5 ms·

I’m not sure which part of the GP comment you’re responding to here. No one is suggesting inequality can't also be a problem, but this doesn’t negate a lot of t

I’m not sure which part of the GP comment you’re responding to here. No one is suggesting inequality can't also be a problem, but this doesn’t negate a lot of the growth being positive-sum. Consider a country like Switzerland where I lived, which still has a good amount of inequality (though perhaps less than the US), or based on the Gini coefficient Germany (which by this metric is more unequal than the US) [1]. The base standard is high enough that even lower middle class Germans tend to have better lives with a higher purchasing power than many middle-class people in less wealthy developed countries such as Spain, and the inequality in Germany compared to someplace like Spain then isn’t a concern for their absolute quality of life. Of course, relative quality of life can pose psychological concerns, but that’s separate to positive vs. zero-sum growth. > Americans are always commenting about how unusually clean Canada is, but Canada is actually quite ordinary. That's how first world countries normally look. To be fair, the US is incredibly varied in this due in part to the inequality, and someplace like the UK seems to have a large number of cities I find especially dirty even from a US perspective. I would say urban Canada is notably better than the first-world country average. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_eq...

kstenerud 5y ago
> I’m not sure which part of the GP comment you’re responding to here. No one is suggesting inequality can't also be a problem, but this doesn’t negate a lot of the growth being positive-sum. While this can be true, it follows along a curve. Up to a certain level of inequality you can still have a net-positive sum, but after a certain point you start to see negative quality of life, lower nutrition, lower life expectency, higher infant mortality, lower security, etc. The USA mostly crossed over during the 1990s and early 2000s. > To be fair, the US is incredibly varied in this due in part to the inequality, and someplace like the UK seems to have a large number of cities I find especially dirty even from a US perspective. I would say urban Canada is notably better than the first-world country average. I've lived in the UK as well, and you're right that it has some pretty dirty cities. But it also has a serious class and inequality problem. Paris has similar problems, although not to the same degree as, say, Liverpool or San Francisco. Southern Europe has more inequality than the north (excepting the UK), and it shows (but they're also being squeezed by European monteary policy so I can't blame them too much). In America, I would say that Colorado is probably the most first-world-like place I saw, followed maybe by some parts of Montana, but all of the top cities had this ... decay for want of a better word ... about them.
- ZacharyPitts 5y ago
  Colorado/Montanta/etc are just too damn cold in the winter for homeless to survive, so they migrate to other warmer places
  - kstenerud 5y ago
    > Colorado/Montanta/etc are just too damn cold in the winter for homeless to survive, so they migrate to other warmer places It's this level of ignorance that is part of the problem. Just because someone is rendered homeless doesn't mean that they uproot and move away from their friends and family and job and life. If you're conjuring up images of vagabonds and junkies at the end of their tether, you really need to learn more. Chicago alone has almost 60,000 homeless, and it's a huge problem that so many die in the winter. https://s6624.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Homeless-Estimate-2021_FINAL.pdf https://s6624.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Homeless-Es...
  - Broken_Hippo 5y ago
    No, not really. It is hard to move and costs money and this is a major deterrent to moving. Not to mention that moving takes away your last connections to any sort of social network you've built up: They might not be able to get you housing, but an occasional warm meal or moral support helps too. You are also assuming that homelessness means living in a tent on a street and that is only a single facet. Some folks bounce around between couches, for example. The government might not consider you homeless while doing this, even if you know you'll be on the street in days. (A friend of mine stayed in a shelter to get housing because of this rule, in Indiana). Lots of folks stay in shelters on cold nights as well. Many sleep in cars. Homelessness is simply less severe/deadly in warm climates. And don't forget that Colorado/Montana/etc also have summers, which means that folks can (and sometimes do) decide to be homeless for part of the year. I mean, seriously... I'm originally from Indiana. Indiana has winters every year, and storms in the spring and summer (so homeless = wet). Indiana has a homeless population. Same for Chicago and New York City, both of which have winter. And lets not forget that different places have different ways of dealing with homelessness. I'm not caught up on policies in different states, but I'm guessing some states funnel more folks into housing than others, some funnel more folks into jails and prisons than others, and some simply see if folks die on the streets or not.

kstenerud 5y ago

> I’m not sure which part of the GP comment you’re responding to here. No one is suggesting inequality can't also be a problem, but this doesn’t negate a lot of the growth being positive-sum. While this can be true, it follows along a curve. Up to a certain level of inequality you can still have a net-positive sum, but after a certain point you start to see negative quality of life, lower nutrition, lower life expectency, higher infant mortality, lower security, etc. The USA mostly crossed over during the 1990s and early 2000s. > To be fair, the US is incredibly varied in this due in part to the inequality, and someplace like the UK seems to have a large number of cities I find especially dirty even from a US perspective. I would say urban Canada is notably better than the first-world country average. I've lived in the UK as well, and you're right that it has some pretty dirty cities. But it also has a serious class and inequality problem. Paris has similar problems, although not to the same degree as, say, Liverpool or San Francisco. Southern Europe has more inequality than the north (excepting the UK), and it shows (but they're also being squeezed by European monteary policy so I can't blame them too much). In America, I would say that Colorado is probably the most first-world-like place I saw, followed maybe by some parts of Montana, but all of the top cities had this ... decay for want of a better word ... about them.

ZacharyPitts 5y ago
Colorado/Montanta/etc are just too damn cold in the winter for homeless to survive, so they migrate to other warmer places
- kstenerud 5y ago
  > Colorado/Montanta/etc are just too damn cold in the winter for homeless to survive, so they migrate to other warmer places It's this level of ignorance that is part of the problem. Just because someone is rendered homeless doesn't mean that they uproot and move away from their friends and family and job and life. If you're conjuring up images of vagabonds and junkies at the end of their tether, you really need to learn more. Chicago alone has almost 60,000 homeless, and it's a huge problem that so many die in the winter. https://s6624.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Homeless-Estimate-2021_FINAL.pdf https://s6624.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Homeless-Es...
- Broken_Hippo 5y ago
  No, not really. It is hard to move and costs money and this is a major deterrent to moving. Not to mention that moving takes away your last connections to any sort of social network you've built up: They might not be able to get you housing, but an occasional warm meal or moral support helps too. You are also assuming that homelessness means living in a tent on a street and that is only a single facet. Some folks bounce around between couches, for example. The government might not consider you homeless while doing this, even if you know you'll be on the street in days. (A friend of mine stayed in a shelter to get housing because of this rule, in Indiana). Lots of folks stay in shelters on cold nights as well. Many sleep in cars. Homelessness is simply less severe/deadly in warm climates. And don't forget that Colorado/Montana/etc also have summers, which means that folks can (and sometimes do) decide to be homeless for part of the year. I mean, seriously... I'm originally from Indiana. Indiana has winters every year, and storms in the spring and summer (so homeless = wet). Indiana has a homeless population. Same for Chicago and New York City, both of which have winter. And lets not forget that different places have different ways of dealing with homelessness. I'm not caught up on policies in different states, but I'm guessing some states funnel more folks into housing than others, some funnel more folks into jails and prisons than others, and some simply see if folks die on the streets or not.