5 ms·

Should we, though? Those communities have spent decades voting people into power on the basis of fueling their economic prosperity by poisoning the rest of us.

Should we, though? Those communities have spent decades voting people into power on the basis of fueling their economic prosperity by poisoning the rest of us. We owe them nothing.

toomuchtodo 7y ago
Compassion never goes out of style. We owe it to ourselves to be better. And in the long run, it's cheaper versus people becoming destitute.
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  To be fair it isn't a matter of 'compassion or not' so much as triage. I try to do the opposite of a 'faceless million are less important than a single named character' trope. While preventing destitution for all would clearly be the best morally and practically there is an awkward unasked questions whose only answers would be even more uncomfortable from cognitive dissonance. "Why do they deserve this special treatment over everyone else already destitute?" "Why not existing already funded programs that everyone else is expected to navigate?"
  - EliRivers 7y ago
    To play devil's advocate, perhaps we'd get more bang for our buck in this case. This particular group of people are very homogenous; same place physically, similar skills, similar experience. I would hazard that these similarities would make a program to assist them cheaper than helping the same number of other people who are much less homogenous. Cheaper and more effective to help them now than dropping them into the general purpose help mechanisms.
Ididntdothis 7y ago
You happily used the power they produced though.
- nate_meurer 7y ago
  No, we use their power because we have no choice. Most electrical utilities are monopolies in their respective service areas.
  - Ididntdothis 7y ago
    That seems to be more of a political problem and should be solved with a nationwide power strategy.
tartoran 7y ago
You’re not incorrect. However, with that attitude we’ll always be divided and controllable/manipulable. So I’d rather we show some empathy instead or hold off from saying it...
aedocw 7y ago
Many of these areas are also chronically under-educated, and we don't do anything to prevent politicians from lying to them. If all you see and hear tells you "clean coal" is a real thing and you've also been convinced that without the power plants you have no future, it's easy to keep going to work and keep electing the same garbage politicians into office. We owe them a better education system (as frankly we owe the whole country), and we owe them a political landscape where liars are not just taken to task by their opponent but removed from the electoral process.

Should we, though? Those communities have spent decades voting people into power on the basis of fueling their economic prosperity by poisoning the rest of us. We owe them nothing.

toomuchtodo 7y ago

Compassion never goes out of style. We owe it to ourselves to be better. And in the long run, it's cheaper versus people becoming destitute.

Nasrudith 7y ago
To be fair it isn't a matter of 'compassion or not' so much as triage. I try to do the opposite of a 'faceless million are less important than a single named character' trope. While preventing destitution for all would clearly be the best morally and practically there is an awkward unasked questions whose only answers would be even more uncomfortable from cognitive dissonance. "Why do they deserve this special treatment over everyone else already destitute?" "Why not existing already funded programs that everyone else is expected to navigate?"
- EliRivers 7y ago
  To play devil's advocate, perhaps we'd get more bang for our buck in this case. This particular group of people are very homogenous; same place physically, similar skills, similar experience. I would hazard that these similarities would make a program to assist them cheaper than helping the same number of other people who are much less homogenous. Cheaper and more effective to help them now than dropping them into the general purpose help mechanisms.

Ididntdothis 7y ago

You happily used the power they produced though.

nate_meurer 7y ago
No, we use their power because we have no choice. Most electrical utilities are monopolies in their respective service areas.
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  That seems to be more of a political problem and should be solved with a nationwide power strategy.

tartoran 7y ago

You’re not incorrect. However, with that attitude we’ll always be divided and controllable/manipulable. So I’d rather we show some empathy instead or hold off from saying it...

aedocw 7y ago

Many of these areas are also chronically under-educated, and we don't do anything to prevent politicians from lying to them. If all you see and hear tells you "clean coal" is a real thing and you've also been convinced that without the power plants you have no future, it's easy to keep going to work and keep electing the same garbage politicians into office. We owe them a better education system (as frankly we owe the whole country), and we owe them a political landscape where liars are not just taken to task by their opponent but removed from the electoral process.