1406 sats \ 15 replies \ @Michelson_Morley 30 Sep 2023 \ on: Suggestions For Next Satsraiser bitcoin
Definitely Open Sats.
The charity for orphans—as compassionate and moral as it may seem— is also in effect subsidizing orphanage itself. It is a harsh point to make. I'm making it in the hope that someone will convince me that I'm wrong. So I'll try to be clear.
What are the long term effects of leading Ugandan parents to believe that it's not so bad if they leave their child, since the child will be cared for anyway?
Americans, in a very human and compassionate reaction to rising poverty, voted in the 60s to institute welfare aimed to help the affected. Few were more affected than black single mothers. But what happens when a system is in place that gives free money to those who don't marry? Marrying meant an instant 15 to 20% reduction in welfare.
Today, around 70% of black americans are born out of wedlock (compare with asians around 10%). Is this compassionate? As Thomas Sowell wrote,
I'm worried about giving crutches to people simply because it feels good to be generous.
Now if the Ugandan charity was instead for giving scholarships to children who showed aptitude or extraordinary ability, then I would support it wholeheartedly. I'm Swedish, so no stranger to welfare. I find the topic very interesting and hope someone (who does not hate my guts by now) finds it interesting as well.
deleted by author
reply
Agreed. After considering siggys wisdom I've changed my vote, the kids are a more altruistic and effective choice, simply because it's not giving them (or rather, their parents) a crutch so much as it is giving the kids themselves a book. A book made of gold.
Think of what cool stuff we could have built if we knew about btc/crypto at that age. All I had was lego!
Hm. This whole thing is inspiring, makes me want to find more ways to enable lightning adoption and experimentation for kids. Any ideas? Barney the dinosaur except he's raving about elliptic curve cryptography??
reply
I am confused myself. I kind of embraced the Cuban idea. I've learned a few things today. #1. I don't know you personally, but you are a very good man, and 2, this place is amazing. I'll stop there before I get really sappy.
reply
deleted by author
reply
deleted by author
reply
I think they both are worthy, but the Cuban route might be more timely. Like you say, they're primed.
reply
deleted by author
reply
deleted by author
Ron is the man!
reply
Two things:
- I agree that Open Sats is a fantastic project. The reason I am not 100% behind it for SN is that Jack gave the project $10 million. Our pittance won't really provide any real benefit.
- I am no bleeding heart liberal. I loathe what The Great Society did to my country. In many respects we are paying the price now. I see a complete distinction between generational dependence on handouts which destroys ambition and self reliance and poor children who have been victimized by the IMF and BIS. You are right that it is a "feel good" type giving, but it's not purely altruistic. I believe it will foster bitcoin adoption in a basic, fundamental way.
reply
Thanks for saying that, I want to be clear that I didn't mean to accuse you or anyone who is inclined to support the charity— I meant to describe my own feelings about it, and why I find it so hard to talk about. It kills me that these kids live in such circumstance and I CAN HELP THEM but by my own reasoning mustn't. Am I just stingy? Heartless? Even racist? These questions are what my inner child asks me, and I hope that I'm not. Because I can't be sure. And shouldn't be.
I'll be thinking about the kids I saw on that page all day, but there's nothing more to be done. Thanks again for engaging.
reply
deleted by author
reply
It's funny you said that, because your post really got me thinking. Could I ultimately be harming those kids to make me feel good about myself? Even worse, how do you vet something like this to make sure It's not going to some grifter? It's good to hash through this stuff.
reply
Exactly. You totally get it. I've thought about it a bit more and what you said about introducing them to bitcoin/lightning, that carries a lot of weight that I didn't consider at all. It wouldn't be "just giving money away", it would be a much more valuable opportunity, giving a head start to the kids whos potential might otherwise go neglected. This outweighs my worry about "helping perpetuate poor parenting" by a large margin.
Hell, giving such insight to kids who aren't even orphans in uganda would be a head start. So I've changed my mind. I vote for the Ugandan kids. But not because I'm a bleeding heart or anything! :) It's just more reasonable.
reply
deleted by author
reply