4 ms·

How do the builders know what is important to build unless those who are suffering can vote for solutions to their ills? Thats my argument for funneling resour

How do the builders know what is important to build unless those who are suffering can vote for solutions to their ills? Thats my argument for funneling resources to the poor: so that entrepreneurs can earn revenue fixing poor people’s problems. Or (and this is a reason to use markets) so entrepreneurs can earn revenue fixing the problems that entrepreneurs encounter when trying to fix poor people’s problems.

AdrianB1 8y ago
Voting for solutions does not make right solutions, just popular. For example in my country the majority voted for significant public employees salary and state pensions increase - great idea, you can vote yourself rich, it does not mean it can be done and it does not mean it is a good idea.
- afarrell 8y ago
  I’m using “vote” here in a slightly odd way—as an analogy: Spending money. When you buy bread, you are casting a vote that bread (and implicitly: bread-making equipment) is important in the economy.
Terretta 8y ago
What are “poor people’s problems”? Do such problems go away simply by not having poor people? In that case, do you solve the first order problems, or try to solve not having the poor? Would you try to differentiate the under-moneyed from the under-inspired? Are their problems the same? If you want to use “markets”, how do you avoid Idiocracy? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy
- YawningAngel 8y ago
  What are “poor people’s problems”? Do such problems go away simply by not having poor people? In that case, do you solve the first order problems, or try to solve not having the poor? There is a general correlation between a wide range of malignancies, including lower educational attainment (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0141192950210404 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1080/014119295021...) and lower life expectancy (https://jech.bmj.com/content/59/2/115.short https://jech.bmj.com/content/59/2/115.short). While it's plausible that these problems could be addressed by radically revising the structure of society (for example, if parents could not influence the educational institutions attended by their offspring, educational outcomes might be much more equal), the necessary revisions don't seem plausible in most Western societies as currently constituted. Thus, simply reducing gross inequality seems like a reasonable suggestion. Would you try to differentiate the under-moneyed from the under-inspired? Are their problems the same? No. Who cares, anyway? If you want to use “markets”, how do you avoid Idiocracy? The existence of the film Idiocracy is not an argument for believing that such a society is a plausible or likely outcome of massive redistribution.
  - m0zg 8y ago
    > There is a general correlation between a wide > range of malignancies, including lower > educational attainment and lower life expectancy Or you could draw the arrow of causality slightly differently and say that life kind of sucks for people who didn't listen to the teacher in high school and didn't do their homework. Which, at least in my case, is supported by reams of evidence. It wasn't because they were poor (I grew up in the USSR, so everyone was poor), it was because they didn't give a shit.
    - akhilcacharya 8y ago
      This isn’t a binary. I cared quite a bit in high school but my outcomes are quite a bit worse than many of my peers, a lot of whom didn’t.
      - m0zg 8y ago
        Of course, it's a probability distribution, as just about anything else in life. But finishing high school is a predictor of good health, long lifespan, and a host of other things: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2099272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2099272/ Another powerful predictor is having both parents, and forming a family.
- aaronblohowiak 8y ago
  >The money was all appropriated for the top in the hopes that it would trickle down to the needy. Mr. Hoover was an engineer. He knew that water trickles down. Put it uphill and let it go and it will reach the driest little spot. But he didn’t know that money trickled up. Give it to the people at the bottom and the people at the top will have it before night, anyhow. But it will at least have passed through the poor fellows hands. They saved the big banks, but the little ones went up the flue. - Will Rogers

AdrianB1 8y ago

Voting for solutions does not make right solutions, just popular. For example in my country the majority voted for significant public employees salary and state pensions increase - great idea, you can vote yourself rich, it does not mean it can be done and it does not mean it is a good idea.

afarrell 8y ago
I’m using “vote” here in a slightly odd way—as an analogy: Spending money. When you buy bread, you are casting a vote that bread (and implicitly: bread-making equipment) is important in the economy.

Terretta 8y ago

What are “poor people’s problems”? Do such problems go away simply by not having poor people? In that case, do you solve the first order problems, or try to solve not having the poor? Would you try to differentiate the under-moneyed from the under-inspired? Are their problems the same? If you want to use “markets”, how do you avoid Idiocracy? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy

YawningAngel 8y ago
What are “poor people’s problems”? Do such problems go away simply by not having poor people? In that case, do you solve the first order problems, or try to solve not having the poor? There is a general correlation between a wide range of malignancies, including lower educational attainment (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0141192950210404 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1080/014119295021...) and lower life expectancy (https://jech.bmj.com/content/59/2/115.short https://jech.bmj.com/content/59/2/115.short). While it's plausible that these problems could be addressed by radically revising the structure of society (for example, if parents could not influence the educational institutions attended by their offspring, educational outcomes might be much more equal), the necessary revisions don't seem plausible in most Western societies as currently constituted. Thus, simply reducing gross inequality seems like a reasonable suggestion. Would you try to differentiate the under-moneyed from the under-inspired? Are their problems the same? No. Who cares, anyway? If you want to use “markets”, how do you avoid Idiocracy? The existence of the film Idiocracy is not an argument for believing that such a society is a plausible or likely outcome of massive redistribution.
- m0zg 8y ago
  > There is a general correlation between a wide > range of malignancies, including lower > educational attainment and lower life expectancy Or you could draw the arrow of causality slightly differently and say that life kind of sucks for people who didn't listen to the teacher in high school and didn't do their homework. Which, at least in my case, is supported by reams of evidence. It wasn't because they were poor (I grew up in the USSR, so everyone was poor), it was because they didn't give a shit.
  - akhilcacharya 8y ago
    This isn’t a binary. I cared quite a bit in high school but my outcomes are quite a bit worse than many of my peers, a lot of whom didn’t.
    - m0zg 8y ago
      Of course, it's a probability distribution, as just about anything else in life. But finishing high school is a predictor of good health, long lifespan, and a host of other things: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2099272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2099272/ Another powerful predictor is having both parents, and forming a family.
aaronblohowiak 8y ago
>The money was all appropriated for the top in the hopes that it would trickle down to the needy. Mr. Hoover was an engineer. He knew that water trickles down. Put it uphill and let it go and it will reach the driest little spot. But he didn’t know that money trickled up. Give it to the people at the bottom and the people at the top will have it before night, anyhow. But it will at least have passed through the poor fellows hands. They saved the big banks, but the little ones went up the flue. - Will Rogers