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

Economic Inequality Is Worse Than We Think (2015)

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 104 posts

Re: Economic Inequality Is Worse Than We Think (2015)

#71

Post by Quarrelsome »

eeZah7Ux wrote: post #36
Quarrelsome wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

jesus. Pick from: alcohol, depression, boredom, dynasty building, genetic programming. I apologise for being rude but it sounds like you have limited compassion if you haven't been able to think this one through. What do you want to do, sterilise the poor? I would remind you that despite a poor background children can and do still excel and even if they don't these children are often the backbone of our industry. You…

> despite a poor background children can and do still excel Only occasionally. And that does not justify raising children in a difficult environment! > What do you want to do, sterilise the poor? I agree that the parent phrased that post very poorly. However many countries did a lot of effective work to prevent unplanned parenthood, including education and access to contraceptives and abortion rather than sterilizati…

> Only occasionally. And that does not justify raising children in a difficult environment!

You and I both know neither of us have enough information to assert how often it happens. I am merely stating it DOES as a counter weight to effectively killing off poor geniuses or rather poor "good enoughs".

> However many countries did a lot of effective work to prevent unplanned parenthood, including education and access to contraceptives and abortion rather than sterilization or punishment.

Yes! This is the available path to us which we should take.

> This sounds like the world need enough desperate people to accept exploitative jobs or go to war and so on? I hope humanity can do better than that.

That's a very extreme way of interpreting my words. Many of these children will become construction workers, carpenters, plumbers, administrative types, catering workers, chefs, musicians, entertainers, IT admins, etc, etc, etc. I am suggesting that my parent post is underestimating the reach of some of these children and falling for the gutter-press focus on the worst case examples. Many of these people will become good enough citizens. I live in a vaguely deprived area and the kid across from me isn't educated and is definitely working class but he's learnt from his tough upbringing and has a pretty good head on his shoulders. For every worst-case example there are tons of kids like this. Baby => bathwater.

Re: Economic Inequality Is Worse Than We Think (2015)

#72

Post by frgtpsswrdlame »

bmmayer1 wrote: post #52
ryanbrunner wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It all depends on what you want to optimize for. But for me, and I suspect a lot of people, the happiness of society seems like a decent starting point (let's assume for the moment that most Americans / 1st world citizens are at the point where base survival is not in question) The current rate of inequality is massively inefficient if you're trying to optimize happiness. The bottom 2 quintiles of Americans control s…

The bread analogy doesn't make any sense. Inequality is a relative metric, not an absolute one. If I only need one loaf of bread to survive, who cares if my neighbor has 100 or 1000?

People have always and will always care about how much their neighbor has.

Re: Economic Inequality Is Worse Than We Think (2015)

#73

Post by [deleted] »

bmmayer1 wrote: post #52
ryanbrunner wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It all depends on what you want to optimize for. But for me, and I suspect a lot of people, the happiness of society seems like a decent starting point (let's assume for the moment that most Americans / 1st world citizens are at the point where base survival is not in question) The current rate of inequality is massively inefficient if you're trying to optimize happiness. The bottom 2 quintiles of Americans control s…

The bread analogy doesn't make any sense. Inequality is a relative metric, not an absolute one. If I only need one loaf of bread to survive, who cares if my neighbor has 100 or 1000?

[deleted]

Re: Economic Inequality Is Worse Than We Think (2015)

#74

Post by delerio »

eeZah7Ux wrote: post #47
delerio wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So only rich people deserve to have a family? Only the rich deserve to find joy in nurturing and raising others? A lot of people, even though they don't have much, they find fulfillment in their family. If you think they shouldn't have children, that means taking away the only joy in some people's lives. Weird sentiment you have there.

Nothing in life is due to us. There is no "deserve". Also, you are painting a false dichotomy between "rich" and "poor". A lot of middle and lower class people can raise healthy and happy children unless they have problems with mental health / violence / substance abuse & so on. > taking away the only joy in some people's lives Looking at children as a source of joy instead of a recipient of unconditional care and ef…

I don't understand your point. Many people find joy in raising children, it fulfills a purpose in their life. Not everyone does, but many do. There is a biological desire to procreate and continue the species.

Re: Economic Inequality Is Worse Than We Think (2015)

#75

Post by sambe »

DarkKomunalec wrote: post #61
sambe wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a strawman. This topic is now so fashionable as a news item (regardless of your view) that people will target any kind of inquality in western democracies as inherently wrong. What counts as extreme? Has much really changed in the last few years since this became something discussed daily? Why do such articles ignore payments in kind and fail to address subtleties to do with the different measures (personal…

So because some people advocate total equality, it's not a strawman to respond to them, instead of to the article? Do you always address only the arguments of the least reasonable people in some arbitrarily defined group?

The article doesn't set the standard based on any kind of cogent argument. It assumes the ideal is what people say it is based on instinct, and the result is not 100% extreme, but it is pretty extreme. This is even more true if you consider the other questions I raised. The researcher compares this to living on a kibbutz, although the article then assumes this is a good thing.

There are many other examples of people's instincts being off by surprising amounts, including in ways that do not affect them positively.

That's what I intended to address. Don't really see the need to get personal and extrapolate hypocritically.

Re: Economic Inequality Is Worse Than We Think (2015)

#76

Post by bmmayer1 »

ryanbrunner wrote: post #66
bmmayer1 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bread analogy doesn't make any sense. Inequality is a relative metric, not an absolute one. If I only need one loaf of bread to survive, who cares if my neighbor has 100 or 1000?

That depends on whether one loaf (my example was slice, which is maybe a bit more evocative) is the bare minimum to survive or enough to be fully satiated. At that level, it (and wealth inequality) can be viewed as an absolute metric. I absolutely care if my neighbour has 100 loaves if I'm emaciated and unable to think about anything but hunger, even if I'm eating enough to survive. My argument is, for the bottom 40%…

If the true intention of 'inequality' arguments is to highlight the plight of the emaciated and hungry, then it certainly doesn't come across. I don't know where you're getting the 40% number, but 40% of Americans are not 'unable to think about anything but hunger.' 14.5% of Americans are below the poverty line (that's about the same % of people on SNAP). 5% of Americans are considered 'extremely food insecure.'

I understand how '85% of Americans are doing just fine' isn't great political rhetoric, but don't you think it's disingenuous to pretend that 'inequality' arguments which mostly highlight what % of wealth the wealthy have compared to everyone else is really about the poor, and not what it's really about, which is soaking the rich and middle class for higher taxes? I mean, after all, that's why phrases like 'the 1%' exist in the first place, to create some sort of camaraderie of outrage amongst the 'proletariat' to pursue a particular economic policy, right?

In any event, if people who truly cared about the poor advocated for solutions to poverty, instead of focusing on 'inequality', they might find their arguments fall on less deaf ears.

Re: Economic Inequality Is Worse Than We Think (2015)

#77

Post by bmmayer1 »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #72
bmmayer1 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bread analogy doesn't make any sense. Inequality is a relative metric, not an absolute one. If I only need one loaf of bread to survive, who cares if my neighbor has 100 or 1000?

People have always and will always care about how much their neighbor has.

True, but 'do not covet thy neighbor's goods' is also one of the oldest traditions we have. There's a reason such moral imperatives have developed in our culture; they are more often than not destructive.

Re: Economic Inequality Is Worse Than We Think (2015)

#78

Post by bmmayer1 »

arethuza wrote: post #65
bmmayer1 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's key that monkeys, like humans, object to unfairness--not 'inequality.' Turns out that relative contribution matters a lot to how monkeys/people judge rewards.[1] [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-017-0082

But inequality arguably leads to unfairness though - is it "fair" that someone who is successful can get better chances for their kids through better environment, schooling and connections? I'd argue that inequality pretty much always leads to unfairness. Edit: And I say that as someone who pays for their kids to be privately educated at a prestigious private school because it is obvious that doing so gives them an u…

I think the point is that fairness leads to inequality.

Re: Economic Inequality Is Worse Than We Think (2015)

#79

Post by bjourne »

viridian wrote: post #51
bjourne wrote: post #19

I think everyone should read Nickel and Dimed ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel_and_Dimed ) by Barbara Ehrenreich. She goes undercover and tries to survive working minimum wage jobs. I don't think I'm spoiling the book by revealing that she wasn't able to. After three months she were so deep in debt that she had to abort the experiment.

I wonder if this is just a lack of knowledge on how to survive while poor. I'm in a good economic position compared to most of the US and certainly most of the world, but I can't see myself having much of an issue with this. Growing up there were times where my family was homeless, and my first job I was a carpenter's apprentice, paid under the table, for less than minimum wage. It's not that being poor is extremely…

It's probably more about lack of liquidity than the lack of knowledge. Housing costs are higher if you are living in a daily motel and can't afford to pay 2-3 months of rent in advance. Food is also more expensive if you don't have access to proper cooking utensils and your own oven and so on.

It was a long time since I read the book, but I recall that the experiment ended because she had more unforseen expenses than she could keep up with. I think her car broke down a few times and as she had no money in her pocket, she had to take out payday loans to get it repaired. Eventually she couldn't do that anymore so no car, no way to get to work, no job and no income.

Re: Economic Inequality Is Worse Than We Think (2015)

#80

Post by wolfgke »

bjourne wrote: post #79
viridian wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if this is just a lack of knowledge on how to survive while poor. I'm in a good economic position compared to most of the US and certainly most of the world, but I can't see myself having much of an issue with this. Growing up there were times where my family was homeless, and my first job I was a carpenter's apprentice, paid under the table, for less than minimum wage. It's not that being poor is extremely…

It's probably more about lack of liquidity than the lack of knowledge. Housing costs are higher if you are living in a daily motel and can't afford to pay 2-3 months of rent in advance. Food is also more expensive if you don't have access to proper cooking utensils and your own oven and so on. It was a long time since I read the book, but I recall that the experiment ended because she had more unforseen expenses than…

> I think her car broke down a few times and as she had no money in her pocket, she had to take out payday loans to get it repaired. Eventually she couldn't do that anymore so no car, no way to get to work, no job and no income.

Why not do carpooling instead?

Post reply on HN