Hacker News Reader

Comment by dasht | Hacker News Reader

As one small point, Greenspun waxes eloquent about the "big government" stupidity of the Berkeley Tool Lending Library.

Well, what is the Berkeley Tool Lending Library? It's a couple of sheds and some low-hours guys there taking care of the equipment. We got wheelbarrows, we got various small power tools, we got rotor tillers, we got tree pruning equipment, some ladders, etc. Lots of people benefit but, by eye, I'd say the main beneficiaries are homeowners who otherwise would have to buy under-used equipment from Home Depot or hire a contractor. The budget is freaking small. The social benefits (including bottom-line contribution to the local economy) is freaking huge. He's talking through his hat on that point, at the very least.

View on HN

some low-hours guys there taking care of the equipment

Come on, this is Berkeley we're talking about. These are municipal employees who, in return for their clockpunching, are likely going to have gold-plated pensions in 30 years, paid for by citizens of Berkeley and California who never needed a rotor tiller in their entire life.

I might sound like a crazy Republican for saying that. OK, let's go to the City of Berkeley website and pick a low-status occupation. Hmm, I like Parking Meter Maintenance Worker, that sounds roughly comparable.

http://agency.governmentjobs.com/berkeley/default.cfm?action...

Salary: $49,464.00 - $52,464.00 Annually (Patrick notes: where did I go wrong!)

Pension: "City employees are included in the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS). Retirement formula is 2.7% at age 55. The City pays both the employer and employee’s share (8%) of the retirement contribution."

Now, you use that retirement formula to look up their salary at retirement based on years of service. Here's the chart:

http://www.calpers.ca.gov/eip-docs/member/retirement/service...

If after thirty years of doing the important work of keeping parking meters operating you desire to rest your laurels and retire from civic service, you can then draw 81% of your salary in your last year (including any overtime pay worked) FOR LIFE.

[Edited to add:

DOH! I erred in my supposition that Tool Lending Specialists make about as much as Parking Meter Maintenance Workers! My apologies, Tool Lending Specialists! I should have noted that your salary goes up to SIXTY THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR.

http://agency.governmentjobs.com/berkeley/default.cfm?action...

]

You're trying to say that your fellow citizens who have a job should get less than a living wage?

What would would you do with the extra few bucks that comes back if their salaries fall? Buy another chocolate bar or something? Fuck me. You're arguing against helping another human being out by giving them a good salary. You want to give them a shitty salary and them have them "leech" off of you through welfare or other shit?

Please stop.

I think you need to make a choice between having political articles (which this is, essentially) and polite, rational discussions. I have seen very few examples of both coexisting for long on the internet. They're not that bad here, yet, but how long will it be?

I think there are a enough programming articles here that it will keep most of the mouth-foaming politics-fans away.

At least I hope.

It's a diary entry by somebody with political opinions, not a political article.

The difference is that nobody is espousing a certain point of view, trying to convince me to do something-or-another, telling me how one party is good/bad, telling me how some policy is great or awful, or convincing me that some political change must take place.

Keep up the crusade against political articles if you must, but let's not throw away the fact that normal people have opinions, okay? I like people with opinions, even those I don't agree with.

Whether it is a "political article" or an article that talks mostly about politics is not a relevant distinction to davidw's point.

Everyone has opinions on politics, and the internet is full of people expressing them. There are relatively fewer sites with people expressing their opinions on startups and hacking.

If he's not 'espousing a certain point of view', I have some Paul Krugman columns to sell you;-)

My fellow citizens include a lot of people who a) make less than the guy who watches a toolshed and b) will have most of their wages confiscated to pay him for having watched a toolshed forty years ago.

Your groups A and B do not overlap and your retired toolshed watcher was and still is paying taxes too.

Is $50k/year that much in Berkeley?

Personally, I wish the government would do away with the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time, a.k.a Social Security, and simply have some required retirement contribution (401k is still ok after the crash, no?), but until they do, what do you think this guy should be getting for his retirement? Surely you aren't of the opinion that one should trade the majority of their young waking life for money to have a decent standard of living, and then the moment they are finally freed from having to "earn" a living they immediately must ratchet back their standard of living to poverty levels?

Surely you aren't of the opinion that one should trade the majority of their young waking life for money to have a decent standard of living, and then the moment they are finally freed from having to "earn" a living they immediately must ratchet back their standard of living to poverty levels?

Absolutely. Excepting, of course, the expedients of planning for your own future instead of relying on the government, saving and the miracle of compound interest.

Absolutely you are of that opinion? People should slave away their youth dreaming of the day they can retire and when that day comes they can't do anything because they're living on a fraction of what they had before? That sounds like an absolutely awful life.

As I said, I would like to see SS go away in favor of just mandating that people invest in some fund that is heavily regulated (regulating the risk, to minimize the risk of people losing their retirement money), but savings must be mandated in some form. If you don't then people simply wont do it. Then you're left with the choice of just saying "I told you so" while you watch them starve to death, or financially supporting them. Both of those are very bad options.

It sounds like you think that, absent government intervention, after receiving a $50K salary for 30 years, it is an inevitable outcome that a Berkeley resident working as a tool lender will live the rest of his non-working life in poverty.

You are right that some people will choose to live as grasshoppers and not ants. But it hardly seems reasonable that society's empathy for their lack of planning should extend to assuring them the retirement of their dreams rather than a minimal one.

It's not inevitable for everyone, just the majority. And guess what: you will support them one way or another. Either by providing a retirement they can live on or by paying for their housing/food stamps.

You could try making household economics an education focus, but countries with a much higher average IQ still have Social Security-like systems, so it seems that people simply wont do this for themselves, on average.

Why must a tool lending specialist live in Berkeley? Many people (like myself) live in one (cheap) city and work in another. $50k/year is probably plenty in Oakland (which, if I recall correctly, is adjacent to Berkeley).

Incidentally, most people who retire at age 50 will face a lower standard of living than if they worked until age 65. Not "Tool Lending Specialists", however, who get to retire after 30 years of service (rather than the typical 45).

Once again: disagreement doesn't equal down vote people. The orange Y at the top should tip you off that you're not on reddit.

A tool library is an intriguing, possibly beneficial idea. But whether it's actually worth what's spent depends on facts not in evidence: how many people use it, how efficiently is it run, what's the cost of the next-best-alternative, do wealthy homeowners need the subsidy? Anything well-intentioned looks good in a vacuum; it's the tradeoffs that matter.

Given the way municipally-originated projects are run, I doubt a rigorous cost-benefit analysis has been applied. If it were a privately-run tool rental facility, and it survived its startup period, I'd have more confidence that it was earning its keep: willing customers would be paying its costs plus enough profit to keep the owners interested.

Municipal projects can survive for years based on little more than "sounds nice", "employs some people/friends", or even ego-stroking "how Berkeley can we be?"

Re "A tool library is an intriguing, possibly beneficial idea. But whether it's actually worth what's spent depends on facts not in evidence: how many people use it, how efficiently is it run, what's the cost of the next-best-alternative, do wealthy homeowners need the subsidy? Anything well-intentioned looks good in a vacuum; it's the tradeoffs that matter."

It's quite often busy. I don't think I've been there once without having to stand in line. I see their (inventory tagged) tools quite often.

By eye, it's run damn efficiently. Really, it's sheds. There are some sharpening stones on motors so when you check in a tool that needs sharpening, they wipe it down (if you didn't) and give it quick once over (if needed). It's in the back yard of a branch library that would otherwise be given over to maybe 3-5 parking spaces. It appears to have damn little administrative or operational overhead. Honestly, it looks like a gem.

"Given the way municipally-originated projects are run, I doubt a rigorous cost-benefit analysis has been applied. "

In this case, the benefits are very widely appreciated and the costs are so low that a "rigorous" cost-benefit analysis could easily double or triple the budget.

Their big "wastage"? Their big "perk"? Their biggest aggregious waste of taxpayer money? That would appear to be the candy bowl they sometimes have out so that patrons can grab a cheap mint or cherry sucker during their visit. Or, for all I know, maybe the people who work their fund that out of pocket.

"I'd have more confidence that it was earning its keep: willing customers would be paying its costs plus enough profit to keep the owners interested."*

I loan my personal tools to neighbors when the need arises. I'm very pleased when they come back on-time, cleaned, and not damaged. I don't expect to make a profit on a bike stand or a shovel or the exotic wrench - I'm quite happy to see those things get use rather than sitting on a shelf.

Similarly, the tool-lending library sure looks to run on the (damn) cheap. It's one of those things that "just plain works" around Berkeley. (Another that "just plain works" is our one funky playground where, yes, parents have to sign some paper before their kids are admitted but once admitted, kids as young as you can imagine are allowed to use tools, including power tools, and get to constantly rebuild the playground. Here: http://www.berkeleyside.com/2009/12/29/adventure-playground-... )

"Municipal projects can survive for years based on little more than "sounds nice", "employs some people/friends", or even ego-stroking "how Berkeley can we be?"

Yes, they can, but if I could take you on a walking tour of the place, you'd believe that the Tool Lending Library is just obviously sane. Best I can do on this here interweb thingie is: http://www.yelp.com/biz/berkeley-public-library-tool-lending...

What happens when someone gets injured or killed because he or she was improperly using a tool from the tool lending library? What if the low-hours guys you mentioned were cutting corners on the tools' upkeep? Or is this really an issue?

I don't think that Philip is opposed to the idea of a tool lending library, he is merely questioning why the City of Berkeley needs to be running it. Why can't a group of citizens form a cooperative to do this, instead of involving the city government?

Except that he never mentioned anything about the budget of the City of Berkeley, he just lumped them in with "big government."

The city government IS a cooperative formed by the citizens of the City of Berkeley.

A cooperative is a group of people united voluntarily. A city is not voluntary (yeah, you can move. but it's not always possible or convenient until we have seasteading).

City residence IS voluntary. Very much unlike country citizenship, which, for practical purposes is involuntary for the vast majority of (non-European) people.

What do you mean? Country citizenship is not voluntary for EU citizens either. Did you mean country residence?

In practical terms, citizenship does not restrict residency in Europe for Europeans.

Almost every legal adult who lives in a city chose to live there. Yeah, choices have practical constraints, and yeah, it can be difficult to change once you've committed. But that's true of almost any complex product available on the free market (CRM systems, a university education, database software, operating system software, etc.).

There is a huge difference. If I decide to withhold my dues to a coop I belong to, the worst that they can do is not renew my membership. If I own a house in Cooperative of Berkeley, as you put it, and I decide that I no longer want to pay my dues (property taxes), they'll take away my house and might even have me prosecuted for tax evasion.

rglovejoy asks: "What happens when someone gets injured or killed because he or she was improperly using a tool from the tool lending library? What if the low-hours guys you mentioned were cutting corners on the tools' upkeep? Or is this really an issue?"

It's not really an issue because the guys that work there are highly competent. Informally, you can ask them for advice about hard projects. Maintaining the tools, they do a fine job. Liability to the city, I don't recall whether I had to sign a disclaimer or not when I first went there. I don't think so but I could be mis-remembering. At any rate, they are quite conservative and careful in their tool management.

Also, regarding: "Why can't a group of citizens form a cooperative to do this, instead of involving the city government?"

Well, we certainly could. Actually, we do! You should see our neighborhood-based disaster-prep system. It has miles to go before I feel like I can laugh at the next big earthquake but it is quite impressive. We've sheds and caches all over the place. And in many neighborhoods, there are less formal tool sharing arrangements. The Tool Lending Library fills a nice niche within that arrangement and is, as another commenter pointed out, a "citizen coop" in the sense of being "voter approved".

Honestly, there is plenty to kvetch about about Berkeley and East Bay politics but the tool lending library is just not on that list.

homeowners who otherwise would have to buy under-used equipment from Home Depot

I'm always impressed at the variety of tools Home Depot rents.

The social benefits (including bottom-line contribution to the local economy) is freaking huge.

Most American municipalities get by without such services.

Perhaps the way to persuade them is by providing hard data to support your cliam about social benefits.

Municipalities are probably the best form of government. They're small and in touch with their constituents. And they generally have to support themselves. Why should they have to provide hard data to people who don't actually live within their boundaries (presumably you don't)? Especially when the primary usage of that data is going to be to support some ideology that none of their residents would agree with.

You don't have to provide it, but if there are benefits, you may be able to support this in some way. If you can support it, then you may be able to persuade others into following course. Your response seems overly defensive, considering what the GP was actually asking.

Berkeley doesn't owe Cleveland hard data.

dasht owes us hard data if he wants to be taken seriously.

Saying "The social benefit of X is freaking huge," with no support, is just a way of making "I really like X" sound more important.

"Municipalities are probably the best form of government".

Unfortunately municipalities are arguably the most corrupt form of government, the major sins being nepotism and crony favoritism.

If all that TSA social network analysis software used (largely unsuccessfully) to locate criminals and terrorists was instead applied to _any_ large US city's municipal employee and political system a major scandal would result and heads would roll.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com