7 ms·

We are all at the mercy of the bottom quintile. The rules you follow (or are expected to follow) are based on the behavior of the bottom quintile, the taxes you

by black6 24d ago

We are all at the mercy of the bottom quintile. The rules you follow (or are expected to follow) are based on the behavior of the bottom quintile, the taxes you pay are to support the bottom quintile, the greatest risks to your life and property come from the bottom quintile, the dearth of comfortable public spaces is because you have to allow the bottom quintile to be there, and our zoning laws (in the US) are developed for fear of the bottom quintile.

gjm11 24d ago
Pretty much all of that is false. The rules I'm expected to follow based on the bottom quintile are generally rules that are no trouble for me to follow. The taxes I pay support way more than just the bottom quintile. I'm actually in the UK but I guess you're in the US, so here's a rough breakdown based on this infographic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_States#/media/File:2023_US_Federal_Budget_Infographic.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_Uni.... Much the biggest chunk of US federal spending is Social Security, the great majority of which is pensions. Pensioners are very variable but they're mostly not in the bottom quintile. Then "nondefense discretionary" spending which is a mixed bag but again is mostly not bottom quintile. After that comes Medicare which again is mostly pensioners. Then defense, which isn't really "to support" any particular subset of the population. Then Medicaid, a lot of which is for poorer people, so I'll give you that one. Then "other" which from the description in the chart is mostly not bottom quintile. Then income security programs, which is probably mostly bottom quintile. If we say that all of Medicaid and income security are "bottom quintile", 10% each of Social Security and Medicare, and 20% each of "nondefense discretionary" and "other", go to support the bottom quintile -- which I think is probably all on the generous side -- then that comes to about $1.56T out of $6.1T of spending, or out of $5.5T if you prefer not to count debt servicing. The greatest risks to my life and property are from disease (for my life), wear and tear plus accident (for my physical property), and stock market instability (for my investments). None of those things has much to do with the bottom quintile. In the US, homicides are about 0.02% of deaths, and most of those happen to people within that bottom quintile you evidently resent so much. The dearth of comfortable public spaces is because you have to allow the bottom quintile to be there and not-bottom-quintile people like you want to make those spaces as unwelcoming to them as possible even at the cost of making them less comfortable for everyone. And also because your society has failed to provide the bottom quintile with better places for the things you don't like them doing than those public spaces. It may well be true that zoning laws are developed for fear of the bottom quintile. You might want to consider the possibility that the fear is as much of a problem there as the bottom quintile itself.
- xyzelement 24d ago
  I think bottom quintile refers to the worst people not necessarily the poor or whatever.
  - nailer 24d ago
    > > I'm actually in the UK > I think bottom quintile refers to the worst people not necessarily the poor or whatever. Yes. In the UK the rate of incest is increasing due to migration from Middle East, North Africa, and Pakistan. An NHS Genomics Education Programme blog in Sept 2025 acknowledged the risk of birth defects doubling, but cited the benefits of 'stronger family support', 'economic advantages' and argued against a ban in favour of 'counselling and education'. Despite the vast majority of the British public not participating in incest, the NHS seemed to think it is right that they pay for the care of the people that do. A common shared resource - the NHS - is exploited by the worst people (who value economic advantages over their child's health) and everyone suffers. https://www.bmj.com/content/391/bmj.r2061 https://www.bmj.com/content/391/bmj.r2061
    - miningape 23d ago
      Honestly one of the most egregious things I've read about the NHS - actively promoting behavior that makes the lives of innocent children unnecessarily harder, and forcing everyone to contribute to supporting frankly disgusting behavior.
    - gjm11 23d ago
      Here is the actual thing they published (and unpublished shortly after, after backlash stoked by the right-wing press): https://web.archive.org/web/20250929053102/https://www.genomicseducation.hee.nhs.uk/blog/should-the-uk-government-ban-first-cousin-marriage/ https://web.archive.org/web/20250929053102/https://www.genom... Readers may judge for themselves how accurate the description above is. A few further remarks. --1-- Many many many things that are unwise and can increase pressure on communities' resources are not illegal. You have the right to try to fix a broken tile on your roof by climbing out of your window without any sort of safety equipment, even though you might fall and need medical treatment, even in countries where the government will pay some or all of your hospital bills. You have the right to eat too much or too little, or to drink a lot of alcohol or smoke a lot of cigarettes, even though in the long run these things will be bad for your health, which as well as possibly requiring expensive medical care will also make you a less economically productive member of society. You have the right (in most places, including the UK and the US) to agitate for fascism or communism, even though if your agitation succeeds the resulting government will probably be very bad on net. --2-- "Some guy working for the NHS wrote a blogpost saying that X should maybe not be made illegal" is quite a long way from "the NHS thinks [any particular thing]". --3-- The article wasn't at all about whether "they should pay for the care of the people that do". Indeed, the people who might need extra care as a result of first-cousin marriage are not the people who enter into those marriages, but some of their children. If your preference is for such children not to receive NHS healthcare, you're punishing the children for the actions of their parents. I think this is generally considered bad policy.
hax0ron3 24d ago
Sometimes I wonder what fraction of America's economic dynamism is based simply on people's desperate desire to make enough money to not have to live around street violence and other kinds of in-your-face social unpleasantness.

by black6 24d ago

gjm11 24d ago

Pretty much all of that is false. The rules I'm expected to follow based on the bottom quintile are generally rules that are no trouble for me to follow. The taxes I pay support way more than just the bottom quintile. I'm actually in the UK but I guess you're in the US, so here's a rough breakdown based on this infographic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_States#/media/File:2023_US_Federal_Budget_Infographic.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_Uni.... Much the biggest chunk of US federal spending is Social Security, the great majority of which is pensions. Pensioners are very variable but they're mostly not in the bottom quintile. Then "nondefense discretionary" spending which is a mixed bag but again is mostly not bottom quintile. After that comes Medicare which again is mostly pensioners. Then defense, which isn't really "to support" any particular subset of the population. Then Medicaid, a lot of which is for poorer people, so I'll give you that one. Then "other" which from the description in the chart is mostly not bottom quintile. Then income security programs, which is probably mostly bottom quintile. If we say that all of Medicaid and income security are "bottom quintile", 10% each of Social Security and Medicare, and 20% each of "nondefense discretionary" and "other", go to support the bottom quintile -- which I think is probably all on the generous side -- then that comes to about $1.56T out of $6.1T of spending, or out of $5.5T if you prefer not to count debt servicing. The greatest risks to my life and property are from disease (for my life), wear and tear plus accident (for my physical property), and stock market instability (for my investments). None of those things has much to do with the bottom quintile. In the US, homicides are about 0.02% of deaths, and most of those happen to people within that bottom quintile you evidently resent so much. The dearth of comfortable public spaces is because you have to allow the bottom quintile to be there and not-bottom-quintile people like you want to make those spaces as unwelcoming to them as possible even at the cost of making them less comfortable for everyone. And also because your society has failed to provide the bottom quintile with better places for the things you don't like them doing than those public spaces. It may well be true that zoning laws are developed for fear of the bottom quintile. You might want to consider the possibility that the fear is as much of a problem there as the bottom quintile itself.

xyzelement 24d ago
I think bottom quintile refers to the worst people not necessarily the poor or whatever.
- nailer 24d ago
  > > I'm actually in the UK > I think bottom quintile refers to the worst people not necessarily the poor or whatever. Yes. In the UK the rate of incest is increasing due to migration from Middle East, North Africa, and Pakistan. An NHS Genomics Education Programme blog in Sept 2025 acknowledged the risk of birth defects doubling, but cited the benefits of 'stronger family support', 'economic advantages' and argued against a ban in favour of 'counselling and education'. Despite the vast majority of the British public not participating in incest, the NHS seemed to think it is right that they pay for the care of the people that do. A common shared resource - the NHS - is exploited by the worst people (who value economic advantages over their child's health) and everyone suffers. https://www.bmj.com/content/391/bmj.r2061 https://www.bmj.com/content/391/bmj.r2061
  - miningape 23d ago
    Honestly one of the most egregious things I've read about the NHS - actively promoting behavior that makes the lives of innocent children unnecessarily harder, and forcing everyone to contribute to supporting frankly disgusting behavior.
  - gjm11 23d ago
    Here is the actual thing they published (and unpublished shortly after, after backlash stoked by the right-wing press): https://web.archive.org/web/20250929053102/https://www.genomicseducation.hee.nhs.uk/blog/should-the-uk-government-ban-first-cousin-marriage/ https://web.archive.org/web/20250929053102/https://www.genom... Readers may judge for themselves how accurate the description above is. A few further remarks. --1-- Many many many things that are unwise and can increase pressure on communities' resources are not illegal. You have the right to try to fix a broken tile on your roof by climbing out of your window without any sort of safety equipment, even though you might fall and need medical treatment, even in countries where the government will pay some or all of your hospital bills. You have the right to eat too much or too little, or to drink a lot of alcohol or smoke a lot of cigarettes, even though in the long run these things will be bad for your health, which as well as possibly requiring expensive medical care will also make you a less economically productive member of society. You have the right (in most places, including the UK and the US) to agitate for fascism or communism, even though if your agitation succeeds the resulting government will probably be very bad on net. --2-- "Some guy working for the NHS wrote a blogpost saying that X should maybe not be made illegal" is quite a long way from "the NHS thinks [any particular thing]". --3-- The article wasn't at all about whether "they should pay for the care of the people that do". Indeed, the people who might need extra care as a result of first-cousin marriage are not the people who enter into those marriages, but some of their children. If your preference is for such children not to receive NHS healthcare, you're punishing the children for the actions of their parents. I think this is generally considered bad policy.

hax0ron3 24d ago

Sometimes I wonder what fraction of America's economic dynamism is based simply on people's desperate desire to make enough money to not have to live around street violence and other kinds of in-your-face social unpleasantness.