Hacker News Reader

Comment by ahomescu1 | Hacker News Reader

> He thinks he is better than other people.

He has a job, an education, isn't addicted to drugs, isn't violent and is generally a well-adjusted and contributing (more or less) member of society. All of that takes a lot of work, and merits some appreciation. How is that not "being better" than drug addicts, drug dealers, muggers or single moms on welfare, or even people who just watch reality TV all day? Many normal people put in a lot of work into being self-sufficient and productive, instead of relying on free money from others.

View on HN

That you would put single mothers on welfare in a group with drug dealers and muggers, and claim that what this guy does is a lot of work, merits appreciation, and makes him better, is disgusting. I'm going to stop there because I don't want to regret what I'd say if I didn't.

> That you would put single mothers on welfare in a group with drug dealers and muggers

Single mothers are, in many cases, that way because of making bad life choices. When you're poor and in a bad relationship (or in some cases not even in a relationship), kids aren't such a good idea (or at least that's how it seems to me). No one forces them to have kids (unless they've been raped, in which case I'm more sympathetic to them; how often is that the case?)

> Single mothers are, in many cases, that way because of making bad life choices.

I'd be very interested to see a citation for this. You seem to be very knowledgeable on the topic, could you provide one?

A citation for what, exactly? That they shouldn't have kids when poor, or that they aren't physically forced to have kids? The former seems like common sense, but I could try and find a citation for the latter (that very few pregnancies are caused by rapes).

Could you give some good examples of why a woman would have kids then wind up on welfare? IMHO the only 2 reasonable examples are raped women and widows.

Why do people make a lot of money when they don't want to pay taxes?

Human reproduction doesn't occur asexually, but you wouldn't know that from reading your comment. Why does the responsibility for this decision rest entirely upon the mother in your conception?

How about girls and young women in places where there's no sex education, and no access to contraception or abortion? Is that her fault, too?

Maybe people being stuck in shitty situations is a consequence of things beyond their control more often than your willingness to apportion blame is willing to admit.

Just want to point out... that from a completely conservative point of view, having single mothers on welfare is better than the alternatives.

One possible alternative is to deny them welfare, thus endangering the health of the children they care for, thus forcing the state to take the children into custody.

Financially that puts a burden on the state that now has to employ someone to take care of the children, whereas it was getting that for 'free' via the mother.

Also, being a better person should be a moral judgment not a judgement on their financial state.

You really have no idea what you're talking about. Condoms break. Relationships end. Men abandon their children. Husbands become alcoholics and start hitting people. A million things can lead to a woman being single with child, and needing public assistance. That's what it's there for. Raising a child in these circumstances is one of the hardest things a person can do. If you think running hackathons makes someone better than a woman raising a child alone, you have a seriously backward set of priorities.

Man this kind of attitude pisses me off to no end. This privileged way of thinking that anyone who is less well off must have a flaw in their character or their morality.

If you took the time to talk to "those people" you would likely find that more often than not they are victims of circumstance out of their control, plain and simple.

Just as much as the supposed "wizards" of new tech startups are in reality about 90% lucky and 10% self determined.

> If you took the time to talk to "those people" you would likely find that more often than not they are victims of circumstance out of their control, plain and simple.

I have talked to "those people" (I'm from a far less privileged background than you think) and, while I do admit there are some good people who drew the short stick, I have also seen a lot of assholes. Not everyone who is poor is that way because they're "unfortunate", many of them actually have bad habits and work ethic.

I know tons of people who are more well off who are assholes and/or have a poor work ethic. But since they get lucky in life and got dealt a good hand (say, upper class parents and private school, for example), then they count as contributing members of society in your eyes, while those who grew up poor are useless. To me, that says a lot more about the effect of society on people's situation than on their own personal merit or lack thereof.

That completely misses the point. Are those well-off assholes you talk about actually contributing something to society (like art, science, leadership, labor, money, anything at all)? If so, then good for them, they are contributing members of society; if not, they're parasites. Context (for example, poverty) isn't relevant, what matters are an individual's achievements and contributions (plenty of poor people have achieved great things in life, as well as plenty of rich people).

I wonder how you would have turned out as the child of a single parent mentally ill drug addict? I'm assuming that the 5 year old you would have pulled yourself up by your bootstraps (instead of being beaten with them), and you would have succeeded in registering and paying for yourself to get an education, right?

I'm from a family where people think it's OK to smoke while pregnant, my parents divorced when I was 7, and I grew up in a formerly communist country (which is still doing pretty badly 20 years later). I got pretty far on hard work and brains, and I stand for what I wrote earlier.

EDIT: My point is that there are people from crappy families who still manage to get very far in life. There is such a thing as individual responsibility.

My point is not that there are no lazy people who don't take responsibility for themselves. Nor does it sound like your situation is even close to my example of a mentally ill drug addicted single parent who beats his child. I do recognize that there are lazy assholes out there.

My point is that in between those two extremes exists the majority of homeless people who are mentally ill and who got to that place because of circumstances beyond their control. If you believe that the majority of homeless people fall into the lazy asshole category, then I'm sorry but you're delusional. We as a society should expend energy and resources fixing this problem at its root, and not just brushing it away into a new neighbourhood each time it becomes gentrified.

> We as a society should expend energy and resources fixing this problem at its root

This raises an interesting question: what is the root (I'm genuinely asking)? It seems like a hard question along the lines of "what makes people mentally ill?". While I'm against permanent welfare, I wouldn't mind if my taxes went to curing these people and making sure they become functioning, productive members of society. I don't really know how or if we can do that.

Free/affordable quality daycare would go a very long way.

That homeless person, or welfare mom, or drug addict is a human being. Why don't you try looking at them that way for a change?

Maybe he is contributing. Maybe he's just burning though millions of his investors dollars and will have nothing to show for it when the music stops. Those investors ultimately being pension funds, university endowments, charity trusts...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com