Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by _sbrk 2164 days ago
https://www.statista.com/statistics/794278/disabled-populati...

Let's take the first-order approximation that 15% of the population is disabled and cannot get their own food. A quick, but by no means, thorough search shows both government and private programs to help these people obtain nutritious food. We could delve into this and go down the rabbit hole of what % of that 15% cannot prepare food or even feed themselves, but I don't have data on that. Yes, delivery might be a need in some of those cases where family, friends, programs, etc. don't exist. These can be a special case, perhaps < 10% of total population.

My comments are directed at the other 90% of keyboard pushers who whine that they're getting charged too much / businesses are being harmed when they click a button for Beef Lo Mein.
1 comments
dsr_ 2163 days ago
There are 330,000,000 people in the USA. 1% of that is 3,300,000 people. Therefore, the Portland-Vancouver MSA (only 2.2 million people) does not exist for any nationwide consideration.

Congratulations.

link
rootusrootus 2163 days ago
> only 2.2 million people

Nitpick: That was 2010. We're getting closer to 3M now.

link
_sbrk 2163 days ago
I fail to grasp what you are implying. Please explain.
link
dsr_ 2163 days ago
You announced that below some percentage of the population, people don't matter and shouldn't be accommodated. By your logic, I showed that Portland doesn't matter.

I hope we can all agree that this is a very stupid conclusion, and therefore you should rethink your argument.

We accommodate disability because it is the right thing to do. We require businesses to spend extra money, lowering their profits, in order to put in ramps and openable doors, in the name of our common humanity. Not everything is done for a profit motive; not everything should be done for profit motives. In conclusion, Ayn Rand can spin in her grave but it would still be wrong to wrap her in wires and use her to generate electricity.

link
_sbrk 2163 days ago
You clearly didn't understand my meaning. I suggest re-reading what I wrote, and then think about the "90%" figure.

I'd flag your insulting "stupid conclusion" statement, but I'm sure someone else will do that for me.

link