13 ms·

What I don't get is why we call ourselves democracies and speak as "lockdowns hurt poor people very badly" In a representative democracy, you wouldn't lock dow

What I don't get is why we call ourselves democracies and speak as "lockdowns hurt poor people very badly" In a representative democracy, you wouldn't lock down and force people to starve - you would lock down and provide income/food/capabilities for people to live regardless of their social/economic status. locking down isn't why poor people hurt, locking down and doing nothing to feed them does. It's like this pandemic is proving one thing - that we suck at democracy and we're not willing to do anything to fix it because we don't want to change how it works for so few when it doesn't work for exponentially more - as long as we're part of the so few, we'll turn a blind eye.

lucian1900 6y ago
Precisely. What you described is exactly what happened in China and Vietnam: one short strict lockdown while taking care of people's material necessities. Unsurprisingly, both countries have eliminated community transmission.
- sgt101 6y ago
  This is a naive reading of what has happened. There may well be some cross immunity in some communities due to previous coronavirus circulations. And the numbers in China are not all that credible - one guy at my work had three of four grandparents die of "some winter cold" in March last year. It will be quite some time before the numbers in China become clear I think.
  - ridethebike 6y ago
    I think if China didn't manage coronavirus successfully we'd have seen numbers of deaths due to "some winter cold" so large that even communist party wouldn't be able to hide
    - sgt101 6y ago
      Really? They did a pretty good job of hiding a host of vast reeducation centres....
      - rictic 6y ago
        Did they? You can rely on your reader to know that you're referring to Xinjiang.
        sgt101 5y ago
        At this point - but these centres were revealed to the world (by journalists who are now kicked from the country) fully built and also full of inmates.
grecy 6y ago
Canada, Australia & New Zealand (and I'm sure many other countries) have done an excellent job providing money to people who are stuck at home because they can't go to work. Here in Canada it was $500/week for 28 weeks, then you moved onto a different scheme if you still needed support. Everyone who needed it go it. We have not been desperately waiting for a pittance of $1200. Be careful not to generalize that all democracies have done a poor job just because some have.
- skeeter2020 6y ago
  >> We have not been desperately waiting for a pittance of $1200. No, we've been desperately waiting for vacinnes after being repeatedly promised there will be plently for everyone ("look at all these contracts we've signed!") while they pay you off with massive borrowing that someone is going to be responsible for when the music stops. Meanwhile Texas, the poster-child for bad behaviour, is headed back to normal.
  - supernovae 6y ago
    Texas is not normal :) Most of us are staying home still, in the major cities we collectively wear masks regardless of our goofy gov. Large places of employment still aren't opening offices and many that are talking about opening are doing so with the realization it won't be like it used to be...
    - chrismat 6y ago
      Not sure where you live - but I travel full time in an RV and have stayed and traveled through El Paso, Austin, Houston, San Antonio and everywhere in between in the last 3 months. Maybe some are still hiding at home, but from my experience the overwhelming majority of Texans seem to be out enjoying the sunshine and open businesses.
      - burlesona 6y ago
        Living in Austin I would say it’s a mix, but the main thing is that you now have about a third of people (including most of the high risk) who are vaccinated (at least the first dose) and joining the ... 1/5? Or so? ... who “don’t believe in COVID.” Combined that’s a decent chunk of the population getting back out. I think it’s still quiet compared to normal, but it sure seems like one giant party compared to the last year. It’s really hard to subjectively judge these things.
mrtweetyhack 6y ago
that's not even what democracy means.
alex_smart 6y ago
>In a representative democracy, you wouldn't lock down and force people to starve - you would lock down and provide income/food/capabilities for people to live regardless of their social/economic status. I didn't realize that being a rich country with a developed economy was a pre-requisite to being a representative democracy.
- supernovae 6y ago
  It's not... in fact, I'd say other democracies with less emphasis on wealth at all cost, do it much better.
  - sombremesa 6y ago
    Hard to take GP seriously. India can even raise funds from various sources (see: PM Cares) if needed, to provide for these needs. They just don't want to, much rather line their own pockets than feed the poor (who happen to be their voting bank, but are too uneducated to vote in their own interest).
    - alex_smart 5y ago
      >see: PM Cares Size of PM Cares fund was estimated to be $1.23 billion dollars[1] (from May 2020, the most recent source I could find). The size of India's food subsidy program is over 2 trillion dollars.[2] So, PM Cares fund is less that 0.1% of the amount Indian government already spends on food subsidies. >too uneducated to vote What's the point of education when you form your opinions with such laziness? Sources: [1] https://www.indiaspend.com/pm-cares-received-at-least-1-27-bn-in-donations-enough-to-fund-over-21-5-mn-covid-19-tests/ https://www.indiaspend.com/pm-cares-received-at-least-1-27-b... [2] https://www.financialexpress.com/economy/increase-pds-price-of-grains-to-cut-food-subsidy/2182112/ https://www.financialexpress.com/economy/increase-pds-price-...
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  Providing food is far from something only developped countries can do. Very poor countries can and have done so. All you have to provide is food, shelter, and maybe a very small baseline of income.
nostromo 6y ago
At a certain point you run out of money. The US can print trillions of dollars in an emergency as a world reserve currency. Most countries cannot do this. The idea that India could just pay 1.4 billion people not to work for a year doesn't seem like a realistic proposal.
- supernovae 6y ago
  On what premise? This kind of talk presumes economies and governments don't serve the will of the people. I mean, lets be real, if they don't serve the will of the people then the economy and government is short term and lockdowns were never the problem, but a symptom...
  - f00zz 6y ago
    Not every country has the privilege of having the world's reserve currency. Money printing never ends well for poor countries.
    - supernovae 6y ago
      In a democracy, This isn't a privilege, its the will of the people. Why frame it as money printing? Does everything that can help people have to be pejorative?
      - sgt101 6y ago
        I think that the OP is pointing out that some democracies are freer to act than others. The USA has absolute latitude, especially after demonstrating that countries that might threaten that latitude (ie. anyone who cut the oil off up to 10 years ago - now irrelevant) will be destroyed. India does not have all that much latitude.
        supernovae 5y ago
        It's political, i get it... but its laughable they try and prove a point through downvotes... but such is hacker news, hide the reality they don't agree with :)
KorematsuFred 6y ago
> you would lock down and provide income/food/capabilities for people to live regardless of their social/economic status. You are mistaking democracy with other virtues. income/food/capabilities do not come from thin air, it is eventually generated by people and under lockdowns when most economy is at a standstill this is incredibly difficult. So even the "redistribution" does not work that well. India is also a far poorer country so there is not much to distribute in first place. > locking down isn't why poor people hurt, locking down and doing nothing to feed them does. What we need is some humility that we do not fully understand what others need and the only way to find it out is by giving people freedom. Poor people in India right now do not want anyone's alms. They are more interested into going out, doing what they want to do rather than just get food clothing and shelter. The previous lockdown did ensure that everyone had food clothing and shelter through government and private charity efforts but people were in general pretty upset. I think we should stop assigning blame to democracy just because realities don't match up our expectations, partly because we are not infinitely smart to understand what other people want.
- devonbleak 6y ago
  I think it's safe to assume if you're missing anything from the base of Maslow's hierarchy then those things are probably included in what you immediately need, let alone what you want.
- supernovae 6y ago
  This to me just reads as excuses based on how it is, not how it could have been. Learned helplessness is what they call it.
bobthechef 6y ago
That's extremely vague and untenable. Besides, the lockdowns were completely unwarranted. Sure, at the beginning, no one seemed to know how dangerous this thing is, but we have learned quite a bit about it since and it does not merit the sweeping lockdowns in place. Locking down and protecting the vulnerable like those with comorbidities, absolutely, but not everyone. It is not that dangerous of a virus! Sadly, this has proven to be a successful experiment in how media-driven FUD, sloppy reporting, and blatant misinformation can make people behave irrationally. We know the tallies are bogus because of the bad monetary incentives and methods used to determine whether someone's death counts as a COVID death, we know that something like a half a percent of the population is really affected, we know that the side effects of the lockdown are very concerning (rising suicide, undiagnosed cancers and other illnesses because people fear medical facilities). This is all pure political opportunism at this point. You want to help the poor? Get rid of the lockdown. The longer you wait, the harder it is going to be to admit that there's nothing to fear (frankly, that ship has kind of sailed; people will ask "well, if it isn't that dangerous, why have we been under lockdown?"). You need a believable exit. (Enter the vaccine.)
fareesh 6y ago
Democracy is the system of elected representatives. You can elect a government that is completely opposed to welfare programs. India has some of the hardest working people in the world, and it's a shame the way many have been treated by government programs. Government handouts have created a culture in which many of the poor are at the mercy of corrupt bureaucrats just to get by. "What's that you say? Your rice allotment was 100 grams less than you're entitled to? Fuck you. Store is closed today. Hey everyone, thank smartass over here, nobody gets rice today." This is government welfare here in India.
- KorematsuFred 6y ago
  I was born poor. One american idea that does resonate with me after coming to USA is that a lot of poor people do not see themselves as poor. While their struggles are real they do not see themselves as losers but rather see themselves as strugglers who will eventually make it some day. They make life better for themselves and others. That was the case with my family. We lived in a house whose floor was basically painted with cowdung, roof leaked, we could not afford meat and we borrowed newspapers from others to read. Yet, not once we would call ourselves poor and demand that someone else take care of us. It would be insulting for our pride. A lot of well off people in India and USA automatically think of poor people as losers or without agency. They then propose that government must help them. Guess what, other than a small fraction of poor people most DO NOT want that help. They would rather prefer to do what they want to do. Poor people do not want your food, clothing and shelter, they have their own desires. We can not possibly know what they are. India is an extremely social country and lockdowns have much bigger costs for people. If people are angry and fed up and willing to risk their lives, I can understand. I do not think assurance of food or money per month will keep them indoors. What we need is some humility to recognize that just because someone else has less money than we do, that does not reduce their self worth or gives us the right to know "what they need". PS. Shortage of food was not a problem in India during last lockdown it is not a problem today either. Food Corporation of India has a record stockpile of rice right now.
  - supernovae 6y ago
    There is a HUGE difference in accepting a dole because you're shut down for the survival of your species and can't work vs how you see yourself functioning in a society where you can work.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
sofixa 5y ago
Vastly depends on the country. In France, lots of efforts were made ( salary compensation so that people keep their jobs and get paid by the government, and companies aren't forced to fold; loans and loan guarantees for businesses; compensation for missed revenues for impacted companies; schools were kept open to give equal opportunities to children; moratorium on evictions; etc etc), with the president even saying multiple times "whatever it costs" ( the guy who was elected on a fiscal responsibility and reform platform ). And still people were left worse than before. It's really not easy, but governments really have to do their best.

lucian1900 6y ago

Precisely. What you described is exactly what happened in China and Vietnam: one short strict lockdown while taking care of people's material necessities. Unsurprisingly, both countries have eliminated community transmission.

sgt101 6y ago
This is a naive reading of what has happened. There may well be some cross immunity in some communities due to previous coronavirus circulations. And the numbers in China are not all that credible - one guy at my work had three of four grandparents die of "some winter cold" in March last year. It will be quite some time before the numbers in China become clear I think.
- ridethebike 6y ago
  I think if China didn't manage coronavirus successfully we'd have seen numbers of deaths due to "some winter cold" so large that even communist party wouldn't be able to hide
  - sgt101 6y ago
    Really? They did a pretty good job of hiding a host of vast reeducation centres....
    - rictic 6y ago
      Did they? You can rely on your reader to know that you're referring to Xinjiang.
      - sgt101 5y ago
        At this point - but these centres were revealed to the world (by journalists who are now kicked from the country) fully built and also full of inmates.

grecy 6y ago

Canada, Australia & New Zealand (and I'm sure many other countries) have done an excellent job providing money to people who are stuck at home because they can't go to work. Here in Canada it was $500/week for 28 weeks, then you moved onto a different scheme if you still needed support. Everyone who needed it go it. We have not been desperately waiting for a pittance of $1200. Be careful not to generalize that all democracies have done a poor job just because some have.

skeeter2020 6y ago
>> We have not been desperately waiting for a pittance of $1200. No, we've been desperately waiting for vacinnes after being repeatedly promised there will be plently for everyone ("look at all these contracts we've signed!") while they pay you off with massive borrowing that someone is going to be responsible for when the music stops. Meanwhile Texas, the poster-child for bad behaviour, is headed back to normal.
- supernovae 6y ago
  Texas is not normal :) Most of us are staying home still, in the major cities we collectively wear masks regardless of our goofy gov. Large places of employment still aren't opening offices and many that are talking about opening are doing so with the realization it won't be like it used to be...
  - chrismat 6y ago
    Not sure where you live - but I travel full time in an RV and have stayed and traveled through El Paso, Austin, Houston, San Antonio and everywhere in between in the last 3 months. Maybe some are still hiding at home, but from my experience the overwhelming majority of Texans seem to be out enjoying the sunshine and open businesses.
    - burlesona 6y ago
      Living in Austin I would say it’s a mix, but the main thing is that you now have about a third of people (including most of the high risk) who are vaccinated (at least the first dose) and joining the ... 1/5? Or so? ... who “don’t believe in COVID.” Combined that’s a decent chunk of the population getting back out. I think it’s still quiet compared to normal, but it sure seems like one giant party compared to the last year. It’s really hard to subjectively judge these things.

mrtweetyhack 6y ago

that's not even what democracy means.

alex_smart 6y ago

>In a representative democracy, you wouldn't lock down and force people to starve - you would lock down and provide income/food/capabilities for people to live regardless of their social/economic status. I didn't realize that being a rich country with a developed economy was a pre-requisite to being a representative democracy.

supernovae 6y ago
It's not... in fact, I'd say other democracies with less emphasis on wealth at all cost, do it much better.
- sombremesa 6y ago
  Hard to take GP seriously. India can even raise funds from various sources (see: PM Cares) if needed, to provide for these needs. They just don't want to, much rather line their own pockets than feed the poor (who happen to be their voting bank, but are too uneducated to vote in their own interest).
  - alex_smart 5y ago
    >see: PM Cares Size of PM Cares fund was estimated to be $1.23 billion dollars[1] (from May 2020, the most recent source I could find). The size of India's food subsidy program is over 2 trillion dollars.[2] So, PM Cares fund is less that 0.1% of the amount Indian government already spends on food subsidies. >too uneducated to vote What's the point of education when you form your opinions with such laziness? Sources: [1] https://www.indiaspend.com/pm-cares-received-at-least-1-27-bn-in-donations-enough-to-fund-over-21-5-mn-covid-19-tests/ https://www.indiaspend.com/pm-cares-received-at-least-1-27-b... [2] https://www.financialexpress.com/economy/increase-pds-price-of-grains-to-cut-food-subsidy/2182112/ https://www.financialexpress.com/economy/increase-pds-price-...
sudosysgen 6y ago
Providing food is far from something only developped countries can do. Very poor countries can and have done so. All you have to provide is food, shelter, and maybe a very small baseline of income.

nostromo 6y ago

At a certain point you run out of money. The US can print trillions of dollars in an emergency as a world reserve currency. Most countries cannot do this. The idea that India could just pay 1.4 billion people not to work for a year doesn't seem like a realistic proposal.

supernovae 6y ago
On what premise? This kind of talk presumes economies and governments don't serve the will of the people. I mean, lets be real, if they don't serve the will of the people then the economy and government is short term and lockdowns were never the problem, but a symptom...
- f00zz 6y ago
  Not every country has the privilege of having the world's reserve currency. Money printing never ends well for poor countries.
  - supernovae 6y ago
    In a democracy, This isn't a privilege, its the will of the people. Why frame it as money printing? Does everything that can help people have to be pejorative?
    - sgt101 6y ago
      I think that the OP is pointing out that some democracies are freer to act than others. The USA has absolute latitude, especially after demonstrating that countries that might threaten that latitude (ie. anyone who cut the oil off up to 10 years ago - now irrelevant) will be destroyed. India does not have all that much latitude.
      - supernovae 5y ago
        It's political, i get it... but its laughable they try and prove a point through downvotes... but such is hacker news, hide the reality they don't agree with :)

KorematsuFred 6y ago

> you would lock down and provide income/food/capabilities for people to live regardless of their social/economic status. You are mistaking democracy with other virtues. income/food/capabilities do not come from thin air, it is eventually generated by people and under lockdowns when most economy is at a standstill this is incredibly difficult. So even the "redistribution" does not work that well. India is also a far poorer country so there is not much to distribute in first place. > locking down isn't why poor people hurt, locking down and doing nothing to feed them does. What we need is some humility that we do not fully understand what others need and the only way to find it out is by giving people freedom. Poor people in India right now do not want anyone's alms. They are more interested into going out, doing what they want to do rather than just get food clothing and shelter. The previous lockdown did ensure that everyone had food clothing and shelter through government and private charity efforts but people were in general pretty upset. I think we should stop assigning blame to democracy just because realities don't match up our expectations, partly because we are not infinitely smart to understand what other people want.

devonbleak 6y ago
I think it's safe to assume if you're missing anything from the base of Maslow's hierarchy then those things are probably included in what you immediately need, let alone what you want.
supernovae 6y ago
This to me just reads as excuses based on how it is, not how it could have been. Learned helplessness is what they call it.

bobthechef 6y ago

That's extremely vague and untenable. Besides, the lockdowns were completely unwarranted. Sure, at the beginning, no one seemed to know how dangerous this thing is, but we have learned quite a bit about it since and it does not merit the sweeping lockdowns in place. Locking down and protecting the vulnerable like those with comorbidities, absolutely, but not everyone. It is not that dangerous of a virus! Sadly, this has proven to be a successful experiment in how media-driven FUD, sloppy reporting, and blatant misinformation can make people behave irrationally. We know the tallies are bogus because of the bad monetary incentives and methods used to determine whether someone's death counts as a COVID death, we know that something like a half a percent of the population is really affected, we know that the side effects of the lockdown are very concerning (rising suicide, undiagnosed cancers and other illnesses because people fear medical facilities). This is all pure political opportunism at this point. You want to help the poor? Get rid of the lockdown. The longer you wait, the harder it is going to be to admit that there's nothing to fear (frankly, that ship has kind of sailed; people will ask "well, if it isn't that dangerous, why have we been under lockdown?"). You need a believable exit. (Enter the vaccine.)

fareesh 6y ago

Democracy is the system of elected representatives. You can elect a government that is completely opposed to welfare programs. India has some of the hardest working people in the world, and it's a shame the way many have been treated by government programs. Government handouts have created a culture in which many of the poor are at the mercy of corrupt bureaucrats just to get by. "What's that you say? Your rice allotment was 100 grams less than you're entitled to? Fuck you. Store is closed today. Hey everyone, thank smartass over here, nobody gets rice today." This is government welfare here in India.

KorematsuFred 6y ago
I was born poor. One american idea that does resonate with me after coming to USA is that a lot of poor people do not see themselves as poor. While their struggles are real they do not see themselves as losers but rather see themselves as strugglers who will eventually make it some day. They make life better for themselves and others. That was the case with my family. We lived in a house whose floor was basically painted with cowdung, roof leaked, we could not afford meat and we borrowed newspapers from others to read. Yet, not once we would call ourselves poor and demand that someone else take care of us. It would be insulting for our pride. A lot of well off people in India and USA automatically think of poor people as losers or without agency. They then propose that government must help them. Guess what, other than a small fraction of poor people most DO NOT want that help. They would rather prefer to do what they want to do. Poor people do not want your food, clothing and shelter, they have their own desires. We can not possibly know what they are. India is an extremely social country and lockdowns have much bigger costs for people. If people are angry and fed up and willing to risk their lives, I can understand. I do not think assurance of food or money per month will keep them indoors. What we need is some humility to recognize that just because someone else has less money than we do, that does not reduce their self worth or gives us the right to know "what they need". PS. Shortage of food was not a problem in India during last lockdown it is not a problem today either. Food Corporation of India has a record stockpile of rice right now.
- supernovae 6y ago
  There is a HUGE difference in accepting a dole because you're shut down for the survival of your species and can't work vs how you see yourself functioning in a society where you can work.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

sofixa 5y ago

Vastly depends on the country. In France, lots of efforts were made ( salary compensation so that people keep their jobs and get paid by the government, and companies aren't forced to fold; loans and loan guarantees for businesses; compensation for missed revenues for impacted companies; schools were kept open to give equal opportunities to children; moratorium on evictions; etc etc), with the president even saying multiple times "whatever it costs" ( the guy who was elected on a fiscal responsibility and reform platform ). And still people were left worse than before. It's really not easy, but governments really have to do their best.