Hacker News Search

gfxgirl 4y ago

Your painting the right as "no taxes" I think they'd paint as "quit wasting money". As an example, SF has the highest tax revenue per capita in the USA https://www.usnews.com/news/cities/slideshows/us-cities-with-the-biggest-general-revenues-per-capita?slide=11 https://www.usnews.com/news/cities/slideshows/us-cities-with... So why is it so dysfunctional? My guess is the right would say because so much is wasted on the wrong things. Note: I'm not saying the right is correct. I'm only suggesting a different interpretation of their POV.

John23832 4y ago
Everyone thinks that something they don't want to pay for is a "waste of money". When that something that you want to quit spending money on can be characterized as "other people who I don't identify with", you get the right. SF is a mess because of liberal mismanagement (I say that as someone who identifies as left). Spending money at massive scale without asking the people you're spending money on to fix something in society (whether it's their own actions, or something that they are responsible for). SF went from a 80B surplus to a 15B deficit... and what get it gain from that? How is the city better... It's not.
- annyeonghada 4y ago
  >When that something that you want to quit spending money on can be characterized as "other people who I don't identify with" Everyone wants to spend money on something or someone they identify with. It's not like the left has showed any leniency against those it deems unworthy.
  - cyberge99 4y ago
    Sure they have. They believe in social safety nets for all (livable wages to reduce crime, for example). They also tend to be more socially inclusive (I rarely see a racist gay person for example).
    - John23832 4y ago
      Woah there... there are PLENTY of racist gay people.
- slake 4y ago
  Not from a government perspective, but does anyone want to 'quit spending money' on anything anymore? I find that as a society we've become addicted to spending on stuff and we never cut back spending on anything anymore. I don't know if the majority agrees but we've all become addicted to e-commerce spending. The number of shoes is not counted in number of total shoes owned but number of shoes bought per month. A stock metric vs a flow metric. Everybody has a vague idea that they're addicted but nobody seems to want to acknowledge it or even track it. It's almost as if cutting frivolous spending is no longer a virtue. Sorry if that's a rant.

hiddencost 4y ago

Meh. That's a straw man based on ignorance. The left puts effort into responsibility and care for community. Why do you think the right advocates for dismantling social services and the left champions them?

nailer 4y ago
The left champions not working, rather than social care. In the UK it’s common to hear ‘I’m on benefits’ as an excuse in itself, rather than ‘I am disabled’ or ‘I am elderly’ or some other legitimate reason for receiving money.
- andrelaszlo 4y ago
  I wonder what you hear then. To me it sounds like "I'm out of options". It makes me think of this aid program that gave people in really poor countries money instead of food. With money they could of course buy food, but also save to improve their life in general, for example by improving their housing, buying a goat, sending their children to school, etc. Previously, they were just dependent on the food, medicines, and whatever was provided by the system and the situation rarely changed for the better. I think it's similar, at least where I live. With a better support system, people seem to be less likely to get dependent on it. Seems like a good thing to do in the long run, even if you just think about it economically. Unless, perhaps, you need a class of people that are in a sort of benefits bondage. I don't really want to think that this is by design though.
  - nailer 4y ago
    My expectation is that healthy adults should work.
rowtheway 4y ago
Broadly speaking, the community-oriented left in places like the US support bureaucratic government welfare programs, while community-oriented conservatives support more organic, often religious, and non-government charitable organizations. My preference runs toward the latter, for reasons best explained by John Carmack: https://archive.ph/0tHg4 https://archive.ph/0tHg4
- cmoski 4y ago
  "more organic, often religious, and non-government charitable organizations" Or none at all. Or ones for people in a select group. Most people live in towns, cities, states and nations, not communities. State and national governments cannot rely on the good of the neighbour. Larger, more equitable systems need to be put in place.
  - rowtheway 4y ago
    > Or none at all. Or ones for people in a select group. Bureaucrats do this too. See the history of communism in Europe, or present state of communism in China. Centralized welfare is a centralized system of control in the hands of politicians.
- freedom2099 4y ago
  If you don’t see the issue with “often religious” then nothing I say can change your mind! Religion as a moral compass is horrible! Religious communities are often the most toxic ones!
  - rowtheway 4y ago
    I am an atheist ex-Catholic. The big atheist-leftist crowd in my college town are intensely more violent, toxic, and racist than local Catholics or Lutherans. Lack of religious belief is no guarantee of kindness or rationality, nor is the presence of faith a strong signal of evil.
    - cyberge99 4y ago
      Behavior is a strong signal and I see more Christian harlots and swindlers than people practicing Christ’s philosophy. The left at least don’t pretend to be wholesome and righteous.
      - kcplate 4y ago
        > The left at least don’t pretend to be wholesome and righteous Funny, I use this same line about the right (at least in reference to politicians) in the US.
John23832 4y ago
I'm not ignorant at all. I live in NYC (the largest "community" in the country) which has the largest, most systematically effective social services system in the country. It's one thing I appreciate most about the city, other than the subway. There is such a thing as too much of a good thing (or good things used to advance perverse incentives). Too Much of a Good Thing: Methadone and "clean needle" clinics on 125th and Brooklyn under the guis of "harm reduction". The goal should be to reduce drug usage. Not make a shopping mall for dealers and zombies. Another is the total hands off approach of the mentally ill and aggressive homeless on the subways and on the streets. Good Things Use To Advance Perverse Incentives: The entire homeless industrial complex in California, which does absolutely nothing but syphon money to these homeless "nonprofits". I lived in both San Jose and LA and frankly the situation was addressed in a maddeningly regressive fashion. You sometimes have to ask yourself WHY someone is championing something. Very often it's not because of altruism.
- danaris 4y ago
  The goal should be to reduce harm. The idea that drug use is axiomatically bad is an invention of the War On Drugs. Criminalizing drug addiction increases harm. Treating it as a disease provably reduces harm. And, in fact, reduces drug use. Methadone and clean needle clinics are pointed in the right direction, but they're not enough. They just happen to be all the people who got them put in place could manage.
  - John23832 4y ago
    The goal should be to reduce drug use and end addiction. "Harm" is relative. There are functioning heroin addicts(either tar or hillbilly heroin) that some people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Hart https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Hart) would say aren't "harming" anyone. It's still not something to societally encourage. I also said nothing of criminalization of addicts. Seller's, sure. > Methadone and clean needle clinics are pointed in the right direction, but they're not enough. They just happen to be all the people who got them put in place could manage. This makes no sense. The halfass'd effort is worse than nothing at all.

user-extended 4y ago
>she only needed a 5% deposit(so £7.5k) LMAO, this is not normal anywhere else in Europe. Also, I bet she either has a lot of money saved up somewhere else, had her mortgage cosigned by someone else with a lot of income, etc. this is not normal at all. I am not from Germany, but take Germany as an example: https://n26.com/en-eu/blog/cost-of-buying-a-house https://n26.com/en-eu/blog/cost-of-buying-a-house "A good rule of thumb is to have at least 35% of the estimated cost. Germany: German residents can generally borrow up to 80% of the assessed property value, but non-residents usually get the short end of the stick. They have to put up 40–45% of the property value as down payment." >two years ago for £180k The average UK price house is 256k... https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/640/cpsprodpb/117DF/production/_118574617_optimised-ons.houseprice-nc-002.png https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/640/cpsprodpb/117DF/production... You lucked out, arguably. >My point is that yes - it's a global problem, but I honestly don't think everyone everywhere needs to save up for 7 years just to get a deposit. Maybe if you live in London you do, but elsewhere? Meh. Basic 3 bed houses are not so crazy expensive in most places, at least here in UK. I make 12k after taxes and before other expenses... what are you talking about. And I am lucky not to pay rent with a terrible commute because I live with my parents.
- gambiting 4y ago
  >>LMAO, this is not normal anywhere else in Europe. Also, I bet she either has a lot of money saved up somewhere else, had her mortgage cosigned by someone else with a lot of income, etc. this is not normal at all. In UK 5% mortgages are readily available to first time buyers. It's a completely normal thing here in UK. And I can assure you she doesn't have a lot of money and the mortgage wasn't cosigned by anyone else lol. >>A good rule of thumb is to have at least 35% of the estimated cost. Well now that's absolutely nuts. Here in UK 10% deposit is normal, 15% is high, and I don't know anyone who paid 20% or more - and everyone in my group of friends(we all just turned 30) bought a house recently. >>The average UK price house is 256k Yes, because London destroys the averages completely. Like I said, my sister just bought a 3 bed house with a garden and driveway for £150k, and it wasn't particularly cheap, neither for the street nor for the area .
  - user-extended 4y ago
    From this map, no: https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/dk-graphics-house-about-that-1.jpg https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/dk-graph...
    - gambiting 4y ago
      I'm confused - it clearly shows the prices have actually gone down in the North East, but still says 4.8% increase? How?