Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by SkyMarshal 1509 days ago
Technically the US is a “high trust” society. Meaning we have institutions like rule of law, independent courts, and elections that are trusted by society to facilitate commercial and legal relations between people, rather than personal relationships and kinships.

Yes we complain a lot and criticize the government and don’t fully trust our polarized politicians, but a real “low trust” society is a far cry from what we have.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_trust_and_low_trust_socie...

1 comments

This might have been true 10 years ago, but now (just from the wiki examples):

1. More than 40% in US do not believe Biden legitimately won election – poll - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/05/america-bide...

2. US tax system is not voluntary, but extremely coercive - the IRS is legendary in its blood-houndness and the US is probably the only country in the world that taxes non-resident citizens.

3. Abortion-Rights Protest Targets Homes of Kavanaugh, Roberts https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-08/abortion-...

I am not sure if the US could already be classified as a low-trust society (probably not yet), but a strong negative trend is definitely present.

The US can have lower levels of trust than it previously had while still having levels of trust that significantly exceed the median. This seems to be a popular misunderstanding in the last decade.

I'm not sure if this is the parent's intent, but there's a whole lot of sincere "the US is a third world country" sort of argumentation going around, predicated entirely on observations that the US falls short of certain utopian ideals). "The US should continue to improve" doesn't depend on pretense that the US lags the median for a given category, and I strongly suspect that this sort of rhetoric gives way to the sort of fatalism that prevents societies from progressing ("we can't progress, we're stuck in this miserable system, etc").

Is this getting downvotes because it doesn't speak to or support the question of the level of trust in the US government? Or is it getting downvotes because the politics of the poster are evident, and people are disagreeing with those politics? I am pretty sure the poster and I would disagree very strongly and on many things, but this post would seem to relate directly on the matter discussed. We do have a decreasing level of trust in our government, and it is beginning to have the sorts of impacts mentioned in the wiki article. Our relatively high standard of living compared to those other low trust countries hides them to some degree by making uprisings less inviting.
I can't actually tell what the parent's politics are. "40% of Americans don't believe Biden won the election" seems like a left-leaning talking point while "protests at Kavenaugh's house" seems like a right-leaning talking point. I think it's a good thing that he wasn't transparently political.

I downvoted because the apparent argument ("the US has these imperfections, thus it follows that it ranks low among countries") is a specific incarnation of the enumeration fallacy that is both obvious and frequently employed. If this isn't what the parent intended to communicate, then he can take my downvote as a cue to be clearer in the future. My downvotes are intended as (albeit very low-resolution) constructive criticism, not ill-will or petty disagreement.

I think the parent was abundantly clear here: > I am not sure if the US could already be classified as a low-trust society (probably not yet), but a strong negative trend is definitely present. I'm not sure where your interpretation is coming from, but if it was a misreading of parent's comment then I think your downvote could be happily reversed.
That quote demonstrates enumeration fallacy (using examples to argue that the US ranks lower without any context about the countries against which the US is ranked).

Moreover:

> [The US's classification as a high-trust society] might have been true 10 years ago, but now (just from the wiki examples): ...

This seems to unambiguously argue that the US is not a high-trust society. With the additional context of your quote "not sure if the US could be classified as a low trust society...", it's possible that the parent is contradicting himself or that he's arguing that the US is certainly not high-trust, but middling or lower. Thus the parent is either unclear (contradiction) or he's arguing by enumeration. Even if there is some alternative interpretation, this very debate suffices to prove unclarity.

Well. In all honesty, I should have written "definetly not yet" instead of "probably not yet". But I see it from my own perspective as someone who grew up in Bulgaria and spent his adult life in the Czech Republic. Neither country is considered an example for the world (understandably lol), but in both, current US state of affairs would be considered extremely worrying. For example in both countries we have a multi-party system, so the average Bulgarian/Czech doesn't hate half the supreme court justices as it is in the US, but 8/9. Yet I don't think that harrassing them at their homes would be an acceptable behavior no matter the case.

So, I made this statement based on low national self-esteem. Later on I compared in my head current US with places such as Lebanon and Venezuela and realised that it is still doing pretty well, even though the strong downwards trend simply cannot be denied. So yeah.

Let's play my politics !!! I don't believe that anyone should be coerced into not having an abortion, but I don't believe anyone should be coerced into paying in someone else's abortion. Thus I agree with... wait for it... neither side in the current debate. Congratulations to the winners!!
I'd be willing to bet that its viewed as "low-effort" because quotes like these generally turn out to be misleading to the actual study (or the study itself has fatal structure), pretty much without fail:

> More than 40% in US do not believe Biden legitimately won election – poll

Political polling is seen by some as more of a driver of opinion than an extraction of one.