7 ms·

This one particular student sticks with me. He was in his 60s-70s, and had a burgeoning career in IT/Security in the late 90s, but quit his job to take care of

This one particular student sticks with me. He was in his 60s-70s, and had a burgeoning career in IT/Security in the late 90s, but quit his job to take care of his ailing mother around 2001 or so. He took care of her, living off of her reverse mortgage for 20 years, but now she has passed away, and the term of the reverse mortgage ends soon (or I believe by now has ended) so the bank will be re-posessing his house, his only remaining asset. The guy was not doing well. Even though he was quite smart and had C++ in his distant background, he was making almost zero progress in the course. It soon became clear that he was so drained from working 12-hour days at a Costco warehouse (and doing other similar menial jobs) 6 days a week (and still not making enough to even pay his medical bills) that he wasn't going to be able to make any progress. I repeatedly recommended him for a scholarship (because of his intelligence and skill) but I never heard back, and eventually he dropped off my schedule. I did everything I could to give him what he needed to succeed, but ultimately there was nothing I could do. It haunts me. This country is so fucked.

akanet 5y ago
Thanks for the story. The most brutal thing for me about reporting this story was each individual human horror-show. It's such a serious thing to be responsible for attempting to transform the lives of people who need it so desperately. It is what's most noble about Lambda's mission, to me.
spoonjim 5y ago
Does any country do a decent job of retraining 70 year old men for developer positions? This does not need to be a high priority for a society if the 70 year old can afford a roof of their head and a meal.
- ericb 5y ago
  I don't think that's the issue. The issue is that the United States provides such a poor safety net for those with health issues that one person's failing health destroys the economic potential of one or more people around them. From a sheer utilitarian perspective, healthcare and safety nets are positive ROI. Imagine the job-producing startups that don't exist because "how do you pay for insurance?"
  - horsawlarway 5y ago
    It's worse than just lost startup opportunities. I think healthcare in the US is riddled with ways to "accidentally"* spend the entire accumulation of your wealth, leaving absolutely nothing to the next generation. Long term care is needed by a lot of folks over the age of 65 (~70% of adults age 65 will require at least partial long term care). Even "reasonably cheap" care (in my experience, roughly the same quality as living in a college dorm, with a roommate and a meal plan) can easily run 10k/month - or 120k a year. Of those needing long term care (roughly half of all folks): Men will need that care for an average of ~2 years, women nearly 4 years. 20% will need that care for 5 years or longer. I watched my parents spend all of their inheritance covering long term care costs for their parents (Alzheimers is a bitch). Once the inheritance was gone, they worked longer than they would have preferred to continue covering those costs (my mother only retired this year when my grandmother died of covid - as horrendous as it sounds, it was almost a blessing). My personal take is that "single family homes" and "private healthcare" are a literal fucking disaster for long term wealth inequality. That policy combination takes a lot of middle class families and leaves them poor. * - I personally don't think it's an accident at all, I think it's very, very intentional.
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      To be fair, long-term care is not just an opportunity to accidentally (from the perspective of the holder, not the system) get rid of one’s accumulated wealth, it is often the motivation for intentionally doing so prematurely, in order to qualify for Medicaid (which pays for the majority of long-term care in the US.) OTOH, for people who don’t have the knowledge or professional advice to do this (which, of course, correlates strongly with having more wealth to start with), it is a trap for accidental wealth drain rather than intentional redistribution, so the poor get generationally poorer, while the better off are also better able to protect generational wealth, both benefiting from programs for the medically indigent.
      - coryrc 5y ago
        Every dollar spent on the elderly who had their whole life to prepare is a dollar not spent on a child growing up in poverty who has not yet had a chance. Families should take care of their own. If nobody is willing to do that for you, you probably aren't deserving.
- xtracto 5y ago
  My thought was around those lines: 60/70 year olds shouldn't be struggling to get retrained. They should be able to live the rest of their lives in retirement. Society should take care of their elders. That's where I would start a UBI program if I could. Sure, if anyone wants to use their time to learn something new that would be a plus for them.
  - ghaff 5y ago
    Well, we sort of do. It's called social security. Now, you could argue that social security by itself only supports a pretty spartan lifestyle. But any UBI proposal is probably even less money.
    - hellbannedguy 5y ago
      I'm for not giving SS to those that don't need it. Your 65 and wealthy. Why do you need a that piddley SS check? The USA has reniged on promises before. Oh yea, everyone would still have to contribute to SS. I imagine the money saved might go to a Basic Income? A Basic Income that would help out the poorest of Americans.
    - rovolo 5y ago
      Your social security benefits are calculated based on your 35 highest income years; which includes 0 income years. The guy quit in 2001 in his 40s-50s, so he may only have 20 years of income for SSA benefits. That said, the formula is a political choice just as the UBI benefits are a political choice. We could give everyone the same SSA benefits regardless of prior income and index the amounts to age instead. UBI and SSA could be the same administration with lower amounts for younger people and higher amounts for retirees. https://www.aarp.org/retirement/social-security/questions-answers/social-security-benefits-calculation.html https://www.aarp.org/retirement/social-security/questions-an...
hellbannedguy 5y ago
What's even more sad is even if he did well in the courses; I doubt he would be hired because of his age. I can't think of another industry that discriminates on age more than tech.
codr7 5y ago
Same story in most western countries by now, stumble once and you're fucked for life. And to add insult to injury, people will rather think you deserve it than face the fact that we're all in the same stinking boat.
- coryrc 5y ago
  Not working for twenty years (in the prime time for earning money) is not "stumbling once".
  - jedberg 5y ago
    In that case the issue was that he had to stop working to take care of his mother. In most civilized countries, his mother would have sufficient help from government healthcare.
    - lazide 5y ago
      Depending on how sick she was there are such programs in every state. If she needed round the clock care like it sounds, she was sick enough most likely. He also could probably have declared bankruptcy early and been able to focus more on learning useful skills instead of killing himself trying to pay bills he never could. That is what bankruptcy is for. But hard to say what was really going on.
      - codr7 5y ago
        Right, learning useful skills while declaring bankruptcy. Something tells me you've never even come close to walking in those shoes. The second you stop generating profit, the state starts treating you like a broken toy.
        lazide 5y ago
        Guess again my friend. Ate old canned food for a very long time while my parents declared bankruptcy as a kid - twice - so we at least had a roof over our head, and wore the same two shirts for years too. My Mom finished a 4 year degree several years afterwards that helped us pull out of the economic collapse of the aerospace industry in the area that had trapped us - and was studying late in the night to do it. While working a very demanding full time job too. There are methods to avoid being destroyed by situations like this, but some never try or don’t bother to even figure it out. Doesn’t mean it still isn’t hard work, and stressful as hell, but it is there to stop the destruction. Folks have to look and try though.
kirso 5y ago
Yep, that's also because: "Earlier this year researchers at the London School of Economics released a paper titled, “Why Do People Stay Poor?” that illustrated how the lack of initial wealth (and not motivation or talent) is what keeps people in poverty. The researchers tested this by randomly allocating wealth (i.e. livestock) to female villagers in Bangladesh and then waited to see how that wealth transfer would affect their future finances. As their paper states: [We] find that, if the program pushes individuals above a threshold level of initial assets, then they escape poverty, but, if it does not, they slide back into poverty…Our findings imply that large one-off transfers that enable people to take on more productive occupations can help alleviate persistent poverty. Their paper clearly illustrates that many poor people stay poor not because of their talent/motivation, but because they are in low-paying jobs that they must work to survive." More on this here: https://ofdollarsanddata.com/why-do-poor-people-stay-poor/ https://ofdollarsanddata.com/why-do-poor-people-stay-poor/
- ZhangSWEFAANG 5y ago
  This is like the escape velocity of wealth.

akanet 5y ago

Thanks for the story. The most brutal thing for me about reporting this story was each individual human horror-show. It's such a serious thing to be responsible for attempting to transform the lives of people who need it so desperately. It is what's most noble about Lambda's mission, to me.

spoonjim 5y ago

Does any country do a decent job of retraining 70 year old men for developer positions? This does not need to be a high priority for a society if the 70 year old can afford a roof of their head and a meal.

ericb 5y ago
I don't think that's the issue. The issue is that the United States provides such a poor safety net for those with health issues that one person's failing health destroys the economic potential of one or more people around them. From a sheer utilitarian perspective, healthcare and safety nets are positive ROI. Imagine the job-producing startups that don't exist because "how do you pay for insurance?"
- horsawlarway 5y ago
  It's worse than just lost startup opportunities. I think healthcare in the US is riddled with ways to "accidentally"* spend the entire accumulation of your wealth, leaving absolutely nothing to the next generation. Long term care is needed by a lot of folks over the age of 65 (~70% of adults age 65 will require at least partial long term care). Even "reasonably cheap" care (in my experience, roughly the same quality as living in a college dorm, with a roommate and a meal plan) can easily run 10k/month - or 120k a year. Of those needing long term care (roughly half of all folks): Men will need that care for an average of ~2 years, women nearly 4 years. 20% will need that care for 5 years or longer. I watched my parents spend all of their inheritance covering long term care costs for their parents (Alzheimers is a bitch). Once the inheritance was gone, they worked longer than they would have preferred to continue covering those costs (my mother only retired this year when my grandmother died of covid - as horrendous as it sounds, it was almost a blessing). My personal take is that "single family homes" and "private healthcare" are a literal fucking disaster for long term wealth inequality. That policy combination takes a lot of middle class families and leaves them poor. * - I personally don't think it's an accident at all, I think it's very, very intentional.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    To be fair, long-term care is not just an opportunity to accidentally (from the perspective of the holder, not the system) get rid of one’s accumulated wealth, it is often the motivation for intentionally doing so prematurely, in order to qualify for Medicaid (which pays for the majority of long-term care in the US.) OTOH, for people who don’t have the knowledge or professional advice to do this (which, of course, correlates strongly with having more wealth to start with), it is a trap for accidental wealth drain rather than intentional redistribution, so the poor get generationally poorer, while the better off are also better able to protect generational wealth, both benefiting from programs for the medically indigent.
    - coryrc 5y ago
      Every dollar spent on the elderly who had their whole life to prepare is a dollar not spent on a child growing up in poverty who has not yet had a chance. Families should take care of their own. If nobody is willing to do that for you, you probably aren't deserving.
xtracto 5y ago
My thought was around those lines: 60/70 year olds shouldn't be struggling to get retrained. They should be able to live the rest of their lives in retirement. Society should take care of their elders. That's where I would start a UBI program if I could. Sure, if anyone wants to use their time to learn something new that would be a plus for them.
- ghaff 5y ago
  Well, we sort of do. It's called social security. Now, you could argue that social security by itself only supports a pretty spartan lifestyle. But any UBI proposal is probably even less money.
  - hellbannedguy 5y ago
    I'm for not giving SS to those that don't need it. Your 65 and wealthy. Why do you need a that piddley SS check? The USA has reniged on promises before. Oh yea, everyone would still have to contribute to SS. I imagine the money saved might go to a Basic Income? A Basic Income that would help out the poorest of Americans.
  - rovolo 5y ago
    Your social security benefits are calculated based on your 35 highest income years; which includes 0 income years. The guy quit in 2001 in his 40s-50s, so he may only have 20 years of income for SSA benefits. That said, the formula is a political choice just as the UBI benefits are a political choice. We could give everyone the same SSA benefits regardless of prior income and index the amounts to age instead. UBI and SSA could be the same administration with lower amounts for younger people and higher amounts for retirees. https://www.aarp.org/retirement/social-security/questions-answers/social-security-benefits-calculation.html https://www.aarp.org/retirement/social-security/questions-an...

hellbannedguy 5y ago

What's even more sad is even if he did well in the courses; I doubt he would be hired because of his age. I can't think of another industry that discriminates on age more than tech.

codr7 5y ago

Same story in most western countries by now, stumble once and you're fucked for life. And to add insult to injury, people will rather think you deserve it than face the fact that we're all in the same stinking boat.

coryrc 5y ago
Not working for twenty years (in the prime time for earning money) is not "stumbling once".
- jedberg 5y ago
  In that case the issue was that he had to stop working to take care of his mother. In most civilized countries, his mother would have sufficient help from government healthcare.
  - lazide 5y ago
    Depending on how sick she was there are such programs in every state. If she needed round the clock care like it sounds, she was sick enough most likely. He also could probably have declared bankruptcy early and been able to focus more on learning useful skills instead of killing himself trying to pay bills he never could. That is what bankruptcy is for. But hard to say what was really going on.
    - codr7 5y ago
      Right, learning useful skills while declaring bankruptcy. Something tells me you've never even come close to walking in those shoes. The second you stop generating profit, the state starts treating you like a broken toy.
      - lazide 5y ago
        Guess again my friend. Ate old canned food for a very long time while my parents declared bankruptcy as a kid - twice - so we at least had a roof over our head, and wore the same two shirts for years too. My Mom finished a 4 year degree several years afterwards that helped us pull out of the economic collapse of the aerospace industry in the area that had trapped us - and was studying late in the night to do it. While working a very demanding full time job too. There are methods to avoid being destroyed by situations like this, but some never try or don’t bother to even figure it out. Doesn’t mean it still isn’t hard work, and stressful as hell, but it is there to stop the destruction. Folks have to look and try though.

kirso 5y ago

Yep, that's also because: "Earlier this year researchers at the London School of Economics released a paper titled, “Why Do People Stay Poor?” that illustrated how the lack of initial wealth (and not motivation or talent) is what keeps people in poverty. The researchers tested this by randomly allocating wealth (i.e. livestock) to female villagers in Bangladesh and then waited to see how that wealth transfer would affect their future finances. As their paper states: [We] find that, if the program pushes individuals above a threshold level of initial assets, then they escape poverty, but, if it does not, they slide back into poverty…Our findings imply that large one-off transfers that enable people to take on more productive occupations can help alleviate persistent poverty. Their paper clearly illustrates that many poor people stay poor not because of their talent/motivation, but because they are in low-paying jobs that they must work to survive." More on this here: https://ofdollarsanddata.com/why-do-poor-people-stay-poor/ https://ofdollarsanddata.com/why-do-poor-people-stay-poor/

ZhangSWEFAANG 5y ago
This is like the escape velocity of wealth.