3 ms·

At the end of the day we have more people coming into our community of who don't feel inclined to contribute to it. The pedantic semantics of the difference is

by asow92 4y ago

At the end of the day we have more people coming into our community of who don't feel inclined to contribute to it. The pedantic semantics of the difference is immaterial to my peers and neighbors.

whimsicalism 4y ago
I can guarantee you it would not be immaterial to you if the state was shipping people there without housing already lined up. It is the state's prerogative to distribute this as it seems fit.
- asow92 4y ago
  As it is our prerogative to protest it either way.
  - vlovich123 4y ago
    Yeah. God forbid poorer live next to me. You know who else has that mentality? People who are much better off than you and view you as the pots. You know what’s demonstrably shown to improve moral and connectedness of a society? Being forced to live next to people who are worse off than you so that your self-interest is to vote and advocate on their behalf so that you’re not living in a shithole.
    - asow92 4y ago
      As it’s their prerogative to see us as “the pots(?)”.
      - vlovich123 4y ago
        Autocorrect from “poors”
      - vlovich123 4y ago
        Do you disagree that stratifying people socio economically so that you minimize your interactions with people who are worse off than you sets up a socio economic caste system? Or do you think a caste system isn’t problematic for a society?
        asow92 4y ago
        The latter; I think it’s folly to deny that social, political, economical, intellectual “caste” systems or hierarchies form naturally on their own, and that they can somehow be abolished through government policy. The beauty of America is that we can break through these barriers if we are truly exceptional and deserve it. And yes, if you are intelligent enough to leverage nepotism, you deserve it. I expect that we will fundamentally disagree on this, as is our right to as free thinking individuals.
juve1996 4y ago
Seems to be a strong statement to make - how do you know they don't contribute? Already by paying some form of rent, is that not contribution?
- asow92 4y ago
  If they're rent is subsidized by the state and they do not work is their contribution a net positive? Many of these people that I've met don't want a W2 or 1099 in fear of loosing their entitlements. The only folks who win there in the long run are landlords (rich getting richer). Sure some do contribute in a qualitative way to culture and social functions, but not as much economically. Yes, I'm often accused of being an un-empathic robot, but I can't help looking at this in a macroeconomic sense. Just trying to be intellectually honest with what I see around me in the world.
  - vlovich123 4y ago
    Do you have any studies you can point me to that shows that Section 8 housing is a net drag on the economy? I haven’t come across such but admittedly I don’t go looking for it either so I’m curious to better understand the themes of what makes it an unsuccessful program and ways to mitigate it. As far as I know, at least based on personal experience, poor people don’t stop being poor people if you take aid away vs give them opportunities to try to better themselves (or at least their child’s lives). And if you think Section 8 housing isn’t rough, all that I’ve seen is not in a state that I’d want to find myself in and I suspect that’s how people there feel too (based on stories I’ve heard told by people from that background).
    - asow92 4y ago
      Not necessarily on the economy, but here's one that goes over crime, which one could argue is linked with the economy. https://economics.nd.edu/assets/153486/carr_jillian_jmp.pdf https://economics.nd.edu/assets/153486/carr_jillian_jmp.pdf. Results indicate that voucher receipt causes a large increase in violent crime arrests for male recipients. They do not, however, indicate that vouchers have an effect on women or on other types of crime. Specifically, we find a statistically significant increase in violent crime arrests for the overall population and male recipients alone. There are no statistically significant effects for female recipients alone. This dichotomy in the effects for male and female housing voucher recipients is consistent with previous research on the effect of the MTO experiment on juvenile criminal outcomes (Kling et al., 2005, Sciandra et al., 2013, Zuberi, 2012, and Clampet-Lundquist et al., 2011).

by asow92 4y ago

At the end of the day we have more people coming into our community of who don't feel inclined to contribute to it. The pedantic semantics of the difference is immaterial to my peers and neighbors.

whimsicalism 4y ago

I can guarantee you it would not be immaterial to you if the state was shipping people there without housing already lined up. It is the state's prerogative to distribute this as it seems fit.

asow92 4y ago
As it is our prerogative to protest it either way.
- vlovich123 4y ago
  Yeah. God forbid poorer live next to me. You know who else has that mentality? People who are much better off than you and view you as the pots. You know what’s demonstrably shown to improve moral and connectedness of a society? Being forced to live next to people who are worse off than you so that your self-interest is to vote and advocate on their behalf so that you’re not living in a shithole.
  - asow92 4y ago
    As it’s their prerogative to see us as “the pots(?)”.
    - vlovich123 4y ago
      Autocorrect from “poors”
    - vlovich123 4y ago
      Do you disagree that stratifying people socio economically so that you minimize your interactions with people who are worse off than you sets up a socio economic caste system? Or do you think a caste system isn’t problematic for a society?
      - asow92 4y ago
        The latter; I think it’s folly to deny that social, political, economical, intellectual “caste” systems or hierarchies form naturally on their own, and that they can somehow be abolished through government policy. The beauty of America is that we can break through these barriers if we are truly exceptional and deserve it. And yes, if you are intelligent enough to leverage nepotism, you deserve it. I expect that we will fundamentally disagree on this, as is our right to as free thinking individuals.

juve1996 4y ago

Seems to be a strong statement to make - how do you know they don't contribute? Already by paying some form of rent, is that not contribution?

asow92 4y ago
If they're rent is subsidized by the state and they do not work is their contribution a net positive? Many of these people that I've met don't want a W2 or 1099 in fear of loosing their entitlements. The only folks who win there in the long run are landlords (rich getting richer). Sure some do contribute in a qualitative way to culture and social functions, but not as much economically. Yes, I'm often accused of being an un-empathic robot, but I can't help looking at this in a macroeconomic sense. Just trying to be intellectually honest with what I see around me in the world.
- vlovich123 4y ago
  Do you have any studies you can point me to that shows that Section 8 housing is a net drag on the economy? I haven’t come across such but admittedly I don’t go looking for it either so I’m curious to better understand the themes of what makes it an unsuccessful program and ways to mitigate it. As far as I know, at least based on personal experience, poor people don’t stop being poor people if you take aid away vs give them opportunities to try to better themselves (or at least their child’s lives). And if you think Section 8 housing isn’t rough, all that I’ve seen is not in a state that I’d want to find myself in and I suspect that’s how people there feel too (based on stories I’ve heard told by people from that background).
  - asow92 4y ago
    Not necessarily on the economy, but here's one that goes over crime, which one could argue is linked with the economy. https://economics.nd.edu/assets/153486/carr_jillian_jmp.pdf https://economics.nd.edu/assets/153486/carr_jillian_jmp.pdf. Results indicate that voucher receipt causes a large increase in violent crime arrests for male recipients. They do not, however, indicate that vouchers have an effect on women or on other types of crime. Specifically, we find a statistically significant increase in violent crime arrests for the overall population and male recipients alone. There are no statistically significant effects for female recipients alone. This dichotomy in the effects for male and female housing voucher recipients is consistent with previous research on the effect of the MTO experiment on juvenile criminal outcomes (Kling et al., 2005, Sciandra et al., 2013, Zuberi, 2012, and Clampet-Lundquist et al., 2011).