You can also take a fairly selfish view and come to the same conclusion. Like, I don't want to see homeless encampments, or really sick and untreated people, or panhandlers, or (...) while I'm walking around in my city. I can solve this problem by 1) moving to a nice suburb, or 2) having my tax dollars go to fix a problem that affects me. 1) is off the table because I want to live in the city, and 2)

while it helps the greater good

also helps me directly. (2 can also be addressed in a draconian fashion, which is not what I'm advocating at all.)

I think one problem is looking at things as zero sum. It's not. If you are healthy and housed and fed then you're not

to be very crass

an eyesore, you're adding to the fabric of the city. I want street musicians who are playing for fun, not because they're trying to make enough to afford dinner.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is something I just don't get how so many folks don't seem to get it. Social safety nets make just a better overall environment to live in. Most people work jobs interacting with other people and have all sorts of things outside of work interacting with people. Ideally they are clean, healthy, educated, and are happy in the sense they are not worried about their prospects for basic necessities like food and shelter.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There is some percentage of people that simple can not think in any other way than zero sum games. Every transaction, interaction, etc needs to have winners and losers. They can’t see that some spending is good because it helps people which in turn helps them. It is a completely alien world view that I also don’t understand. They are the foot soldiers for fascism.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

I was gonna joke that they must not have friends then, but that's actually a pretty common problem.