7 ms·

> solve poverty How?

by mandelbrotwurst 3y ago

pxue 3y ago
First, solve housing.
- EA-3167 3y ago
  So to solve one incredibly hard problem humanity has never solved... you need to first solve another incredibly hard problem? Well shit, get on it Portugal! /s
  - KerrAvon 3y ago
    indeed, link hands everybody, and chant with me the centrist anthem: better things aren't possible and we should just give up! better things aren't possible and we should just give up! better things aren't possible and we should just give up!
    - EA-3167 3y ago
      I think there's a vast gulf between abject pessimism, and the sort of useless optimism encapsulated in the casual statement, "Solve poverty" don't you? If someone asked you how people could live longer, you wouldn't be helpfully engaging if the response was, "Solve death."
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- jimmygrapes 3y ago
  I disagree: first, solve culture
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- PartiallyTyped 3y ago
  Finland has solved it. In fact, you can subsidize housing costs from all the savings on healthcare costs.
KerrAvon 3y ago
give people money so they can buy food, clothing, and shelter. there are solutions that have worked in the past. the problem is the US center-right doesn't like them because they can be abused, and it's far worse for one person in a million to have something given to them that they don't deserve than for a million people to be helped.
- JimtheCoder 3y ago
  "the problem is the US center-right doesn't like them because they can be abused" What does the US center-right have to do with Portugal?
- slashdev 3y ago
  Who’s going to pay for that? Why would those people want to work if they can just freeload? There are serious problems with welfare programs. They’ve been the downfall of entire countries. Look at Argentina where the bloated government payroll can be viewed as a sort of work for welfare program. The country can’t afford it and its currency blows up on a regular basis as a result. That’s not saying you should have no welfare programs, but there’s a balance to be maintained. Probably it should be time limited so people are given a sort of “financial rehab”, but not disincentivized to work. And it shouldn’t stop if you get a job, why, just why would you want an incentive against that. Some people seem to think there can be consumption without production or life without work, but that’s logically incoherent.
  - oneeyedpigeon 3y ago
    > Who’s going to pay for that? Anyone who wants to live in a better society, who realises this policy would help achieve that. > Why would those people want to work if they can just freeload? Because most people want more than just the absolute necessities of life.
    - joiqj 3y ago
      >Because most people want more than just the absolute necessities of life. You'd be surprised.
palata 3y ago
Maybe a first step would be to prevent the ultra rich to get even richer.
- lolinder 3y ago
  Preventing the rich from getting richer does nothing in and of itself to help the poor. You might do things to help the poor that as a side effect make it harder to accrue absurd amounts of wealth, but if your goal from the outset is simply to eliminate all billionaires, there are lots of ways to do that that will only end up hurting the poor as well.
  - palata 3y ago
    Can we reasonably assume that in the idea of "looking at the ultra rich to help solving poverty", there is fundamentally an idea that... well... it should be done in a way that will help poverty? Or was it that unclear that I was talking about solving poverty, with the idea that all the money that goes for ultra rich could actually be distributed better?
    - lolinder 3y ago
      Rhetoric matters, and you didn't say "looking at the ultra rich to help solve poverty", you said "prevent the ultra rich [from] get[ting] even richer". If you had said the former, I wouldn't have objected. What you actually said felt more like class warfare than a serious proposal to help poor people.
      - palata 3y ago
        It goes, literally, like this: > Solve poverty > How? > Maybe a first step would be to prevent the ultra rich to get even richer. If you can't understand the similarity between this and "looking at the ultra rich to help solve poverty", honestly I don't know what I can do.
        seventhtiger 3y ago

> solve poverty How?

pxue 3y ago

First, solve housing.

EA-3167 3y ago
So to solve one incredibly hard problem humanity has never solved... you need to first solve another incredibly hard problem? Well shit, get on it Portugal! /s
- KerrAvon 3y ago
  indeed, link hands everybody, and chant with me the centrist anthem: better things aren't possible and we should just give up! better things aren't possible and we should just give up! better things aren't possible and we should just give up!
  - EA-3167 3y ago
    I think there's a vast gulf between abject pessimism, and the sort of useless optimism encapsulated in the casual statement, "Solve poverty" don't you? If someone asked you how people could live longer, you wouldn't be helpfully engaging if the response was, "Solve death."
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
jimmygrapes 3y ago
I disagree: first, solve culture
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
PartiallyTyped 3y ago
Finland has solved it. In fact, you can subsidize housing costs from all the savings on healthcare costs.

KerrAvon 3y ago

give people money so they can buy food, clothing, and shelter. there are solutions that have worked in the past. the problem is the US center-right doesn't like them because they can be abused, and it's far worse for one person in a million to have something given to them that they don't deserve than for a million people to be helped.

JimtheCoder 3y ago
"the problem is the US center-right doesn't like them because they can be abused" What does the US center-right have to do with Portugal?
slashdev 3y ago
Who’s going to pay for that? Why would those people want to work if they can just freeload? There are serious problems with welfare programs. They’ve been the downfall of entire countries. Look at Argentina where the bloated government payroll can be viewed as a sort of work for welfare program. The country can’t afford it and its currency blows up on a regular basis as a result. That’s not saying you should have no welfare programs, but there’s a balance to be maintained. Probably it should be time limited so people are given a sort of “financial rehab”, but not disincentivized to work. And it shouldn’t stop if you get a job, why, just why would you want an incentive against that. Some people seem to think there can be consumption without production or life without work, but that’s logically incoherent.
- oneeyedpigeon 3y ago
  > Who’s going to pay for that? Anyone who wants to live in a better society, who realises this policy would help achieve that. > Why would those people want to work if they can just freeload? Because most people want more than just the absolute necessities of life.
  - joiqj 3y ago
    >Because most people want more than just the absolute necessities of life. You'd be surprised.

palata 3y ago

Maybe a first step would be to prevent the ultra rich to get even richer.

lolinder 3y ago
Preventing the rich from getting richer does nothing in and of itself to help the poor. You might do things to help the poor that as a side effect make it harder to accrue absurd amounts of wealth, but if your goal from the outset is simply to eliminate all billionaires, there are lots of ways to do that that will only end up hurting the poor as well.
- palata 3y ago
  Can we reasonably assume that in the idea of "looking at the ultra rich to help solving poverty", there is fundamentally an idea that... well... it should be done in a way that will help poverty? Or was it that unclear that I was talking about solving poverty, with the idea that all the money that goes for ultra rich could actually be distributed better?
  - lolinder 3y ago
    Rhetoric matters, and you didn't say "looking at the ultra rich to help solve poverty", you said "prevent the ultra rich [from] get[ting] even richer". If you had said the former, I wouldn't have objected. What you actually said felt more like class warfare than a serious proposal to help poor people.
    - palata 3y ago
      It goes, literally, like this: > Solve poverty > How? > Maybe a first step would be to prevent the ultra rich to get even richer. If you can't understand the similarity between this and "looking at the ultra rich to help solve poverty", honestly I don't know what I can do.
      - seventhtiger 3y ago