logoalt Hacker News

renticulousyesterday at 2:59 PM2 repliesview on HN

We need functioning poverty where people can still get by even if they fall below a certain threshold, they have a recourse to getup and live without being treated like animals.

Around The World with Louis C.K. | Jim Norton Can't Save You EP 68

https://youtu.be/z0cypFadE3k?t=2394

In a podcast, Louis C.K. has remarked on his observations of "functioning poverty" during his travels in India, contrasting it with the homelessness and societal dysfunction he sees in New York City.


Replies

setryesterday at 5:47 PM

Oh neat; I’ve been calling it the “economy of the poor” since I can’t find any proper conversation on it. This is the first time I’ve seen someone bring it up

But I think the notable aspect is not that they have recourse, it’s that the economics properly scales down. Can’t afford 20 cigarettes? An Indian shop will sell you 10. Can’t afford 10? They’ll sell you 1. Can’t afford 1? They’ll sell you half a cigarette.

Can’t afford clean water? They’ll sell you mildly dirty water. Can’t afford mildly dirty water? They’ll sell you dirty water.

Can’t afford a modern, well built, safe car? How about one with 3 wheels? No doors? No AC? 10 MPG? The crumpling structure of a tin can? An engine with less HP than a lawnmower?

In the US, there’s an arbitrary cutoff where you simply aren't allowed to be sold goods and services by anyone in normal society. It’s not about giving recourse; it’s about not actively trying to ostracize them as a separate class of humanity.

You have to actively work to stop “functional poverty” from existing. In any normal setup, it’s just more of the same economy as otherwise.

timoshishiyesterday at 3:23 PM

His idea of functioning poverty in that video seems to involve shanty towns and more "side hustles" for the poor.

His heart may be in the right place but he may be too rich for this conversation. He comes off as more than a little bit out of touch here

show 1 reply