Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The term we're looking for here is "poverty trap."

A poverty trap is a circumstance where people are forced to take a more costly short term move. The canonical example is buying a $35 pair of shoes twice a year instead of a $50 pair that might last two years.



Obligatory Terry Pratchett quote:

“The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.

Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.

But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.

This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.”


It's a fun quote that has some truth to it, but not much more than that.


The truth of it applies to a lot of things though; if money is tight and you have to buy some quantities it means you pay more for

Toilet paper.

Paper towels.

You can’t stock up when soup is on sale. Or tuna. Or other x canned item.

Shoes, do you buy lightly used, or do you buy whatever is on clearance ?

Clothing: nothing from Walmart ever seems to fit right. Used shirts and pants always seem to fit just a little off. Is there a Burlington coat factory, or a Gabe’s, or similar near you? Maybe you can grab something cheap. If not, you may have to spend entirely too much of your paycheck to replace some pieces of clothing you probably have to have for work. (Example of this, I used to know people making barely more then minimum wage, who didn’t have a car, and had to pay way too much to keep buying cheap pants when they got holes in them so they wouldn’t lose their job ).


Yes, that is why I said it has some truth to it. Perhaps I could have been more clear in my criticism.

It is simply a very incomplete description for why some people have more wealth and income than others. It is one piece of a large and complex puzzle.


Yeap. I mainly meant it as a fun alternative to the rather more standard "Obligatory xkcd" posts :D. Also, I'm a huge fan of Terry Pratchett.


I think it pretty well encompasses all the criticism that I could levy at this artie.


Poverty traps are relevant, but they're usually more than a day's pay. The temptation to cheap out is always there, but being stuck with the bad route is mostly relevant to big-ticket items. Bigger than a cell phone, which you can get used or with a zero-interest payment plan among other options.


Well I agree but would add:

If you’re stuck in the short game poverty trap, it’s harder to even realize what your (underlying) big ticket items are.

Or to put it from another perspective: you have to be able to afford to minimalize. In the West, there are no Buddhist temples in the ghettos.


> In the West, there are no Buddhist temples in the ghettos.

Like the boiling frog, that's an attractive illustration that is literally untrue.


That was a metaphor… New Age Zen Buddhists are usually not poor, culturally not related to Asia at all and often don't realize how their practice is a refurbishment of puritan cultural origins.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: