71–80 of 134 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, because homeless people should have nothing and suffer as much as possible because they can't afford rent.
I think the point is, the cost of having/using those things is approaching the cost of rent.
The math doesn't add up. At "0.000133 bitcoins a day" it would take 7518 days (more than 20 years) to make one bitcoin. At "0.0004 bitcoins" per video it would take 2500 videos to watch to make one bitcoin. The amount of wasted human capital is insane. Why don't these people get jobs? There are tons of posts on Craigslist for jobs that don't require any education - delivery, waiters, busboys, cleaning, etc.
Plus "60 cents a day" of income is going to be eaten up by transaction fees when they need actual cents to buy lunch (I don't think online delivery services or trendy cafes accepting bitcoin payments cater for the homeless end of the market; there's only so many gyft-funded $10 Papa John's pizzas one can afford) The whole thing reeks of a PR stunt to the point where I can easily see the people involved's actual "job"…
There were a few points that the article didn't bring up. I was surprised that they didn't discuss the speculative value of bitcoins. There's no way that the value of a dollar in your pocket will suddenly double, but the value of a bitcoin has and will again. Obviously volatility isn't all fun...would you want your salary paid in bitcions? In the current market you might actually come out ahead over the next few year…
There were a few points that the article didn't bring up. I was surprised that they didn't discuss the speculative value of bitcoins. There's no way that the value of a dollar in your pocket will suddenly double, but the value of a bitcoin has and will again. Obviously volatility isn't all fun...would you want your salary paid in bitcions? In the current market you might actually come out ahead over the next few year…
The minimum wage does a lot of good Interesting you say then when you can clearly see that actually hurts those people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Comments on general news sites tend to be cesspools in general. Oddly, the same people posting weird vitriol about how America is being ruined by freeloading parasites seem to be: 1) not highly educated; and 2) able to spend hours and hours a day posting angry comments on news websites. I wonder where they're getting their own income from. Are they all retirees and students? People on SS disability? Stay-at-home pare…
Conservative political groups in the USA pay people to basically troll on major news sites/message boards/blogs: http://www.alternet.org/story/149197/are_right-wing_libertar...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, because homeless people should have nothing and suffer as much as possible because they can't afford rent.
I think the point is, the cost of having/using those things is approaching the cost of rent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, because homeless people should have nothing and suffer as much as possible because they can't afford rent.
Seems like rent would be more important than a fancy laptop, cigarettes, and energy drinks...
There were a few points that the article didn't bring up. I was surprised that they didn't discuss the speculative value of bitcoins. There's no way that the value of a dollar in your pocket will suddenly double, but the value of a bitcoin has and will again. Obviously volatility isn't all fun...would you want your salary paid in bitcions? In the current market you might actually come out ahead over the next few year…
With a choice between pride + 60¢ per day or $10-20 per day from begging why wouldn't you choose the latter?
To be able to afford laptops, smartphones, cigarettes etc. these men must be getting money from somewhere other than bitcoin.
Also: "he decided to live on the street for a while" makes me think he probably has some money in savings that he is able to make use of. That would explain why he has a smartphone (and presumably cell plan if he's able to use the phone).
This is a feel good article but lets be honest: The vast majority of homeless people don't have laptops or smartphones. They don't choose to be homeless like this man did. The article is examining a few of outliers. Bitcoin isn't going to help most homeless people.
The math doesn't add up. At "0.000133 bitcoins a day" it would take 7518 days (more than 20 years) to make one bitcoin. At "0.0004 bitcoins" per video it would take 2500 videos to watch to make one bitcoin. The amount of wasted human capital is insane. Why don't these people get jobs? There are tons of posts on Craigslist for jobs that don't require any education - delivery, waiters, busboys, cleaning, etc.
Why don't these people get jobs? I am currently homeless. I am not looking for a job because I am medically handicapped. I walked away from a job with a Fortune 500 company that was helping to keep me ill. My condition is very expensive, thus my job amounted to a net loss in income. Since quitting and sleeping in a tent, I have paid down thousands of dollars in debt incurred during the years I had that job. I am curr…
edit: How would we proceed?
Love the picture of the "homeless" guy using a laptop newer than mine, with his pet, nice bike, playing a video game while he smokes a cig. He also has an energy drink... as if he needs it to get through his day of sitting around. It's people like him who are hurting the homeless people that are actually in need.
When was the last time you met the eyes of one of these good-for-nothing, lazy, bad-smelling, disgusting … things?
If you can't even meet eyes with a homeless person, let alone really observing the person, you can't even put yourself into their shoes, feel what they feel, and see the world from their eyes. If you can't do that, then you lack empathy.
And when you lack empathy, that's the seed of prejudice.
Or how about this article, posted here on Hacker News: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/These-young-SF-profess...
Those are startup founders that live in RVs … because rent is too high in the Bay Area.
There are indeed homeless people who are mentally or emotional unstable. Not all homeless people are like that. And there are mentally and emotionally unstable people who live in homes. And then, there are systemic problems where rent prices have driven people out of affordable homes.
As to the point about how having laptops point to a confusion in Maslow's Hierarchy, I think that demonstrates more of the commenter's lack of understanding of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
It is true that shelter is at the bottom of the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. It is part of the human need to seek physical security, and is the foundation for the higher level needs. However, "shelter" is so much more than an apartment or a house. An apartment and a house are socially approved shelter. Shelter is anything that will help you maintain homeostasis. It can be a cave. It can be survival shelter in the woods. It can be under a freeway bridge. It can be in a cardboard box. It includes clothing.
When you are in survival mode, you are not thinking about socially-approved shelter. You are seeking any shelter. People who go out into the woods without a lot of training in wilderness survival tends to flounder around when things go bad. Their minds, being unable to accept the situation as-is, keep thinking that civilization will save them somehow, and cling to that. "If only I can get out of these woods or find a ranger, I would be safe." Instead of "Oh shit, a bad storm is coming, I need to get under covers NOW."
Likewise, having talked to some of the homeless, I was told how you can pick out the newly homeless. They have so much pride (and shame), it kept them from receiving help -- food, or shelter, or whatever. They are clinging to behaviors that are socially-approved. Social approval is higher up on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
Believe me, if you were somewhere public and you hear gunshots, and you felt your life threatened, you will probably run. And you won't be thinking that the place you are running to is private property or not.
Finally, comments like these suggest that the commenters have not examined their concepts thoroughly or looked into their own feelings about this.
People who live outside the socially-approved box are threatening to people living inside the box. This threat goes beyond the surface, "oh, he is going to mug me." The aversion and disgust that keeps people from empathizing with the homeless comes from pack behavior. Humans tend to aggregate in groups, reject outsiders, and severely punish anyone who betray the pack.
This punishment is exactly the kind of reflexive emotional response risk-averse people have when you tell them about startup idea. "What's wrong with these people? They must be crazy!"
It is also the emotional reaction that leads to comments like, "If he can afford a better laptop than I, he can afford an rent. There must be something wrong about him."
That's bullshit.