6 ms·

This made me chuckle: "haves" versus the "have nots". How about we change that to: "made smart decisions, studied hard, work hard" versus the "made bad decision

by paul_f 13y ago

This made me chuckle: "haves" versus the "have nots". How about we change that to: "made smart decisions, studied hard, work hard" versus the "made bad decisions, jealous of others"

gnaritas 13y ago
Because that's fallacious thinking, specifically the just world fallacy. Your view of the world is faulty.
gaius 13y ago
Good luck being rich in a city without street sweepers, waitresses, barmen, firemen, nurses, teachers... In fact the whole point of you buying that swanky apartment will evaporate overnight without service workers.
- darkarmani 13y ago
  Nurses? Why are they on that list?
  - sanderjd 13y ago
    Because they are service workers who are not very highly paid.
    - bryanlarsen 13y ago
      The average RN salary is $66K. However, that's just the base salary. Most RN's work some night shifts and some overtime, which can very quickly push that above $100K. In most of the US $66K - well over $100K is a lot of money. It doesn't go very far in the valley, though...
      - umsm 13y ago
        Those numbers are extremely generous. I know a few nurses and none make $100k.
    - darkarmani 13y ago
      Is that the argument? "street sweepers, waitresses, barmen, firemen, nurses, teachers" should be very highly paid? Someone should invent an economic mechanism that raises salaries when it's hard to find workers. This mechanism should work in some automatic fashion that allocates money to fields that are understaffed.
      - sanderjd 13y ago
        I'm not making any argument at all...you asked why nurses were in the list, so I just pointed out the pattern in the list that I thought nurses fit into.
- pessimizer 13y ago
  Don't worry, because self-driving cars and drone pizza deliveries. iPad 3D printing, too.
thenmar 13y ago
Is this supposed to be a joke?
steveklabnik 13y ago
Because that's not an accurate characterization.
visakanv 13y ago
It's possible to make smart decisions, study hard, work hard and still end up in a difficult spot- especially if you have serious illnesses, or have to support family members with special needs, etc. These are usually the people suffering the most.
famousactress 13y ago
Haha. Wow. I guess I'm glad someone said this. The way you see the problem is really common and I think too many other people who feel the way you do are cunning enough to keep quiet or massage their thoughts into something more palatable. To be clear, I think this opinion demonstrates such a completely bullshit, narrow, entitled, and ethnocentric view of the world it blows my mind. It's a helpful reminder of why I don't live up there.
- libria 13y ago
  > I think this opinion demonstrates such a completely bullshit, narrow, entitled, and ethnocentric view of the world it blows my mind. Well you can safely unblow your mind. He used a stereotype broadly applied to a group, but lazy people do indeed make up some portion of the "have nots". Sibling comments show measured, thought-massaged responses that correct the GP. Let's not combat bad generalizations with hyperbole.
  - visakanv 13y ago
    I've always been deeply curious about laziness. What makes a lazy person lazy? Is it predisposition? Is it environment? What are your thoughts?
    - famousactress 13y ago
      Ironically (given the context it was brought up in), my answer would be privilege.
    - potatolicious 13y ago
      This really is the million-dollar question isn't it? It unfolds in all kinds of interesting directions and has big implications - why are some countries more productive than others? Why are some cultures more technologically advanced? There's a good book on this: Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. Well worth a read. There are no easy answers here, though being mindful of history is important in arguing this topic - predisposition and environment have historically been used by social darwinists to assert superiority over other cultures and races (see: "tropical climates breed laziness" and "blacks are predisposed to lesser intelligence but greater physical ability"). They're not verboten, but it pays to tread carefully if you want to argue in that direction.
spiek 13y ago
You realize you can do all of those things and still make not very much money, right? You also realize that people in different economic situations aren't privileged to receive all of the institutional knowledge about the job market that you may have? That some people don't even think about becoming doctors or lawyers or programmers because they dont know anyone who became those things? There are a huge number of reasons why some people may not be able to make the same amount of money someone at google can make. Does that mean they shouldn't be allowed to live in SF?
- potatolicious 13y ago
  Not to mention young recently graduated lawyers and doctors make shit for money, and newly minted lawyers in particular are facing much weaker than expected demand in the market. "Making smart choices" doesn't always pan out. I don't think one can easily accuse someone who studied hard, disciplined themselves, and made their way through law school of being shortsighted, but here they are facing unemployment or dramatic underemployment. Ditto traditional fields of engineering. Lots of people who studied hard, planned ahead, worked hard, and then fell into the massive collapse of manufacturing in this country. It's nice to know that the crazy "improv political theater" from that one guy has some bearing in reality, though.
  - will_work4tears 13y ago
    As a case in point, my sister and her husband recently finished their post-doc work at NYU and are heading out to SF. Both of them PhDs, both of them work very hard at what they do, both of them in school/fellowships/postdocs since graduating high school (they are 32/33 now) and are having trouble finding jobs. Her husband recently took a job in SF doing research getting paid a mere 60k a year. That's very low anywhere for the effort put into it, insultingly low in SF, IMO. She can probably find work there in SF pretty easy, but probably not making much more. Lazy they are not. (seriously thinking of pushing them into joining one of those RoR or similar bootcamps and getting into Programming, they have the drive and intellect to do well, I think) Edit: Just to be clear, their PhDs are both in the 'Hard Sciences' - biology to be specific - Virology and Genetics respectively.
michaelochurch 13y ago
Actually, the people doing the work have more in common with the have-nots. What, you think the average engineer at Google can afford a house in San Francisco? No. The $100-150k engineers will soon be priced out to make room for the product managers and startup executives making $250k while working 11-to-3.
- nomedeplume 13y ago
  Do PMs seriously make $250k+? I may have to reconsider the career change.
pradocchia 13y ago
You may be a paragon of merit, but some of us have merely been fortunate in our gifts and circumstances and long-tail events.
russelluresti 13y ago
Well, it's not that others made "bad" decisions, they just made a different decision (to not pursue a tech job). Tech jobs aren't the only jobs that hold value; someone has to make the coffee, repair the buildings, do the dry cleaning, run the restaurant, do the accounting, etc. The choice to pursue a career as a mechanic or plumber or electrician or whatever else isn't a "bad" decision - those jobs are necessary and thus we need people to do them. SF is a city and has the same needs as any other city, which means it needs people to meet all those needs. You can't have a city with just wealthy tech people because then no one's going to come over to fix the plumbing. Wealthy tech companies are growing, hiring more talent, and paying them lots of money; this means that housing demands go up (from the people they're importing from other cities/states/countries) which leads to increased prices (specifically because you now have more demand from a group of customers that can afford to pay higher prices than everyone else). Now, all of a sudden, people who aren't as nicely compensated at their jobs can no longer afford to live in the city they work. The issue is that the city still needs those people - regardless of what wealthy people think.
- revicon 13y ago
  > SF is a city and has the same needs as any other > city, which means it needs people to meet all > those needs. You can't have a city with just > wealthy tech people because then no one's going > to come over to fix the plumbing. If this is the case, it would be factored into the market. If there are no plumbers available to work in San Francisco, then no one would want to live there as they can't get their plumbing fixed. If there are no baristas in San Francisco, then no one would want to live there because there would be no coffee shops. Coffee shops aren't closing in the mission, quite the opposite, more are opening all the time, selling expensive coffee to tech people and providing barista jobs to baristas. Now for it to make sense for the barista to work at these coffee shops he or she needs to be able to live within commutable distance of the coffee shop. If there is no one within commutable distance willing to work for what the coffee shop is willing to pay, the coffee shop has to pay more and raise prices. If coffee prices go up so much that people hate living in SF because of it, then rental prices will go down because people will move away.

by paul_f 13y ago

This made me chuckle: "haves" versus the "have nots". How about we change that to: "made smart decisions, studied hard, work hard" versus the "made bad decisions, jealous of others"

gnaritas 13y ago

Because that's fallacious thinking, specifically the just world fallacy. Your view of the world is faulty.

gaius 13y ago

Good luck being rich in a city without street sweepers, waitresses, barmen, firemen, nurses, teachers... In fact the whole point of you buying that swanky apartment will evaporate overnight without service workers.

darkarmani 13y ago
Nurses? Why are they on that list?
- sanderjd 13y ago
  Because they are service workers who are not very highly paid.
  - bryanlarsen 13y ago
    The average RN salary is $66K. However, that's just the base salary. Most RN's work some night shifts and some overtime, which can very quickly push that above $100K. In most of the US $66K - well over $100K is a lot of money. It doesn't go very far in the valley, though...
    - umsm 13y ago
      Those numbers are extremely generous. I know a few nurses and none make $100k.
  - darkarmani 13y ago
    Is that the argument? "street sweepers, waitresses, barmen, firemen, nurses, teachers" should be very highly paid? Someone should invent an economic mechanism that raises salaries when it's hard to find workers. This mechanism should work in some automatic fashion that allocates money to fields that are understaffed.
    - sanderjd 13y ago
      I'm not making any argument at all...you asked why nurses were in the list, so I just pointed out the pattern in the list that I thought nurses fit into.
pessimizer 13y ago
Don't worry, because self-driving cars and drone pizza deliveries. iPad 3D printing, too.

thenmar 13y ago

Is this supposed to be a joke?

steveklabnik 13y ago

Because that's not an accurate characterization.

visakanv 13y ago

It's possible to make smart decisions, study hard, work hard and still end up in a difficult spot- especially if you have serious illnesses, or have to support family members with special needs, etc. These are usually the people suffering the most.

famousactress 13y ago

Haha. Wow. I guess I'm glad someone said this. The way you see the problem is really common and I think too many other people who feel the way you do are cunning enough to keep quiet or massage their thoughts into something more palatable. To be clear, I think this opinion demonstrates such a completely bullshit, narrow, entitled, and ethnocentric view of the world it blows my mind. It's a helpful reminder of why I don't live up there.

libria 13y ago
> I think this opinion demonstrates such a completely bullshit, narrow, entitled, and ethnocentric view of the world it blows my mind. Well you can safely unblow your mind. He used a stereotype broadly applied to a group, but lazy people do indeed make up some portion of the "have nots". Sibling comments show measured, thought-massaged responses that correct the GP. Let's not combat bad generalizations with hyperbole.
- visakanv 13y ago
  I've always been deeply curious about laziness. What makes a lazy person lazy? Is it predisposition? Is it environment? What are your thoughts?
  - famousactress 13y ago
    Ironically (given the context it was brought up in), my answer would be privilege.
  - potatolicious 13y ago
    This really is the million-dollar question isn't it? It unfolds in all kinds of interesting directions and has big implications - why are some countries more productive than others? Why are some cultures more technologically advanced? There's a good book on this: Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. Well worth a read. There are no easy answers here, though being mindful of history is important in arguing this topic - predisposition and environment have historically been used by social darwinists to assert superiority over other cultures and races (see: "tropical climates breed laziness" and "blacks are predisposed to lesser intelligence but greater physical ability"). They're not verboten, but it pays to tread carefully if you want to argue in that direction.

spiek 13y ago

You realize you can do all of those things and still make not very much money, right? You also realize that people in different economic situations aren't privileged to receive all of the institutional knowledge about the job market that you may have? That some people don't even think about becoming doctors or lawyers or programmers because they dont know anyone who became those things? There are a huge number of reasons why some people may not be able to make the same amount of money someone at google can make. Does that mean they shouldn't be allowed to live in SF?

potatolicious 13y ago
Not to mention young recently graduated lawyers and doctors make shit for money, and newly minted lawyers in particular are facing much weaker than expected demand in the market. "Making smart choices" doesn't always pan out. I don't think one can easily accuse someone who studied hard, disciplined themselves, and made their way through law school of being shortsighted, but here they are facing unemployment or dramatic underemployment. Ditto traditional fields of engineering. Lots of people who studied hard, planned ahead, worked hard, and then fell into the massive collapse of manufacturing in this country. It's nice to know that the crazy "improv political theater" from that one guy has some bearing in reality, though.
- will_work4tears 13y ago
  As a case in point, my sister and her husband recently finished their post-doc work at NYU and are heading out to SF. Both of them PhDs, both of them work very hard at what they do, both of them in school/fellowships/postdocs since graduating high school (they are 32/33 now) and are having trouble finding jobs. Her husband recently took a job in SF doing research getting paid a mere 60k a year. That's very low anywhere for the effort put into it, insultingly low in SF, IMO. She can probably find work there in SF pretty easy, but probably not making much more. Lazy they are not. (seriously thinking of pushing them into joining one of those RoR or similar bootcamps and getting into Programming, they have the drive and intellect to do well, I think) Edit: Just to be clear, their PhDs are both in the 'Hard Sciences' - biology to be specific - Virology and Genetics respectively.

michaelochurch 13y ago

Actually, the people doing the work have more in common with the have-nots. What, you think the average engineer at Google can afford a house in San Francisco? No. The $100-150k engineers will soon be priced out to make room for the product managers and startup executives making $250k while working 11-to-3.

nomedeplume 13y ago
Do PMs seriously make $250k+? I may have to reconsider the career change.

pradocchia 13y ago

You may be a paragon of merit, but some of us have merely been fortunate in our gifts and circumstances and long-tail events.

russelluresti 13y ago

Well, it's not that others made "bad" decisions, they just made a different decision (to not pursue a tech job). Tech jobs aren't the only jobs that hold value; someone has to make the coffee, repair the buildings, do the dry cleaning, run the restaurant, do the accounting, etc. The choice to pursue a career as a mechanic or plumber or electrician or whatever else isn't a "bad" decision - those jobs are necessary and thus we need people to do them. SF is a city and has the same needs as any other city, which means it needs people to meet all those needs. You can't have a city with just wealthy tech people because then no one's going to come over to fix the plumbing. Wealthy tech companies are growing, hiring more talent, and paying them lots of money; this means that housing demands go up (from the people they're importing from other cities/states/countries) which leads to increased prices (specifically because you now have more demand from a group of customers that can afford to pay higher prices than everyone else). Now, all of a sudden, people who aren't as nicely compensated at their jobs can no longer afford to live in the city they work. The issue is that the city still needs those people - regardless of what wealthy people think.

revicon 13y ago
> SF is a city and has the same needs as any other > city, which means it needs people to meet all > those needs. You can't have a city with just > wealthy tech people because then no one's going > to come over to fix the plumbing. If this is the case, it would be factored into the market. If there are no plumbers available to work in San Francisco, then no one would want to live there as they can't get their plumbing fixed. If there are no baristas in San Francisco, then no one would want to live there because there would be no coffee shops. Coffee shops aren't closing in the mission, quite the opposite, more are opening all the time, selling expensive coffee to tech people and providing barista jobs to baristas. Now for it to make sense for the barista to work at these coffee shops he or she needs to be able to live within commutable distance of the coffee shop. If there is no one within commutable distance willing to work for what the coffee shop is willing to pay, the coffee shop has to pay more and raise prices. If coffee prices go up so much that people hate living in SF because of it, then rental prices will go down because people will move away.