33955985

You seem concerned with a “moral failures” aspect of debt, which doesn’t make for an interesting discussion. If you’re not interested in the complex system of algorithmic finance and its intersection with poverty and generational wealth, I’m not sure there’s much of a discussion here.

I already mentioned that some well paying jobs (the kind that people stuck in debt traps would most benefit from) require an active credit score to obtain. So “not using credit” is not an option. As well, credit is a primary way that the people who hold generational wealth got that wealth. Oh, and they run the system.

You’ve created a straw “poor person” and insist on shadow boxing it. If you ever decide to confront the complex systems that these fellow humans face, I encourage you to read up on the modern credit system. Wikipedia has a good rundown with active sources.

Yep. It’s all a secret. You are measured by an invisible system that you can’t opt-out of, can’t question… oh and just in case you thought you could learn from experience, here comes a newer “version” of the score that determines whether you’re allowed to build equity or whether you’re relegated to paying someone else’s mortgage.

A reasonable take if you ignore how this system reinforces existing inequality + the ways this system is used outside its original scope.

Also you have to admit it’s kind of fucked up that there’s no total opt out mechanism.

This is absolutely sensible and also impossible for the patchwork of systems that an individual has to navigate. These systems would have to talk to eachother, and they don’t.

That’s why I’m in favor of a straight cash subsidy through the negative income tax.

Yeah. I’m a bit confused on how an article on layoffs misses the massive increase in cost of capital. The entire market has changed.

The existence of parents addicted to heroin doesn’t make having another kid to get a lighter sentence any less fucked up, rich or poor

You really should read Bad Blood. Theranos misdiagnosed cancer patients.

A woman, all women, absolutely ought to have the right to choose when and if they become pregnant. Even women who are charged with crimes.

But if you’re her child 12 or so years from now, what is it going to look like that you were conceived under such circumstances?

As the article notes, US and Mex have bilateral extradition so it’s doubtful she intended to stay there to escape prison. She was likely going on to another country after that.

Who built the API and who pays to maintain it? These are not public goods in the traditional sense. The incentives must align or else the benefit is only maintained through benign neglect.

It was always odd to me that entire businesses relied on what was essentially the goodwill of a corporation. I think the same about things like microG in the Android world. They just… use Google’s API without paying and yet we think it’ll all work out?

> It is not very healthy for the baby in the womb.

Sucks to be a parasite I guess

That you don’t think the possibility of governments prosecuting vulnerable women seeking health care in the US using surveillance capitalist tools is a story says more about you than the article.