Hacker News Reader

Comment by erikb | Hacker News Reader

Honestly, I was really surprised how little of it is new knowledge.

That's not criticism, but maybe the realization that there isn't much more knowledge to gain about friendships, if science knows exactly the same stuff as someone who is in a totally different department.

I think maybe it becomes interesting when combined with other relationships like colleagues. If you spend the prime time of your day with someone for 10 years, you also expect them to be dependable to some degree. However in a mostly formal relationship people can get quite surprised about how little they actually can count on their coworkers when sh*t hits the fan. And at the same time many people may spend more time, energy and money into their coworkers than into their dependable friends.

View on HN

I've read that "friends are the new families", taking on roles that were traditionally reserved for families such as lending money or sharing the burdens of childcare.

In which area of this planet? I wish friends and I would support each other in final struggles, but it's a huge taboo in my country in central Europe.

Living Australia, I had seen money change owners among friends literally dozens of times. Not huge sums ($500-$3,000), but big enough to matter in mid-20s. It felt normal at the time, though in retrospect I can see that most of our families were poor and we had nowhere else to turn save for other young professionals. I'm not sure if that was due to co-dependence or friendship, nor if there is much difference between the two.

"a huge taboo in my country in central Europe" ... I wonder which country that is. I'm Czech, currently spending lots of time in Poland, acquianted with Slovak and Hungarian culture, and haven't seen this being a "huge taboo".

For me Central Europe is Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourgh, Germany, Switzerland, Lichtenstein, Austria, and maybe I may add Italy or Denmark. All the countries you mention I would call Eastern Europe, and from my Eastern European friends I hear the same opennness about money and friends.

Just out of curiousity. If you call these countries Central Europe, what's Eastern Europe for you? (I'm aware that there's more than one truth to most of these vague terms)

Those countries are conventionally considered part of Western Europe in countries such as the US, France and the UK

At least the German speaking countries explicitly call themselves Zentraleuropa (Central Europe) in German: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitteleuropa

I thought "central Europe" was mostly a label used in some post-communistic countries to feel less Eastern.

This "central Europe" thing is very funny indeed. I've lived in the Netherlands - they think of themselves as "Western Europe". In the UK everyone knows Europe is split into West and East by the Iron curtain.

For me as a Czech, Eastern Europe is everything East of Slovakia - Ukraine, Romania, Belarus. But try asking a Romanian - they'll tell you Romania is Central Europe! When you ask them what is Eastern Europe then, you'll learn it's Ukraine and Russia.

The thing is, Europe is has a lot of countries. Except for the Eastern part, where Russia covers 1/3 of the continent. Geographically it would make sense to consider Romania as a part of Central Europe, however culturally or geopolitically few Romanians would disagree that Romania is part of Eastern Europe. Even our manuals say that Romania is part of South-Eastern Europe ;)

Ah and in my circles Russia, despite maybe even publicly being considered European (is it?) is considered Asian. There even the political distinctions are completely ignored it seems.

Hehe, I'm quite sure though, that none of my Shanghai friends would consider themselves Central European, at least.

In no way shape or form are Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark or even Italy considered Central Europe.

You could maybe consider them the Central Europe of Western Europe, if you want to stretch some definitions :)

Central Europe is basically Germany, Poland and the former Habsburg Empire.

Really, never heard that before. In my circles even part of Germany is secretly considered Eastern Europe. Maybe it's more political than geographical. Don't know.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographical_midpoint_of_Europ...

(Europe != European Union)

I wouldn't call it vague. East border of Europe is Ural mountains. I'd say Czech or Poland are in the center. Check the wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe

From India here, lending money to friends in times of urgency is quite common and is not considered as a taboo. In fact, some of my friends jumped to help me in need. Also I feel it considerably strengthens the friendship.

Is it really that common for people in India to live so close to the edge without savings that they regularly need help?

I know my friends and I (in the US) all have buffers of at minimum a few months of expenses. I guess it's not inconceivable that someone might have an emergency that requires more, but that would end up being a rather substantial of money. In my friend circle, I've never heard of someone borrowing money.

That honestly surprises me. I cannot say the same for people in Australia, a similar culture to the US. I think you might be surprised how many people outside of your friendship circle are actually living paycheck to paycheck.

It is a smart thing to try and have though.

Seems you are not much aware of outside the relatively well off friends' circle. Here is how precarious financial conditions for lot of americans is [1].

Key Quote: "47 percent of respondents said that either they would cover the expense by borrowing or selling something, or they would not be able to come up with the $400 at all."

On the other hand in India it would be very obvious to borrow money considering around 80% of population live on couple of dollars a day.

1. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/05/my-secr...

It may help to remember that the average yearly wage in India is about $3000[1].

[1] https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-average-annual-salary-in-I...

I realize there are income differences, but I don't think it's terribly relevant. Even if I have low income (and concomitant low expenses), then my choice is to save money consistently when times are good and then spend extra money during some time period; or I can not maintain any savings, spend extra during some emergency by borrowing money, and then spend less afterwards to put money toward my incurred debt. Both of these financial life plans earn and spend the same amount of money, but one of these plans seems much more stressful than the other. None of the preceding is at all related to the amount of income or spending, only the timing.

Income differences are terribly relevant. How could you think otherwise? If you make more, fewer times will be emergencies. They will just be normal events.

It's certainly true that making more money will lead to an easier life (otherwise what would be the point?), but I don't think you're addressing my central argument.

Whether someone saves money prior to an emergency and then spends their savings, or they borrow for the emergency and slowly pay it back over time, the person still earns and spends identical amounts of money. The difference is the ordering of events. No matter how poor the person, if he or she is capable of repaying loans after the fact, then he or she is capable of saving money before the fact.

I've of course read the statistics that 30-50% of Americans couldn't handle an unexpected expense of some moderate magnitude, but I admit I don't really understand the psychology behind it. You're going to get to spend all the money you earn in your life either way. Why not time it to maximize happiness and/or reduce stress?

Some other commenters have correctly guessed that my income is higher than the median and for some reason think that this is a reason why I can't or shouldn't have an opinion on the matter. But this wasn't always the case. All through my twenties I was poor, but even still I always strived to have 6 months of expenses in a savings account. The only times I didn't have 6 months of expenses in cash were the times I had emergencies or a couple times I bought a cheap used car with cash.

No, they are not. What is important is how much you can buy using your average salary. Buying power is important. And the prices in India are much cheaper.

You and your friends are probably earning (a lot) more than the US median income ;)

I'm retired, so unlikely.

Then you're probably not paying rent due to owning something.

Or maybe you live a very frugal life, kudos to you, not everybody can do it (I'm myself in the frugal camp, but I don't think it's for everybody out there).

> Or maybe you live a very frugal life

It's this one.

You have to remember that India culture and western culture are so different that you can't compare them whatsoever. The meaning of friend is completely different there. People behave differently to friends and to strangers alike.

(edited typo)

There's a reason giving nontrivial loans to friends is taboo.

I've only had a few friends come to me for $500+ loans. All had already hit their family up for as much money as they could, maxed out their credit cards and overdraft, and were behind on their rent. Needless to say, I didn't think they would pay me back - or that my money would fix their financial troubles.

To be fair though, there is a difference b/w helping a friend in need of liquid capital (e.g down payment on a car) and lending money to a chronically financially irresponsible person.

We live in Germany (Berlin) & received (and will render if needed) amazing support from friends at times of need.

Then my first guess is you're expats in Berlin? ;-)

Yes but a lot of the people who helped us are Germans.

Yup, Germans give happily money to other people. But Germans don't like to ask for this.

Me and my closest friends (about 4 or 5 people) do all the time. Never had an issue.

There are a lot of 'mates' that I wouldn't lend a penny to though.

I don't know about the last part since I haven't reached that stage, but I absolutely agree with this. And this perhaps holds more true when the generational gap is too much. e.g. young people with different ideologies from their parents tend to place a lot more emphasis on their friendships than their familial ties.

Ultimately though, its all about what works best. Friendships and family is great only when the relationships are open-minded, non-judgemental, share understanding and such. It is much easier for me to express my happiness and frustrations to my friends than to my mother. But I do have friends who will talk to their parents every day and that seems to work fine for them.

Personally, I don't think it is inherently bad that this happens. Relying exclusively on familial and patrimonial ties for socializing is incredibly limiting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com