4 ms·

Couldn't agree more, lost interest here: >Psychologist Abraham Maslow believed that safety ranked second only to food and shelter as a basic human need. Someon

Couldn't agree more, lost interest here: >Psychologist Abraham Maslow believed that safety ranked second only to food and shelter as a basic human need. Someone who has food and a roof over their head today, but doesn’t know whether they will tomorrow, should be considered poor. I find this premise extremely unsatisfying and non-obvious to say the least. Life is dangerous. There's no such thing as safety. Everyone's going to die, and most of us won't expect it's rapidity. I am in no way poor, but if I lost my job and couldn't pay my bills, I'd be in trouble very quickly. That's no one's fault but my own and doesn't deserve action from anyone but me.

pessimizer 8y ago
I hope that you're not advocating that "fault" be used as a inverse measure of poverty. If so, depending on your religious and political bent, there probably isn't and has never been any poverty anywhere.
wolfram74 8y ago
If you live in an 'at will employment' aka 'no fault fire' state you could very easily be fired because of no fault on your part.
- flukus 8y ago
  If you live anywhere you can be fired through no fault of your own through downsizing company mergers and the like. My company is being bought out at the moment so I don't know if my job will exist in 3 months. The only difference in countries with strong Labor laws is that it can't happen arbitrarily and a certain amount of runway is paid out.
LateRuin 8y ago
I used to think like this when i was in high school and read Ayn Rand. Glad i grew up
- 51lver 8y ago
  As is, your statement serves only to lump the parent's opinion into a bucket that is easier for you to judge. What's your actual point?
- dang 8y ago
  Personal attacks will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong someone else is. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
iainmerrick 8y ago
Life is dangerous. There's no such thing as safety. Do you at least agree that there are very dangerous places to live, such as war zones? Most people live in safer places than that and it’s a good thing we do. From there, I’d argue that there’s a spectrum. Living in a war zone or next to a live volcano is extremely dangerous and stressful. But there are other ways to live that are only slightly dangerous, like living somewhere with gang violence, or no health care system, or with no savings. And some people live in areas with very low crime and violence, have good access to health care, and have ample savings or other safety nets. If you’re lucky and/or wise enough to live like that, you’re safer and better off.
RangerScience 8y ago
> I am in no way poor, but if I lost my job and couldn't pay my bills, I'd be in trouble very quickly Sounds like if you lost your job you could pay the bills. You're running into the difference between what is - for you - a hypothetical and what is for others a reality. > That's no one's fault but my own Bu-bu-bu-bullshit! This is completely discounting the role the entire rest of civilization has in producing the context within which you make your choices. Here's an example: I met a homeless old couple at an encampment once, and they were there because they'd chosen to move out of the Section 8 housing they were in because the building was becoming a drug den. They chose to be homeless but I do not think it is reasonable to say it's "their fault". I think what you're actually saying is "I don't want any responsibility for other people" which is fine, but realize a) there's a difference between that and someone's situation being their fault, c) a moral judgement by you is inappropriate, and b) "If Everybody Did" then we wouldn't have civilization. Some people need to, do, and should take responsibility for others, and you should disparage neither the needy nor the charitable on those grounds alone. (Note: If everybody takes all responsibility for everyone else, you get tyranny instead. Balance and diversity!)
- AlexB138 8y ago
  > "Bu-bu-bu-bullshit! " Is this really necessary, or the best way to make your point? It really takes away from an otherwise decent post.
  - M0T0K0 8y ago
    I sympathize with RangerScience on this one; the schism between successful individuals who refuse to acknowledge society's role in aiding their success (subsidies, infrastructure, taxes, etc.), versus the less successful who continually get steamrolled over for the former's further advantage. Its obviously more complex than that, but I've met a few who don't help much in the former's depiction.
    - sachdevap 8y ago
      I think the parent is pointing out that the wording on their parent comment is not helping change anyone's mind.

pessimizer 8y ago

I hope that you're not advocating that "fault" be used as a inverse measure of poverty. If so, depending on your religious and political bent, there probably isn't and has never been any poverty anywhere.

wolfram74 8y ago

If you live in an 'at will employment' aka 'no fault fire' state you could very easily be fired because of no fault on your part.

flukus 8y ago
If you live anywhere you can be fired through no fault of your own through downsizing company mergers and the like. My company is being bought out at the moment so I don't know if my job will exist in 3 months. The only difference in countries with strong Labor laws is that it can't happen arbitrarily and a certain amount of runway is paid out.

LateRuin 8y ago

I used to think like this when i was in high school and read Ayn Rand. Glad i grew up

51lver 8y ago
As is, your statement serves only to lump the parent's opinion into a bucket that is easier for you to judge. What's your actual point?
dang 8y ago
Personal attacks will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong someone else is. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

iainmerrick 8y ago

Life is dangerous. There's no such thing as safety. Do you at least agree that there are very dangerous places to live, such as war zones? Most people live in safer places than that and it’s a good thing we do. From there, I’d argue that there’s a spectrum. Living in a war zone or next to a live volcano is extremely dangerous and stressful. But there are other ways to live that are only slightly dangerous, like living somewhere with gang violence, or no health care system, or with no savings. And some people live in areas with very low crime and violence, have good access to health care, and have ample savings or other safety nets. If you’re lucky and/or wise enough to live like that, you’re safer and better off.

RangerScience 8y ago

> I am in no way poor, but if I lost my job and couldn't pay my bills, I'd be in trouble very quickly Sounds like if you lost your job you could pay the bills. You're running into the difference between what is - for you - a hypothetical and what is for others a reality. > That's no one's fault but my own Bu-bu-bu-bullshit! This is completely discounting the role the entire rest of civilization has in producing the context within which you make your choices. Here's an example: I met a homeless old couple at an encampment once, and they were there because they'd chosen to move out of the Section 8 housing they were in because the building was becoming a drug den. They chose to be homeless but I do not think it is reasonable to say it's "their fault". I think what you're actually saying is "I don't want any responsibility for other people" which is fine, but realize a) there's a difference between that and someone's situation being their fault, c) a moral judgement by you is inappropriate, and b) "If Everybody Did" then we wouldn't have civilization. Some people need to, do, and should take responsibility for others, and you should disparage neither the needy nor the charitable on those grounds alone. (Note: If everybody takes all responsibility for everyone else, you get tyranny instead. Balance and diversity!)

AlexB138 8y ago
> "Bu-bu-bu-bullshit! " Is this really necessary, or the best way to make your point? It really takes away from an otherwise decent post.
- M0T0K0 8y ago
  I sympathize with RangerScience on this one; the schism between successful individuals who refuse to acknowledge society's role in aiding their success (subsidies, infrastructure, taxes, etc.), versus the less successful who continually get steamrolled over for the former's further advantage. Its obviously more complex than that, but I've met a few who don't help much in the former's depiction.
  - sachdevap 8y ago
    I think the parent is pointing out that the wording on their parent comment is not helping change anyone's mind.