Hacker News Reader

> you're only interested in assigning blame, and not interested in actually trying to fix things

This succinctly sums up your comment. Perhaps if you gave OP the benefit of the doubt, you'd understand he's trying to fix things in a distributed manner, rather than thinking everybody can be rescued with top-down omniscience.

OP is not trying to fix things in a distributed manner. They're saying that the status quo is fine - the solutions are already here and that people aren't taking advantage of them. This is is not a constructive position because, the current status quo clearly doesn't work for many people, so there is scope for making changes and improvements.

Like any complex problem, there probably isn't a simple solution. Its not a binary issue of 'personal responsibility' vs 'central government', theres room for central, state & local governments as well as charities, communities, and companies to work together on this.

I don't see any assertions of the status quo being fine. The issue is with the passivation of individuals, both by themselves and well-meaning others.

When it's claimed that the jobs are there it's just a matter of taking them then yes it's a claim tha the status quo is being fine.

Would you please point me to exactly where the original blog post, or the above comment by 'jackhack, assert that these jobs are currently available in the US?

There's really two independent facets to this subject. One is about the immediate state of things, which in the US is regulation artificially lowering the amount of jobs available (even minimum wage does this). The blog post does a good job exploring this.

The second, which you seem more concerned about, is the trends of whether these types of jobs will continue to exist at all in the future. Which I will agree is questionable.

The US basically has an accelerated view of the effects of automation, as outsourcing to cheaper countries has identical effects. Furthermore, our poor lack the table stakes for participation in our highly-regulated economy, as explored in the original post.

I would point to broken employment and monetary policy that are actively further screwing up the economy and fostering the current go-big-or-stay-home environment. If we really have gotten much more productive, why is the standard "full time" workweek 40+ hours and not 15?

The post have a comment by the author saying basically this:

"I'm just pointing out that the jobs are here and those folks simply refuse to do them."

Problem is that this is a phenomena you see everywhere regardless of system but in all liberal markets.

The only thing thats consistent is the technology.

The problem when you remove regulation (uber) you end up with lots of jobs that pay less until as with Uber they will all be automated away.

This is the problem and ignoring it by trying to use the typical "there are plenty of jobs" as the Author does is simply refusing to deal with the reality as it is IMO.

That's the entire point of their post, is that the status quo is fine, and it's other people's fault for not being able to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. It's their fault for not being able to get an education. It's their fault for not being able to up and move to another area.

Do you pigeonhole everything you disagree with into a sensationalized straw man?

No, the OP was not trying to fix anything. The OP was complaining about "personal responsibility". They were simply trying to make themselves feel superior for nothing being unlucky enough to get caught in one of those situations.

Given that most poor Americans don't work [1] and yet have more money than 95% of Indians [2], you'd expect these problems to be solved in the US. Particularly since Americans also have free libraries, free schools where teachers show up, and internet access is a tiny fraction of the consumption available to poor Americans.

So are these problems solved there? Since education is available to Americans, why haven't they all used it and acquired higher wage jobs?

[1] See table 3, http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publication...

[2] http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/the-haves-and-t... THESE NUMBERS ARE ADUSTED FOR PURCHASING POWER PARITY

You honestly did not read my comment, did you?

Tell me, when are you going to find the time to visit the library or these free schools (which do not exist everywhere, only in a few places) when you're working two jobs trying to make ends meet?

Further, the amount of money an American has compared to an Indian IS NOT RELEVANT IN THE SLIGHTEST. It's called "cost of living". Look it up. $15k buys you a fuckload of stuff in India. Look at how much it buys you in the US.

Seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about. A high school education is available to all Americans. That's it. And high school education does not translate to high wage jobs. One needs higher education for that, which is not available to all Americans.

It's called "cost of living".

Did you somehow miss the sentence in all capital letters that I put right after my second reference? Not to mention the axis labels in my second source, as well as all the text in my second source addressing this point?

I'm absolutely sure that the bolsheviks felt the same way. Or are you one yourself?