5 ms·
The person that wrote this article is a good writer. I wonder he couldn't use this skill to get a better paying job? Maybe as a technical writer? There are load
by hermitcrab 3y ago
The person that wrote this article is a good writer. I wonder he couldn't use this skill to get a better paying job? Maybe as a technical writer? There are loads of software and hardware products that need documentation, but programmers and engineers generally hate writing documentation and aren't good at it. And many people who can write have no technical chops. Maybe it is something he could start doing 'on the side' if he has the spare capacity? Perhaps some on HN could start him off with a small side job?
- pluto_modadic 3y agoor society as a whole should pay well for writers of all subjects, not just FAANG ones ;)
- hermitcrab 3y agoDo you want your taxes to subsidize poetry? I don't.
- saagarjha 3y agoI do, and so do most people. This is why we have public spending for the arts :)
- trelane 3y agoThere's no maximum tax. You're free to send the government extra money.
- saagarjha 3y agoThe whole point of taxes is that you don't get to pick and choose the parts you like or use. If you don't like where the dollars are going, go vote–although I would personally say that my taxes have many worse places they are going that you might be interested in before we get to any arts projects.
- trelane 3y ago> The whole point of taxes is that you don't get to pick and choose the parts you like or use. No, the point of taxes is taking some minimum amount of money from others by force, so that the government can spend it how they choose. > So you're fine with taking others' money by force, and spending some of it on the arts, but you think it's overall not going where you want it to, so you'll minimize your personal contribution? I don't see this as a consistent view.
- saagarjha 3y agoIt’s quite amazing how there are exactly two words in your response that, while true, provide more insight into your position on tax policy than the rest of your comment. I also think they preclude us coming to any sort of understanding without substantial revision of our worldviews. Perhaps you know which ones they are?
- trelane 3y ago> It’s quite amazing how there are exactly two words in your response that, while true, provide more insight into your position on tax policy than the rest of your comment. I also think they preclude us coming to any sort of understanding without substantial revision of our worldviews. Perhaps you know which ones they are? Feel free to enlighten me, and please tell me in what way they speak to you, and what you believe they say to you.
- saagarjha 3y agoPeople who bring up that taxes are collected “by force” are invariably libertarian types that feel any cent that goes to the government is a great injustice, and it’s generally difficult to have any conversation but that when this is the case. If this applies to you, then see my earlier comment; otherwise this is just an fyi for how your comments are being read. Feel free to adjust or clarify as you see appropriate.
- 3y ago
- tonyedgecombe 3y agoWhich largely benefits arts for the wealthy.
- saagarjha 3y agoI feel that public art is generally set up to better serve accessible art than the alternative, which is that the wealthy commission it solely for themselves. Or worse, companies do it to advertise themselves.
- f4c39012 3y agoi do. I don't appreciate poetry, never have. But others do, it is culture and art, and i have no right to deny this to others as a common good of the human experience
- hermitcrab 3y agoFair comment. It was a flippant remark. I'm happy for some of my taxes to be spent on subsidising the arts in it's various forms (including forms I don't like). But certainly not to support every aspiring poet/novelist (not that I think anyone is seriously suggesting that).
- Fredkin 3y ago"i have no right to deny this to others" - But somehow you do have a right to deny other others usage of their money to this end??
- f4c39012 3y agoIt is a balance - not for you or me specifically
- mandmandam 3y agoLet's compare tax spending on poetry vs illegal wars that increase terrorism and instability while enriching the absolute worst of us. A wildly generous estimate for federal and state spending that ends up going toward poetry is 10 million a year. Our middle east wars have cost 8 trillion over 22 years, or 360 billion a year. For every lone tax dollar spent on poetry, $36,000 is spent on destruction. To match the proportional effort that went into your comment above, you'd have to write 360,000 words - about 4 novels - against war.
- hermitcrab 3y agoIf we could guarantee that every $1 spent on poetry was $1 less spent on war, then I would be up for massive funding for poetry. Sadly I don't think the world works like that.
- mandmandam 3y agoFunding of the arts certainly does reduce a population's tolerance for mind-numbingly expensive and stupid wars. And a 1:1 ratio wouldn't be necessary - as generously estimated above, the ratio is more like 1:36,000.
- hermitcrab 3y ago>Funding of the arts certainly does reduce a population's tolerance for mind-numbingly expensive and stupid wars. Not convinced about that. Athens and Renaissance Italy were both hugely centres for the arts, but also fought plenty of wars.
- mandmandam 3y agoAthens funded war much more than the arts. The arts in Renaissance Italy were funded by patronage, not taxes. ... Not that I ever claimed spending money on arts removes all possibility of war, mind you. Poetry, art, music, drama, etc, improve critical thinking, empathy, self-determination, awareness of history, political engagement, etc; all of which are reasons that one of the first things fascists will do is suppress any arts not related to propaganda. It's really weird to see someone try and argue that funding the arts has no effect on a populations mindless bloodthirst, in order to defend not paying a microsopic fraction of their income toward poetry. As I said, the most generous amount the US could be considered to spend on poetry via fed and state taxes is about ten mil. That's 10 cents per person, per year. That's what you're arguing over here. It's profoundly odd.
- cipheredStones 3y agoThis article is from early 2021, and the author's lot in life has since improved (substantially because of the article): a year and a half later he wrote a follow-up titled "On Being Rich-ish: Lessons I learned becoming suddenly middle-class". https://www.residentcontrarian.com/p/on-being-rich-ish-lessons-i-learned https://www.residentcontrarian.com/p/on-being-rich-ish-lesso...
- hermitcrab 3y agoExcellent!
- hermitcrab 3y agoThe follow-up article doesn't go into much detail about how he got out of the poverty trap. He probably has good reasons not to go into the details.