4 ms·

I’m also an immigrant and often lament the difference in attitude between immigrants and natives in any country. But it’s not a fair comparison because immigran

by atonse 5y ago

I’m also an immigrant and often lament the difference in attitude between immigrants and natives in any country. But it’s not a fair comparison because immigrants as a group self select. If you had the motivation to move to a different country, often one that doesn’t speak your language, you’re naturally more driven and motivated.

lotsofpulp 5y ago
Rewarding the motivated and driven and not rewarding the unmotivated and non driven seems like the ideal incentive structure for society. Obviously, easier to write than implement and execute. But my point is is there an obligation for society to not have to make people move if the economic conditions change and labor supply and demand curves move? What are the long term effects of these incentive structures?
- luffapi 5y ago
  The government shouldn’t be in the business of “motivating” anyone (that’s propaganda). Having a social safety net so we don’t have an army of homeless people has nothing to do with “reward”, it raises the quality of living for all of us.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    I am a proponent of certain social safety nets, but I am not sure the feasibility of one of them being that you can live wherever you want. We already enforce a barrier at a country’s borders, but even within a country, what would mitigate the effects everyone wanting to live in the most desirable areas? Perhaps the answer is to just keep going more dense, if one’s position is that within a country, anyone is allowed to live anywhere, either via their own means or government assistance. But I do not see that being politically popular with many, and I can envision a few feasibility concerns with that approach. Another option is that the location where you get a social safety net is not guaranteed, and so desirable land is distributed according to one’s wealth (which I know is highly dependent on one’s ancestry).
    - luffapi 5y ago
      Mixed income housing is a good thing and leads to healthier communities. We need more public housing, low income housing and density in all metros. I think London does a good job here. It’s expensive to buy, but they have vibrant communities with public housing mixed in and to the benefit of everyone, you don’t step in human excrement every time you walk outside (opposed to SF).
- klyrs 5y ago
  Being unmotivated, undriven is hand in glove with depression. Rewarding the mentally healthy while scorning the mentally ill doesn't strike me as "ideal." Homeless people move to places with mild winters, because they don't see housing as an attainable goal. Maybe they'd move somewhere with free housing -- or maybe they'd assume that any such program wouldn't survive an election cycle, so would rather stay put than get their hopes up.

by atonse 5y ago

lotsofpulp 5y ago

Rewarding the motivated and driven and not rewarding the unmotivated and non driven seems like the ideal incentive structure for society. Obviously, easier to write than implement and execute. But my point is is there an obligation for society to not have to make people move if the economic conditions change and labor supply and demand curves move? What are the long term effects of these incentive structures?

luffapi 5y ago
The government shouldn’t be in the business of “motivating” anyone (that’s propaganda). Having a social safety net so we don’t have an army of homeless people has nothing to do with “reward”, it raises the quality of living for all of us.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  I am a proponent of certain social safety nets, but I am not sure the feasibility of one of them being that you can live wherever you want. We already enforce a barrier at a country’s borders, but even within a country, what would mitigate the effects everyone wanting to live in the most desirable areas? Perhaps the answer is to just keep going more dense, if one’s position is that within a country, anyone is allowed to live anywhere, either via their own means or government assistance. But I do not see that being politically popular with many, and I can envision a few feasibility concerns with that approach. Another option is that the location where you get a social safety net is not guaranteed, and so desirable land is distributed according to one’s wealth (which I know is highly dependent on one’s ancestry).
  - luffapi 5y ago
    Mixed income housing is a good thing and leads to healthier communities. We need more public housing, low income housing and density in all metros. I think London does a good job here. It’s expensive to buy, but they have vibrant communities with public housing mixed in and to the benefit of everyone, you don’t step in human excrement every time you walk outside (opposed to SF).
klyrs 5y ago
Being unmotivated, undriven is hand in glove with depression. Rewarding the mentally healthy while scorning the mentally ill doesn't strike me as "ideal." Homeless people move to places with mild winters, because they don't see housing as an attainable goal. Maybe they'd move somewhere with free housing -- or maybe they'd assume that any such program wouldn't survive an election cycle, so would rather stay put than get their hopes up.