6 ms·

America is a land of extremes. We actually have relatively high standard of living thanks to extremely high wages, which allow us to live lives of relative luxu

America is a land of extremes. We actually have relatively high standard of living thanks to extremely high wages, which allow us to live lives of relative luxury. We also have high wealth inequality and tolerate many horrors - some unfathomable to other developed countries (e.g. gun deaths).

ronanyeah 3y ago
It is possible to tolerate wealth inequality, while not tolerating mentally ill drug addicts terrorising the public.
- somewhereoutth 3y ago
  Arguably the latter is a symptom of the former. So there are broadly 2 approaches to tackle the problem - reduce inequality, or use draconian measures to control the people who got the wrong end of the inequality stick.
  - moonchrome 3y ago
    Plenty of drug addicts and drug related organized crime is the rise in western Europe, especially in major port hubs.
- Jochim 3y ago
  Places with lower wealth inequality seem to have fewer mentally ill drug addicts terrorising the public. Putting aside arguments of social responsibility and taking a purely self-interested perspective, it's typically cheaper and more effective to provide for these people than it is to lock them up. When there's nothing to take away, enforcement doesn't provide any deterrent and frequently leads to an escalation of behaviour instead.
- amrocha 3y ago
  It's possible to tolerate the cause without tolerating the consequences?
  - prottog 3y ago
    Wealth inequality causes drug addicts unleashing havoc on the public?
    - amrocha 3y ago
      Yes. Wealth inequality => poverty => homelessness => despair => substance abuse => "havoc" It really doesn't seem that complicated to me. Countries that have affordable housing and jobs don't have this problem.
      - prottog 3y ago
        Nothing seems complicated if you wave away all the details. You made quite a leap even in the first link of the chain ("wealth inequality => poverty"). I don't see how poverty follows from wealth inequality. That there are people who earn more or have amassed more wealth than me, sometimes fantastically so, doesn't make me any poorer. In fact, often times my own life is enriched by the value created by those who ended up becoming wealthy. Of course, this is not to suggest that every rich person created value for others to get there, or that people who create value for others necessarily become rich. The link between poverty and homelessness, as discussed elsewhere in the thread, is mostly due to policy choices local to SF and California as a whole that greatly disincentivize building more homes to keep up with demand. I come from a country where (with some exaggeration) it feels like an urban park might have higher population density than San Francisco. There's no reason why one of the most desired markets in the world should be that way, other than through artificially restricting the supply. > Countries that have affordable housing and jobs don't have this problem. Very few countries, whether housing is cheap or expensive and whether jobs pay well or poorly, have this problem of people strung about, high in public, engaging in antisocial behavior. Most countries don't turn a blind eye towards drug addiction from a personal liberty standpoint, which I think is quite a uniquely American concept. Most will imprison people for possessing or consuming any and punish with death those who traffic. There is broad cultural acceptance of behaving in this way.
        amrocha 3y ago

ronanyeah 3y ago

It is possible to tolerate wealth inequality, while not tolerating mentally ill drug addicts terrorising the public.

somewhereoutth 3y ago
Arguably the latter is a symptom of the former. So there are broadly 2 approaches to tackle the problem - reduce inequality, or use draconian measures to control the people who got the wrong end of the inequality stick.
- moonchrome 3y ago
  Plenty of drug addicts and drug related organized crime is the rise in western Europe, especially in major port hubs.
Jochim 3y ago
Places with lower wealth inequality seem to have fewer mentally ill drug addicts terrorising the public. Putting aside arguments of social responsibility and taking a purely self-interested perspective, it's typically cheaper and more effective to provide for these people than it is to lock them up. When there's nothing to take away, enforcement doesn't provide any deterrent and frequently leads to an escalation of behaviour instead.
amrocha 3y ago
It's possible to tolerate the cause without tolerating the consequences?
- prottog 3y ago
  Wealth inequality causes drug addicts unleashing havoc on the public?
  - amrocha 3y ago
    Yes. Wealth inequality => poverty => homelessness => despair => substance abuse => "havoc" It really doesn't seem that complicated to me. Countries that have affordable housing and jobs don't have this problem.
    - prottog 3y ago
      Nothing seems complicated if you wave away all the details. You made quite a leap even in the first link of the chain ("wealth inequality => poverty"). I don't see how poverty follows from wealth inequality. That there are people who earn more or have amassed more wealth than me, sometimes fantastically so, doesn't make me any poorer. In fact, often times my own life is enriched by the value created by those who ended up becoming wealthy. Of course, this is not to suggest that every rich person created value for others to get there, or that people who create value for others necessarily become rich. The link between poverty and homelessness, as discussed elsewhere in the thread, is mostly due to policy choices local to SF and California as a whole that greatly disincentivize building more homes to keep up with demand. I come from a country where (with some exaggeration) it feels like an urban park might have higher population density than San Francisco. There's no reason why one of the most desired markets in the world should be that way, other than through artificially restricting the supply. > Countries that have affordable housing and jobs don't have this problem. Very few countries, whether housing is cheap or expensive and whether jobs pay well or poorly, have this problem of people strung about, high in public, engaging in antisocial behavior. Most countries don't turn a blind eye towards drug addiction from a personal liberty standpoint, which I think is quite a uniquely American concept. Most will imprison people for possessing or consuming any and punish with death those who traffic. There is broad cultural acceptance of behaving in this way.
      - amrocha 3y ago