Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1411283 Posts in 69325 Topics- by 58380 Members - Latest Member: bob1029

March 29, 2024, 03:03:27 AM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsPlayerGeneralPoverty Video Thread
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: Poverty Video Thread  (Read 1649 times)
JWK5
Guest
« on: April 14, 2014, 10:48:29 AM »

Fuck the poor.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2014, 01:26:20 PM by John Sandoval » Logged
Schoq
Level 10
*****


♡∞


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 14, 2014, 11:22:41 AM »

can we have a rule against pasting awful facebook click linkbait itt pls
« Last Edit: April 14, 2014, 02:24:57 PM by Schoq » Logged

♡ ♥ make games, not money ♥ ♡
JWK5
Guest
« Reply #2 on: April 14, 2014, 01:07:34 PM »

Facebook clickbait?

In any case, I just thought it was interesting.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2014, 01:17:18 PM by JWK5 » Logged
Schoq
Level 10
*****


♡∞


View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 14, 2014, 02:55:42 PM »

I guess linkbait is the appropriate term.

What I mean is the story is shallow, transparently created and presented to get lots of shares on ~social media~, and has no value.

It's not surprising that a public attack on a group stops a lot more people than a call (not visibly backed by any organization) to help them. It's not even highlighting hypocrisy, which is the supposed punchline.


The reactions to the first sign could probably have been entertaining as a video. It's mostly the clumsy guise of social commentary that ruins it.
Logged

♡ ♥ make games, not money ♥ ♡
TobiasW
Level 8
***


This can only end brilliantly!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 14, 2014, 07:19:57 PM »

The reactions to the first sign could probably have been entertaining as a video.





That's actually the source of the images - and as usually not mentioned anywhere on the page. (Which is one of the Ten Reprehensible Things I Hate Most About Content Aggregation Pages. The titles of the articles being another one...)
Logged

Muz
Level 10
*****


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: April 16, 2014, 10:15:14 AM »


Heh, I get annoyed every time someone talks about how much the poor need to be helped and how none of us should be happy because children in Africa are starving. Yet nobody really thinks that hey.. maybe instead of buying the food that my kids are just going to throw away and then nagging at them with the African Children excuse... maybe I should use the money I save by buying less food and use it to buy actual food for starving kids.

I see people giving money to the poor beggars who have a 50% chance of being charlatans, because they can't bear to see a beggar on the street. But how many really give that same dollar to the kid who was orphaned and needs every cent to get her life on track? The people who work little and beg a lot get less than the people who work hard and get paid as little as possible. Maybe things would have been fixed if people are paid a deserving wage instead of this system where people are paid as little as possible to prevent them from quitting (but let's buy a $10k carpet and desk for our HQ because it attracts investors).

I actually spend quite a lot on charity because it gives some purpose to what I do. Why should I buy something ludicrously overpriced just because it gives 5% to charity? Why should I pick the lame charities that Humble Bundle supports instead of giving the money to more deserving charities? So I set aside about 10% of my income to give to the proper charities instead of giving it to some bum on the street who'll just buy cigarettes with it.


Somewhat on the topic of non-topics: I tend to rant a lot when I'm low on sleep.
Logged
JWK5
Guest
« Reply #6 on: April 16, 2014, 11:40:05 AM »

The problem I've always had with the "Starving kids in [insert place here]" analogy is that there are almost always starving kids right there in your own city. I'd be more inclined to donate to a local food bank or actually give directly to a person who seems to be in need than place all the responsibility of helping someone on a third party. I don't want to pat myself on the back for a good deed, I want to ease the suffering of the person or people I saw with my own two eyes.

The problem with "the poor" is that it is a really general and misleading notion. Who is the poor, and in comparison to what? The poor in one place might be comparable to the middle class in another, for example. Does that mean they suffer less? Does less suffering mean less deserving of help? Is a man standing without food out in the cold in Canada less worthy of consideration because he wasn't a starving child in Africa? Why do we reach past the suffering in front of us to ease the suffering so far away from us?

My guess is that everyone cares right up until the point it demands responsibility, then only a few actually put in the time to help. I think that is what the video demonstrated to me. They all "cared" when it came time to chew the guy out (i.e. it was their concern) but when they were given an opportunity to actually do something and take responsibility for their concerns, they just kept walking.

EDIT: On the flip-side, you can see in the video some people did donate, but it seems not many actually inquired about it except when the guy had the "Fuck the poor." sign. It's not the video itself that interested me (or the link I posted) but how moved people were by an insult to the cause but not the cause itself.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2014, 12:17:28 PM by JWK5 » Logged
Blademasterbobo
Level 10
*****


dum


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2014, 06:47:59 PM »

I don't want to pat myself on the back for a good deed, I want to ease the suffering of the person or people I saw with my own two eyes.

there's not as big of a difference between those two things as you seem to think there is

it's still just about making yourself feel better

"if i don't see them suffer then i don't care" is a dumb attitude
Logged

Hand Point Left Hand Shake Left Hand Thumbs Down Left Hand Thumbs Up Left Bro Fist Left Hand Metal Left Toast Left Hand Fork Left Hand Money Left Hand Clap Hand Any Key Tiger Hand Joystick Hand Pencil Hand Money Right Hand Knife Right Toast Right Hand Metal Right Bro Fist Right Hand Thumbs Up Right Hand Thumbs Down Right Hand Shake Right Hand Point Right
JWK5
Guest
« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2014, 07:33:13 PM »

Quote
there's not as big of a difference between those two things as you seem to think there is

it's still just about making yourself feel better
There's

Quote
"if i don't see them suffer then i don't care" is a dumb attitude
"I care, but not enough to really bother." is even worse.

However, what I meant is that I want to help those I can help directly, that are within my range of influence (i.e. locally, actually within my means and reach).
Logged
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: April 16, 2014, 08:24:19 PM »

duh the local starving child is wthe worst comparison to make ever, being in rich country is not the same than being in a poor cuntry, especially when there is war raging and no opportunity to move out this life. I mean that the problem is that you are trying to say that there isn't a hierarchy of pain to disregard people who are even more disregarded and have even less opportunity to raise above their condition. I'm currently living below the poverty line, yet, because I'm under a developed country regime I understand the difference of how much privilege I am, even if I die on teh street, because there is always this opportunity to know that I "might be" save, unlike people on some country from which our living standard strive on their enslavement. Especially africa which is bigger of that the entire developed reunite and there is still some place and the richest continent on the world ... I understand too well teh computer and internet I'm using is drenched in blood from that place. It's only justice to help them back when possible even if it does not absolute our selves from profiting their misery. Even more since we profit from a system that have organize their historical erasure


And using charlatan to avoid donate is stupidly convenient, I mean if a beggars has 50% of being honest you will actually help someone, NOW if you decide to not donate because of charlatan there is à% chance to help someone but yourself ... how a convenient scapegoat from responsibility charalatn are!
Logged

s_l_m
Level 8
***


Open to collabs


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2014, 11:27:18 PM »

I probably agree with Gimmy but can't understand large chunks of his writing ^

Anywho, here is a crappy Polygraph I made for school.


Logged

Think happy thoughts.
Leon Fook
Level 5
*****


Ohh hi, or something like that.


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: April 16, 2014, 11:40:21 PM »

And using charlatan to avoid donate is stupidly convenient, I mean if a beggars has 50% of being honest you will actually help someone, NOW if you decide to not donate because of charlatan there is à% chance to help someone but yourself ... how a convenient scapegoat from responsibility charalatn are!
I don't think not donating to charity because of charlatan is stupid. And i don't think you're evil for not donating to charity. It just a type of cautious behaviour a person have, much like a paranoid fearing everything surrounding them can kill them, which is probably true to some extend.
Maybe because we're living in different part of the world, as our believe is totally different. We're not oblidge to give and donate to charity is a choice, not mandatory. Also you might not realize how much company is using charity to earn money. Chance is the money you put into the charity will slip into someone pocket, and the actual money getting into charity might be lesser than what you originally donated, because charity is apparently a business model.
Also, attacking someone, calling them dumb/stupid because they have different opinion on charity is basically what the video is trying to present.
Logged

gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: April 17, 2014, 06:46:58 AM »

I'm not saying you are evil, just that this thought process is a false excuse in itself. There is better reason to not give to charity than slipping in someone pocket. I'm not attacking the opinion, i'm attacking the argument.

Because if your true goal is to help the optimal strategy is to give even more so a greater percent help. This argument true goal is to shield an opinion that is selfish in nature (it's fine) to not bear the responsibility of the consequence by diverting the moral problem to a scapegoat. And it's base on fallacy, that all charity "might" be a scam and that is more important than it "might" help, ironic on a game making forum because making a game is all about making a bet on the idea it "might" be good. It implicitly suggest us that ALL charity is suspicious therefore "not taking action" is the way of solving this, instead of doing research like I did.

AND isn't that exactly what the video seems to point at, is it?

And more is that the "hierarchy of poor" kind of opinion is frequent too and is ironic when we speak together on an international forums ... the problem of local and "far" is a false problem today because the world is in reach if you have a computer. The thing is that those are floating argument people didn't really thought by themselves, they didn't question them, they just adopt them.

In fact the better argument is that charity can help, the way it is structured, to keep the victim systematically victimized, either through conscious construction or unfortunate consequence. For example charity can help spread "consumerism slavery" to local market and prevent them from growing through cheap competition against local production, they can finance war, corruption and dictature, etc...

One reason why china is increasingly seen in good light in poor country is that they consider them equal and focus on infrastructure instead of blackmailing them with false high ground morals. So basically the argument I'm attacking is still selfish at it's core, it does not assess the situation of the other but the situation of the self which is irrelevant, and why I call this dumb (and still not targeting the opinion).

Currently africa is one of the faster growing economic space akin to what asia was once (I think they use to call them the five dragon), some charity did help, so the consequence is that it was worth it when it was done properly. Now helping africa is not just a matter of charity but can became a selfish pursuit of economic market by being first and buying good will for the future.
Logged

Leon Fook
Level 5
*****


Ohh hi, or something like that.


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: April 17, 2014, 08:28:13 AM »

that make sense. my bad for misunderstood.
Logged

JWK5
Guest
« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2014, 09:06:03 AM »

Quote
Because if your true goal is to help the optimal strategy is to give even more so a greater percent help.
No, the optimal strategy would be to investigate further before helping. I don't know about where you live, but here where I live (i.e. locally) people "work" specific areas of the city. Either they hold signs roadside or they hang outside certain stores asking for change. They will come at you with lines that go "Hey man, I need some change for the bus..." or "My car just broke down and...", over and over like a broken record. If you probe further on the problem you start to get a very illogical story forming that eventually leads to "Go fuck yourself!" Later, you will see them walking around with booze or climbing into their boyfriend or pimp's vehicle with the day's haul. Often it is the same people over and over and they've practically made a career of it. There is always the off chance someone might be sincere, but most of the time they are not. It is not cynicism not to give to these people, it is "street smarts" and you learn very very quickly here.

"Giving more" does not better the situation, giving more just means they will seek you out first and you are losing resources that could have been more helpful elsewhere. You can't generalize people (especially the needy), it's not that simple. The optimal strategy is to focus your efforts where they are inclined to do the most good. For example, If you don't trust in giving $10 to a stranger who asks for money then buying $10 worth of food and giving it to a food bank or buying supplies for a homeless shelter are more likely to yield positive results.

Quote
And more is that the "hierarchy of poor" kind of opinion is frequent too and is ironic when we speak together on an international forums ... the problem of local and "far" is a false problem today because the world is in reach if you have a computer. The thing is that those are floating argument people didn't really thought by themselves, they didn't question them, they just adopt them.
Ignore the drowning man 10 feet away to save the hanging man 10 miles away? A person has only so much time in a day and so much resource. Do you give that time and resource to those suffering right there in front of you or do you walk past them and give it to others? To be honest, I have no problem with people choosing to help locally or abroad, but I myself stay focused locally. Why? Because I know where my time and resource is going and who it helps directly. I become responsible for my efforts, I have to look them in the eyes, I don't get the comfort and detachment that distance offers. I don't help or give because I want to be a good person, I help or give because it cuts deep to see someone struggling.

I am not saying I don't want people in Africa (or wherever) not to suffer, I am just saying I do not realistically have he time and or resources to personally see to it that they don't. Right or wrong, I want to know where my efforts are going and who they are going to. Specifically, not generally. Now I could do some kind of outreach program or something, and I know people who do, but the problem is that there are still people suffering here locally including members of my own family. So do I help the drowning man 10 feet away or the hanging man 10 miles away? I do not have the time and resource to do both.

I have seen a lot of suffering in my lifetime. People shot and stabbed, people whose houses burned down, people going hungry, people getting robbed, people with mental disorders losing everything and people dying because they can't get treatment, etc. I have yet to see suffering of any kind that didn't make me feel horrible to have witnessed, didn't matter their wealth or lack thereof or where they lived. I can't knock anyone trying to end suffering of any kind, but what does rub me the wrong way is that everyone seems to care about everything but only a few seem to do anything about any of it. It's the sentiment I got from the video. "Care" is a very loose and fashionable idea these days, but realistically there is only so much we can actually "care" about because our time and resources are limited, especially those of us who struggle to keep our own heads and the heads of our families above water.

To avoid being spread to thin, and to better help others, we have to focus our efforts. This means knowing who we can help and how best we can help them. I think this is the barrier most hit, everybody wants to believe they care about everything but nobody can do anything about everything so they become overwhelmed and do nothing for anyone. We are taught the world is our problem but that is a very misleading generalization. The world is not our problem, each individual suffers specific problems from a specific chain of events, and is generally affected by specific people. Those actually doing good are doing good in specific places, whether they travel to specific places in foreign countries, serve in specific homeless shelters or food banks, give to specific people who have specific needs, etc. Generalization is where the real evil is, it breeds detachment and separatism. 

"Poor" isn't even the problem, you can give people money and you still have suffering. Where I live people have money and even those with money suffer. The problems are very specific. The problems are specific attitudes and behaviors, specific social structures, specific injustices, etc. You can give people money but if you don't teach them what to do with it, if they aren't willing to do better with it, or if you aren't even sure they are getting it then you are just throwing resources to the wind. That is largely the problem. The "poor" need more than money, they need more than resources, they need our time. Doesn't matter what level of poor they are, they need time. Helping people in general requires time. Time is where you learn the specifics. The problem of the modern world is that we are taught that the only socially acceptable way to spend our time is to earn and spend money, right down to our charities, but really the most important way to spend our time is to spend it on each other. That is where the real "caring" is.

[/rambling]



P.S. I have given up caffeine so I haven't yet found anything to fill the void of morning coffee... Tea just isn't cutting it yet... lol.
Logged
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2014, 12:32:16 PM »

I was mostly attacking the rhetorics and how it is used to avoid the problem completely. Ie those are bad arguments, I'm glad it force people to generate better arguments as in more specifics. However I still see those specifics "worst" case shielding from all case and have implicit generalization.

One problem of charity is victimization. There is two way of helping people, to provide resource of any kind (aka standard help) and to remove barrier to their growth. When I told about africa (which fall generally in the victimization trap) and china, it was the example to show how growth happen outside the victimization into something concrete. Ie that bad habit, bad argument and bad generalization lead to not "helping" at all and disregard and erase those in problem. One thing that help and does not take resource is just being conscious and changing habit, The great thing with habit and why they are dangerous is that they create invisible routine, therefore invisible barrier when we are not vigilant. That's why there is so much energy by some people to fight against prejudice.

Forming new habit just have a front cost, even better forming an habit of changing habit based on new information (ie having an habit of questioning regularly things) create benefit with little cost. We have a lot of silly routine that are actually harmful for everyone, why not designing new things? it's not like we aren't doing that already all the time.

And last, lots of people talk about the overwhelming "the world is not my problem" usually don't considerate how they are overwhelmingly benefiting from the world and don't seem to bother about that.
Logged

gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: April 17, 2014, 12:33:35 PM »

I summon moderator thread split!
[/size]
Logged

TobiasW
Level 8
***


This can only end brilliantly!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #17 on: April 17, 2014, 01:11:34 PM »

You should've summoned a thread renaming too Tongue
Logged

Aik
Level 6
*


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: April 18, 2014, 06:37:10 PM »



Logged
Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic