6 ms·

According to you, the people outside these booming cities suffer from drug and alcohol addiction, failure to use birth control, failure to build healthy stable

According to you, the people outside these booming cities suffer from drug and alcohol addiction, failure to use birth control, failure to build healthy stable relationships and joblessness. (Strangely, the illegals Trump wants to deport don't seem to have trouble finding a job - weird how looking for a job and accepting one when found solves that problem.) These people are morally deaf. They want to blame others their choice not to work, their choice to do drugs, their choice not to use a condom. Trump isn't proposing to fix the problem of people making bad choices. He's just telling these people that he's one of them and he blames others for their choices. (Note: the same critique applies to many solid-blue subgroups, including groups who's inherent virtue is treated as a sacred cow within Blue America. I am explicitly NOT claiming Trump voters are somehow uniquely bad in this way.)

guildwriter 10y ago
I'd say this is deeply unfair to people living in communities decimated by meth just as I would say it's deeply unfair to people living in inner cities. This is not to say that drugs alone are the problem, but that there are a multitude of factors creating an ugly feedback system. Words are difficult to convey this sort of thing so I'm going to do my best: 1) The primary source of jobs in the region leaves due to macro issues that have nothing to do with the population. Since people have bought homes, their capital is fixed and they can't move. (Societal networks exacerbate this) 2) and 3) make leaving even harder. 2) Loss of jobs and no other options lead to deeply depressing situation. People turn to drugs in order to escape the crushing hopelessness. This feedbacks into 1) by making investment unattractive (which then feedbacks into 2)). 3) War on Drugs means that families get broken up as people inevitably get arrested and sent away for ages. Crime rate goes up. Feeds into 1) and 2). Note that is vastly simplified and that the problem can begin anywhere on this three point system. As such the culture of the area transforms to reflect this new reality. When you are born into this kind of system and this is all you know, the chance of escape diminishes rapidly. I remember reading "The Corner" and how black males growing up in Baltimore had accepted that they would be dead by 20 and that having a kid was the only way that they were likely to have any kind of legacy. I don't know if it's easy to appreciate how haunting that must be. I mean to some extent you are right. We all should be moral superpeople and be able to withstand every test of character than comes our way. Frankly though we are not all built that way and that's just reality. People are going to falter and people are going to fall into a morass and not get back up. Whipping them with their failings is not going to get results from everyone. Everyone needs different things. And some people just can't overcome their circumstances. It kind of reminds me of the Ouroboros: where one thing ends and the other thing begins is unclear and possibly impossible to discern.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  Your reasoning fails at (1). The money spent purchasing a home is sunk cost. It's gone. It's never coming back. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost#Loss_aversion_and_the_sunk_cost_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost#Loss_aversion_and_th... Furthermore, I claim it does not require us to be "moral superpeople" to get past this situation. There are many populations with vastly worse problems than (1) who don't turn to drugs, unplanned pregnancy, abandoning their wives and refusing to work. For example, the population of rural Mexico. In fact, it's this tendency for rural Mexicans to be "moral superpeople" that created one of Trump's key platforms. Mexicans are willing to move, abandon their societal networks, find a job and work it. Isn't this why Trump wants to build a wall?
  - guildwriter 10y ago
    You realize that the sunk cost fallacy proves what I'm trying to say? Most people really struggle with that sort of thing. It's one of the reasons why behavioral economics has taken off in recent history. People are not perfect actors. Of course there are people with problems who don't turn to drugs that are also poor. The point I'm trying to make is that saying the best and only solution isn't necessarily to say that people are lazy and that they need to shape up. Or build a wall for that matter. It's also worth noting that the reasons why Mexicans can move and abandon their societal networks is because of the strength of the dollar versus the peso, the cost of living they are willing to put up with, and the work they are willing to do. Where is an American going to go that gets a similar instant upgrade in purchasing power? What about the societal reality that people in America are not willing to do backbreaking labor like picking fruit? And who says rural Mexicans have it any better? http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/03/mexico-lost-generation-drug-addicts-160302105406296.html http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/03/mexico-los...
    - yummyfajitas 10y ago
      ...the cost of living they are willing to put up with, and the work they are willing to do...people in America are not willing to do backbreaking labor like picking fruit? Yes, Mexicans are willing to do what it takes, while many Trump voters prefer to sit at home refusing to work and doing meth. I was making the following core points: 1) the Trump voters apatters was defending suffer mainly from self-inflicted problems and b) Trump is exploiting their desire to blame others for their own bad choices in order to take power. You haven't disagreed with me at all on this point. All you've said is that this behavior is somewhat predictable. I agree, it can be predicted. So what?
apatters 10y ago
What do you think of the articles that have been posted to HN about how people make worse decisions when they're under financial stress? I think it's true and can explain behavior that is both self-destructive and selfish. To solve the problem you have to figure out how someone like that can get themselves out of the vicious cycle. Even if they are morally deaf I don't think much gets accomplished by focusing on that point. Add to this the fact that certain behavioral strategies may seem self-destructive from one perspective but necessary from another. Drug use for example has nasty consequences but is frequently a mechanism for coping with some other very nasty problem. And you have... well, I don't know what, but a complicated world. I am not saying Trump supporters are all jobless drug addicts but I absolutely think lower education, lower income demographics swung toward him because they have more direct experience with the dark side of modernization and the political establishment was tone deaf to this. (Also, of the factors I mentioned I think the lack of college degree is the one most heavily correlated to lower income, lower employment, higher addiction, higher unintended pregnancy etc. not which city they're in.)
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  What do you think of the articles that have been posted to HN about how people make worse decisions when they're under financial stress? I think they fail to explain the majority of the behavioral differences. Specifically, they fail to explain: 1) why the children of upper class parents do not start behaving like poor people when they are broke (e.g. during college or grad school). 2) why Mexicans make good choices like sneaking into America, working hard, forming stable family units and saving money. 3) why Indians make the same good choices even when they don't have the option of sneaking into America. 4) why unskilled Chinese immigrants (or folks back home) make the same good choices.
  - intended 10y ago
    The Indian and Chinese ones are easy to explain - you get the best of those countries. Those countries in turn have suffered from brain drain for the past several decades.

guildwriter 10y ago

I'd say this is deeply unfair to people living in communities decimated by meth just as I would say it's deeply unfair to people living in inner cities. This is not to say that drugs alone are the problem, but that there are a multitude of factors creating an ugly feedback system. Words are difficult to convey this sort of thing so I'm going to do my best: 1) The primary source of jobs in the region leaves due to macro issues that have nothing to do with the population. Since people have bought homes, their capital is fixed and they can't move. (Societal networks exacerbate this) 2) and 3) make leaving even harder. 2) Loss of jobs and no other options lead to deeply depressing situation. People turn to drugs in order to escape the crushing hopelessness. This feedbacks into 1) by making investment unattractive (which then feedbacks into 2)). 3) War on Drugs means that families get broken up as people inevitably get arrested and sent away for ages. Crime rate goes up. Feeds into 1) and 2). Note that is vastly simplified and that the problem can begin anywhere on this three point system. As such the culture of the area transforms to reflect this new reality. When you are born into this kind of system and this is all you know, the chance of escape diminishes rapidly. I remember reading "The Corner" and how black males growing up in Baltimore had accepted that they would be dead by 20 and that having a kid was the only way that they were likely to have any kind of legacy. I don't know if it's easy to appreciate how haunting that must be. I mean to some extent you are right. We all should be moral superpeople and be able to withstand every test of character than comes our way. Frankly though we are not all built that way and that's just reality. People are going to falter and people are going to fall into a morass and not get back up. Whipping them with their failings is not going to get results from everyone. Everyone needs different things. And some people just can't overcome their circumstances. It kind of reminds me of the Ouroboros: where one thing ends and the other thing begins is unclear and possibly impossible to discern.

yummyfajitas 10y ago
Your reasoning fails at (1). The money spent purchasing a home is sunk cost. It's gone. It's never coming back. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost#Loss_aversion_and_the_sunk_cost_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost#Loss_aversion_and_th... Furthermore, I claim it does not require us to be "moral superpeople" to get past this situation. There are many populations with vastly worse problems than (1) who don't turn to drugs, unplanned pregnancy, abandoning their wives and refusing to work. For example, the population of rural Mexico. In fact, it's this tendency for rural Mexicans to be "moral superpeople" that created one of Trump's key platforms. Mexicans are willing to move, abandon their societal networks, find a job and work it. Isn't this why Trump wants to build a wall?
- guildwriter 10y ago
  You realize that the sunk cost fallacy proves what I'm trying to say? Most people really struggle with that sort of thing. It's one of the reasons why behavioral economics has taken off in recent history. People are not perfect actors. Of course there are people with problems who don't turn to drugs that are also poor. The point I'm trying to make is that saying the best and only solution isn't necessarily to say that people are lazy and that they need to shape up. Or build a wall for that matter. It's also worth noting that the reasons why Mexicans can move and abandon their societal networks is because of the strength of the dollar versus the peso, the cost of living they are willing to put up with, and the work they are willing to do. Where is an American going to go that gets a similar instant upgrade in purchasing power? What about the societal reality that people in America are not willing to do backbreaking labor like picking fruit? And who says rural Mexicans have it any better? http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/03/mexico-lost-generation-drug-addicts-160302105406296.html http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/03/mexico-los...
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    ...the cost of living they are willing to put up with, and the work they are willing to do...people in America are not willing to do backbreaking labor like picking fruit? Yes, Mexicans are willing to do what it takes, while many Trump voters prefer to sit at home refusing to work and doing meth. I was making the following core points: 1) the Trump voters apatters was defending suffer mainly from self-inflicted problems and b) Trump is exploiting their desire to blame others for their own bad choices in order to take power. You haven't disagreed with me at all on this point. All you've said is that this behavior is somewhat predictable. I agree, it can be predicted. So what?

apatters 10y ago

What do you think of the articles that have been posted to HN about how people make worse decisions when they're under financial stress? I think it's true and can explain behavior that is both self-destructive and selfish. To solve the problem you have to figure out how someone like that can get themselves out of the vicious cycle. Even if they are morally deaf I don't think much gets accomplished by focusing on that point. Add to this the fact that certain behavioral strategies may seem self-destructive from one perspective but necessary from another. Drug use for example has nasty consequences but is frequently a mechanism for coping with some other very nasty problem. And you have... well, I don't know what, but a complicated world. I am not saying Trump supporters are all jobless drug addicts but I absolutely think lower education, lower income demographics swung toward him because they have more direct experience with the dark side of modernization and the political establishment was tone deaf to this. (Also, of the factors I mentioned I think the lack of college degree is the one most heavily correlated to lower income, lower employment, higher addiction, higher unintended pregnancy etc. not which city they're in.)

yummyfajitas 10y ago
What do you think of the articles that have been posted to HN about how people make worse decisions when they're under financial stress? I think they fail to explain the majority of the behavioral differences. Specifically, they fail to explain: 1) why the children of upper class parents do not start behaving like poor people when they are broke (e.g. during college or grad school). 2) why Mexicans make good choices like sneaking into America, working hard, forming stable family units and saving money. 3) why Indians make the same good choices even when they don't have the option of sneaking into America. 4) why unskilled Chinese immigrants (or folks back home) make the same good choices.
- intended 10y ago
  The Indian and Chinese ones are easy to explain - you get the best of those countries. Those countries in turn have suffered from brain drain for the past several decades.