Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwadogabone | Hacker News Reader

I'm glad you posted and took the the time to check it, because intuitively I would agree with the headline, less money = more stress = less talking (probably not for everybody, but most people will talk less when under stress, especially over time).

At the limit, this is "my parents couldn't afford proper care for a debilitating diesease" vs they could. There is one group there that would talk more.

if you're poor, broke, alcholic, meth head, on heroin, you're probably not gonna be talking to your kids as much as someone who is not.

To see that idea with a self survey is kinda hilarious. kutgw to get this stuff right.

View on HN

> To see that idea with a self survey is kinda hilarious

It wasn't a self survey.

> This left us with a final sample of 84 dyads, randomly assigned to either the Scarcity (n=42) or Control (n=42) conditions. Dyads across conditions did not differ in age, child or caregiver sex, caregiver education, or family income

> The caregiver and child were seated across from one another at a table. The child completed an unrelated experiment with the researcher, while the caregiver completed the Scarcity or Control manipulation survey on a tablet. When the caregiver had finished, the researcher left the room under the guise of loading a second survey onto the iPad, leaving the caregiver and child alone with a toy the experimenter happened to offer as she left. A video camera and/or tape recorder recorded their interactions.

Why are the poor in the America described in terms of "meth heads"? Being poor is not a moral failure.

I think you're reading his list as an 'and', read the list as an 'or'.

I just picked one, but I noticed this more than once. Either the poor are referred to as "trailer trash", "Walmart monsters" or "meth heads". It is just interesting to see how American culture is so anti being poor that it seeps into your language without you knowing.

All cultures have anti poor sentiments as well as empathetic attitudes towards the poor. What is "interesting" here is prejudice attitudes from people like you towards america.

Also stop calling Americans "interesting." Using a term like this is a deliberate insult on a culture or a person. You are examining the culture like it's a lab rat and commenting on how the behavior is "interesting."

You are not an idiot. People do not talk like this in real life by remarking on how behavior is "interesting" to the subjects face. You and others only use these terms behind the anonymity of a forum. Therefore you are aware this is insulting. Stop.

This is a common tactic used to get around the HN rules. You say "interesting" posing it as an innocent remark. It is not, you are conducting a deliberate and insulting attack on American culture here.

The problem is that poor and broke are not like the others.

Why is there an implied assumption that only americans think being poor is a moral failure?

>Why are the poor in the America described in terms of "meth heads"? Being poor is not a moral failure.

They're generally not referred to that way outside discussion of behaviors addicts engage in to get their fix and the discussion is limited in scope to addicts.

Making the generalization that everyone refers to the poors as meth heads serves the same ideological needs as generalizing the poors as addicts albeit to a different end.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com