hope you're ready to go shopping again later this week! You have family? Oh, well then you'll be shopping again 3 times this week. Maybe even 4 times. I hope you like waiting in the sun/rain, LA Metro only puts up cover where they can make money off advertising, so all the bus stops we've used only have benches (except one, but that one's further away).

If all you needed was medication, you'll probably want to get your shopping done anyways, as this is otherwise a > 2hr trip just for that (remember, bus 2 is hourly, so you're spending an hour at the shopping center _minimum_, including walking to/from the bus stop).

There's five other stores across the street from the shopping center that you'd like to check out sometime, including a new grocery store, but it takes 20 minutes to cross the shopping center, then probably another 10 to cross the street and the parking lot in front of the other stores. Add the time spent in these stores, and you've just added another hour to your shopping trip. This is only _partially_ offset by crossing to the supermarket pharmacy, as that supermarket is nowhere near the corner, and keep on kind that anything you have to carry will slow you down more.

-----

Buses:

- Bus 1 goes EW near home, turns NS between home and the transfer point (about 10 minutes), then goes EW again.

- Bus 2 goes EW, turns NS between the shopping center and transfer point, and goes EW again.

- There _was_ a bus that went NS along the east side of the shopping center (which also would have dropped me off at home, cutting out the need for a second bus entirely), but this bus route was changed in 2019 to turn away from the shopping center once it gets to the NE corner.

- There's a bus that goes EW along the other side of the shopping center, but that's not helpful.

-----

You're forgetting about just how much convenience your car gives you _besides_ the ability to get to and from the store.

- You don't have to wait for transfers or make what is effectively two trips to get somewhere.

- You don't have to cross parking lots or go in and out of stores from the street (you can park up near the store, then drive to the other side of the shopping center).

- You can make a quick 5 minute stop on the way home without increasing your travel time by a full hour (because the bus only comes hourly).

- You don't have to wait outside.

- You don't have to hope that the bus was cancelled without notification (two weeks ago I was lucky to get a ride, as my once-an-hour bus was straight up cancelled without prior warning; if I didn't use the former-official Transit app to check times, I wouldn't have known, and would have been waiting at the stop for 80 minutes like one of my less fortunate coworkers did, or taking a different once-an-hour bus home with extra transfers and lots of waiting, to only get home ~10 minutes earlier)

- You don't have to only buy as much as you can carry on a single trip (I work in a grocery store, people can and do fill _multiple_ shopping carts to avoid having to go shopping a second time in a week. People can and do purchase groceries for elderly relatives they don't live with).

- if there's a detour, it only costs you the time it takes to make said detour. If the bus has to make a detour and you have tight timing, you might miss your transfer, adding 10-60 minutes to your commute.

- You're not dependent someone being willing to pick you up. When I was in college, a full bus would often just go right by without stopping, since there wasn't enough room.

- You're not dependent on your fellow passengers being rule-abiding or polite. Last year the bus driver stopped for an entire 50 minutes at a high school because the kids weren't being safe or quiet. Not that they're ever quiet, or that a full bus in general is quiet, but they were throwing condoms across an overcrowded bus and yelling, and the bus driver understandably didn't want to deal with it when _he couldn't close the door_, so he stopped and said those past the yellow line on the floor needed to get off and wait for the next bus. Instead, they made fun of him, continued talking loudly, and those near the door who shoved their way into a full bus refused to move. (The next month or so was _very_ quiet on the bus)

- general garbage is everywhere. The filth that people leave behind when they cram into a bus and then leave. The noise of competing music playing against each other. Having the choice to either get up and lose your seat, or sit with someone's butt in your face because another busy bus broke down and yours is the first/closest bus going in the same direction.

- All you want to do is go home and go to sleep, but you don't want to get the bus in your bed and this sweaty dude's been sitting here talking in your ear for 15 minutes now and you wish you hadn't offered him a seat, and as soon as he leaves you realize the person behind you is yelling on the phone and now you have a headache.

Re: This is a teenager

#692
post #689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The future is still a function of the past If you don't believe in conscious choice the whole debate is moot anyway.

That's not the claim. The claim is that if you're born poor, your chances of being poor when you become an adult are much higher. Perhaps you know that and still think that because the kid who is born poor "chose" to stay poor, but I hope no one capable of having a discussion about this topic thinks like that.

No, that is not the claim. That is a simple statistical fact that is obvious to anyone who looks at the data.

The claim is that folks are nothing more than "a derivation of their previous person states", and that correspondingly there is little to nothing a person can choose to do to escape the path set for them by their start state. I personally think this is blatantly false, and I have many observations to support my position.

Re: This is a teenager

#693

The punchline is this: "It's 2021. The research participants are in their late-30s now, which means they've had plenty of time to shape their own destinies. But we can clearly see that the experiences of their childhood had a huge effect on their financial situation as adults. It also has an effect on virtually everything else in their lives." You cannot infer the direction of causality from this data, i.e. that the…

> But then you get into why the parents are poor in the first place, and there are many causes, but a lot of them get passed down to the next generation in one way or another. Are you trying to say that these people are genetically poor?

To give one example, today's wealth distribution in UK still correlates quite strongly with Norman descent from the original participants of the Conquest. That's over 1,000 years of still-measurable generational wealth transfer.

Re: This is a teenager

#694

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My personal position is to abolish the minimum wage and update the tax scale with negative tax rates that support a reasonable quality of life at all income levels. The market will find its own balance for what a true minimum wage is in that environment (and not have weird perverse incentives like you state). Yes, this is UBI. But phrased as a tax cut makes it politically viable (at least in the US).

I would be interested to see this modeled. One of the classic unintended consequences of social welfare is making someone at the bottom unwilling to work. We saw this during the pandemic when people in formerly low-wage jobs got a lot of cash assistance and stopped being interested in low-wage jobs. (Remember all the "help wanted" signs and early closing hours at local restaurants?) I'm curious to see an example scal…

That "classic unintended consequence" was specifically tested many times in UBI context, and study after study doesn't find it in any noticeable amount.

In any case, given how badly broken the current system is, surely it's at least worth a try?

Re: This is a teenager

#695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ar…

> One kid should not be allowed to ruin a class.

The only thing I ruined for other students when I was in class was forcing them to look at my stupid haircut. My punishments were for truancy. I went to school, but spent all of my time in the computer lab because with severe ADHD without any academic support rendered class pointless. One crusty old Korean War vet teacher flat-out told me he "didn't believe in IEPs," and the administrators refused to even address the problem. I never once started a fight, brought drugs to school, or had a gun. While people found me pretty intimidating looking at first, I had a genuinely warm, mature, and mutually respectful relationship with damn near anybody I interacted with. No students really had a problem with me, but the adults actually enjoyed interacting with me more. Most teachers, administrators, librarians, etc would stop me for a quick chat to catch up, talk about current events, or whatever if we passed each other. I didn't ruin shit, and neither did a hell of a lot of other kids that were punished because the school didn't hold up their end of the bargain for academic accessibility.

> When I was kid we had people that brought guns to school and were kicked out it seemed reasonable to me.

Whoa there straw man. It's completely ridiculous to lump academically struggling kids or kids with run-of-the-mill behavioral problems in with kids that bring deadly weapons to school. Nobody is arguing that kids who bring guns into school should be sent on their way after a stern talking to.

Also, nobody said that alternative schools weren't on the table. I, myself, graduated in a night school program designed for failing high school students who'd been successful at work, and it was a phenomenal experience. They gave us a lot more leeway and expected us to do schoolwork mostly independently while working at least 20 hours per week, and we'd fail the entire term for all classes if we missed a single assignment. It was precisely the lack of patronizing meddling you're advocating for that allowed hundreds of kids to graduate through that program.

> In both cases

Kids are generally held back because they're struggling with the material, not because they're being disruptive. How exactly does holding a kid back help the system if there's any expense to the child?

> I was suspended for fighting and it seemed like an appropriate punishment.

I'm glad you think so, but that doesn't actually counter any of the data presented.

Re: This is a teenager

#696
post #465
post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean? In the adult world, you'd just call the police. In the child world, sometimes you tell the adults, but they don't do anything, and the abuse continues. That's at least my experience with bullying in primary school. "Conflict resolution" and such virtue-signalling buzzwords don't work against violent bullies .

Adults largely do nothing, agree. I recall trying once, it got to the principal level. Nothing happened. The kids got a talking to by the principal, but their parents did not care. Child bullies have parents who do not care what their kids do. Fighting back works - against a single bully. If there is more than one, they will make the fight unfair. After all, it is about dominance and not proving yourself. Bullies eve…

In my experience, they do not, they just become someone else's problem.

(Or everyone's, if they end up in top management.)

Re: This is a teenager

#697

The punchline is this: "It's 2021. The research participants are in their late-30s now, which means they've had plenty of time to shape their own destinies. But we can clearly see that the experiences of their childhood had a huge effect on their financial situation as adults. It also has an effect on virtually everything else in their lives." You cannot infer the direction of causality from this data, i.e. that the…

If one feels unhappy about the causality link between a good childhood and a better life as an adult please remember that we are talking about statistical effects here. If more people who were bullied end up in unfortunate positions that doesn't imply direct causality, it implies that people whose live paths lead to bad places often had being bullied as a station on it.

There will always be the tail ends of the statistical function, so people who became phenomenal adults despite all hardships, but also people who had a good childhood and became utterly disfunctional adults. But if we think about devising utilitarian political measures knowing what "broadly" has an effect on people is useful. Ideally you discover small things that if changed would have huge positive downstream effects. E.g. if bullying would be shown to have a big impact on later lives, it could be justified to pick up more funds to prevent it, to help victims and/or to change the way schools work in order to minimize chances someone is being bullied. Bullying is just an example, one could also pick other triggers.

Re: This is a teenager

#698
post #683

I think in Europe no one holds back in the grades, school will push a kid forward. When I was a kid they did hold kids and they were usually worst bullies and bad influences. Wonder if it still the case in US or “Alex” would be born somewhere 1990ish or earlier?

> I think in Europe no one holds back in the grades, school will push a kid forward.

That is hilariously incorrect.

I had an adverse childhood, my dad died when I was 8, and my mom was literally not around, she was on the other side of the country and not interested. I was in care. I was passed around middle and high schools like a hot potato, nobody wanted me, simply because I was in care. The folks in care told me I was going to do exceptionally well in life, as my IQ tests were incredible - they were the only really structured approach to testing at the time. I ran the computer labs at all the schools I was at (C64 FTW!), because I was known as a “whizz kid” and could be trusted with that, but before ever setting foot in any of those schools I was already “branded” because I was in care. The teachers, all of them bar one, literally didn’t give a fuck. The one that cared, cared deeply. He was the music teacher, steadfastly wore punk t-shirts to class, and taught me drums and percussion. I still think of him often, but music lessons are not enough.

As for the rest of the bastards, my questions and educational needs were ignored, I was told to “just don’t bother” by many. I was great in the computer lab of course, English, and history. I struggled with many other subjects, but was deeply motivated to do well in school - I saw all the _other_ kids in care around me and was absolutely positive that I did not want to end up like that, but as I said I simply was ignored. Not only can I not do math until today, the “European schools (Netherlands, to be precise) experience” traumatised me to an extent where any kind of formal learning causes some kind of brain freeze and I simply cannot. I was relentlessly bullied at and outside of school, until I learned to stand up for myself, at which point it went in a kind of binary fashion directly to outlandish punishments for standing up for myself. Punching back in self defence can, in fact, land you in a straitjacket and in isolation for a week, who knew?! That was also where my deep distrust and rejection of any kind of authority figure or structure comes from.

I never finished school, I emancipated myself from care and dropped out when I was 17, and got the fuck out of the Netherlands. I am, until this day (54 years old now), unable to get a degree as I dropped out and as I am unable to study in a traditional sense. I was homeless and living rough a few months later, and it took me years to fight my way out of that shit. By good fortune and stubbornness I was able to learn and work in stage lighting, and did that for many years. I designed shows, clubs, bars, and ran the lights at too many events to count. I was at the forefront of the (then new up and coming) move away from pure analog lighting and into digital control and moving lights.

I eventually pivoted into IT professionally, again at a time when this was all new for everyone, and managed to build a career. I did well for a very long time and love the work. As a certified Old, I now struggle to get the contracts I need to keep going, companies want young blood and believe that deep skill and experience is overrated, so we will see what the next stage of life will bring.

Nothing special about European schools. They suck just as much as all the others.

Re: This is a teenager

#699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately a solid number of these things would rely on the moral equivalent of slavery. > Reduce the burden of poverty. For instance, the poorer you are the further you have to travel to the grocery store. The people who often don't have the means to easily travel for food have to travel for food. No one wants to work in these neighborhoods because they are invariably awful. At some point the risk of an employee…

> Our current economic system has consistently lifted large numbers of people out of poverty historically, and is still doing it today. I think you mean China's economic system, which was in turn based on the practices of the USSR. China's economic system is lifting millions out of poverty, but western systems are systematically dragging people into it. Poverty in the US has never been lower than it was in 1973. Sinc…

The economic system in China is capitalism.

Re: This is a teenager

#700

The conclusion of this data presentation is that so of these people are our collective responsibility, and I just wasn't convinced. I wish they had shown percentages with the visualization. They choose not to. I was underwhelmed by some points that seemed like they should have been more shocking. Look at the huge number of people in the many adverse experiences category who made it to college, and make a high salary.…

The classic answer to that question would be to move to a more Scandinavian model.
Post reply on HN