Hacker News Reader

Comment by greendesk | Hacker News Reader

It is a perception issue; apparently coal miners are swayed to believe a people decided to close coal mines.

For some people, it is easier to perceive that a bureaucrat is against your industry, as opposed to find out that the economic value created is exceptionally low. When a person loses a job, it will be heartbreaking for the person to realise the job performed earlier has low economical value.

Telling someone "We do not need your services anymore" is harder than telling "Well, all those bureaucrats that live elsewhere decided it...".

I do think that economic value of coal is low and it is economically swapped out for other sources.

View on HN

I think this cause effect is well understood and people who are not impacted can be clinical about it but when your livelihood depends on not understanding something you won't.

What happens to all these people, their families and lives put in disarray. This is what the economic and political system of a society is supposed to address - the well being of all citizens. And we can clearly see this is where globalization and the current economic dispensation falls apart spectacularly.

Wishing it away or washing your hands off is a kind of sociopathy. Are these people to be left alone to form an underbelly of society susceptible to any demagogue willing to exploit their disenchantment for their own ends. This self serving plan of action directly leads to social unrest, breakdown and worse.

This presumes a simplistic model of the market that completely ignores the combination of regulations, tariffs and subsidies.

And, FWIW, Obama did favor natural gas.

Corporate oligarchs have always tried to make the results of their deliberate decisions and the candidates they throw money at sound like the inevitable march of progress. But it isn't. And this election was a repudiation of that.

Wasn't natural gas a byproduct of the shale oil/hydro fracking boom? It seems that perhaps (while oil prices were high) these coal miners should've moved to North Dakota and Texas. Is this not the equivalent of a jQuery developer complaining about lack of jobs when they could maybe learn React or Angular?

> It seems that perhaps (while oil prices were high) these coal miners should've moved to North Dakota and Texas.

Easier said than done when one's entire social structure is rooted in one place, and has been since before one was born.

We forget how lucky we are that we can do our work from anywhere in the world; those of us who've moved around also tend, I think, to forget the real value of staying where one grew up.

What is the value? Whenever I go back home I of course am happy to see old friends and family. But I'm also reminded of all the reasons I'm glad I left, from poorer economic opportunities to poor political decisions manifesting themselves in everyday life.

In the spirit of taking surprising statements at face value, here are some examples.

- Having a kid? Now your whole extended family is available to give you help and advice, to babysit, to be there for you when you need them.

- Need a job? It's a lot easier to find one when you have a personal network in a place already.

- Something terrible happen in your life? You now have a built in set of folks to help you through it.

There's incredible value in having a large local support group. Yes, it's possible to compensate for the lack of it with friends, and those of us who have moved far from home tend to do that, but that's a pretty straightforward second best compared to being with family, people you've grown up with, etc.

So we can all appreciate what immigrants that leave their country in search of a better life in a distant place make.

Being able to and wise enough to move, is a survival instinct that all living things have.

Having to move constantly is one of the core grievances people have against modernity and globalism. Some people care about having friends, roots, history, community.

Aren't Americans moving less now-a-days: How to Get Americans Moving Again http://nyti.ms/257a62z? What does having friends and community have with staying put or moving? This sounds cold and calculating, but aren't friends and community fungible? Of course not the individuals themselves, but when we move we find new communities and new friends.

Equating a 45 year old man with minimal education, a mortgage, and generations of family history in an industry with a 20-something software developer with none of those things is... not reasonable.

Oh so after all that time accusing my generation of being lazy and unmotivated, they would rather stay unemployed and vote for a racists than change it. got it.

Just as entropy increases over time, adaptability to change decreases significantly over a person's lifetime. Assuming you are a millennial (based on your claim of your generation being accused), you got an education which prepared you to use technology and learn things on the internet - critical skills for this idea of a "modern employee". Besides, the coal miners in Appalachia aren't exactly known for sitting on their ass.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-03/from-coal...

> Just as entropy increases over time, adaptability to change decreases significantly over a person's lifetime

There is no evidence for this what so ever.

My father is in the same position as this demographic you mention. Working at large firms, facing regular layoffs due to offshoring and outsourcing, and yet moves around the U.S. when the opportunities are elsewhere. And he has a mortgage, and he's at least 55 years old IIRC.

Moving around constantly chasing work is, for most, a miserable existence and not something you should trumpet as being good or try to normalize.

Right. Because only 20 year old software developers relocate for work.

Anyone is capable of moving. It's hard and it's disruptive but it's possible. And increasingly it's going to be a necessity if you want to have long term prosperity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com