Re: Back to the legislation session boys and girls
Yup, time to go back and write legislation that makes all records ever produced past present and future public, to be made available on a free to access database, record keeping of all incidents legally required, illegal to destroy or tamper with records. Most private citizen information would be redacted, accessible for attorneys for legitimate things like civil suits. Legislators should pass some crystal clear laws that say public employees are accountable to the public and they are not entitled to the same constitutional protections, let alone more than private citizens. These laws should cover all government employees, from cops and teachers (and if you think public school teachers should be exempt, there's a nasty story about a teacher bringing in a third party to whip a little boy in the bathroom in Chicago and the district has no idea how many teachers have hurt children and ultimately been disciplined, or if any teachers have a pattern of accusations) prison guards, prosecuting attorneys, judges, magistrates, sherriffs, principals, everyone. I can see a fair exemption of medical records, including incidents relating to a mental health condition so long as direct supervisors are accountable for continued employment.
.
And while I'd bet the unions would drop their opposition to the current laws if full transparency gained steam, legislators should push on and air all the whiney grievances against accountability. It's utterly ridiculous that government employees get special privileges and immunities and yet constantly whine and cry how they are under attack, and how they selflessly devote themselves to thankless public service. (And I hold teachers in high regard, but they aren't as poorly paid as they claim because no one considers the mega health insurance they have to contribute almost nothing to both now and after retirement along with the salary they collect in the form of a pension. They also continue to support the unions that are responsible for the working conditions good and bad).
Yeah, back to the drawing board and do it right this time.
So if I want my loved ones murder solved, I need to come up with reward money as an incentive (or my dearly departed had wads of cash on them, although then they could get paid without rendering service...)? I mean, he's basically saying they have no incentive to put in the effort to solve crimes.
Well if you're attitude is "fuck 'em" then you needn't concern yourself with advocating for laws on other people's private business that has no effect on you. You don't possess some unique moral or social authority to tell adults how to live their lives the right way. Mind your business
Can anyone tell me where all these predators that want to do awful sex things to children are hiding in our society? I am not saying they don't exist, I'm just saying that the amount of legislation and media reporting make it seem like most normal looking men I encounter are secretly monsters. I mean, the vast majority of children victimized are hurt by trusted people they know, like coaches and doctors and priests. Anyone who thinks our president isn't exaggerating (like the Qanon folks) when he talks about thousands of women and children from South America being trafficked here for sex slavery should be far more concerned that the US has such a demand than about the coyotes trying bring the supply (and why would women and children come here for asylum if there are so many predators?)
Again, I acknowledge that there are victims, I'm not dismissing them and I want justice for them. But all of this sex trafficking nonsense is just another avenue to control women and punish them for not conforming to social norms.
Shoot, I should have read further down before responding! I'm a libertarian (I disagree with some things like the official position on net neutrality) and I am in favor of more individual liberty. FEE is a great libertarian website! Libertarians and liberals actually have many common goals and ideals, just different ways of accomplishing them.
You're passing a whole lot of judgement on buyers and sellers of sex by assuming they all fit the same dynamic of a poor desperate woman prostituting herself to a married man spending the rent money. Sure, that dynamic exists, but it's not the only one, and who are you to judge the actions of consenting adults? Have you ever considered that sex work is not just a last resort to keep the lights on, and is actually preferable to some than service shut off or eviction. Some people make a very good living doing sex work, and enjoy their job. Not all John's are married men running around on their doting wives. Some men are painfully shy and awkward and suffer from loneliness. Some men simply have no interest or time to establish a relationship. And married men have their reasons too, not all of them unsympathetic.
All the deterrence of these ridiculous police crack downs does is drive prostitution further underground, creating a greater likelihood of victimization and shame adults who aren't hurting anyone. Just like drug prohibition. And immigration restrictions. We need to stop trying to control people and let everyone live their lives to the extent that it doesn't infringe on anyone else's rights.
And while poverty is often a factor in street prostitution, especially when youth is involved, scaling back regulations that have no public safety value would decriminalize poverty, stop impedeing charity from helping the needy, and allow for people to take on more entrepreneurship to provide for themselves as well.
You're absolutely right, law enforcement of all kinds spends way too much time on low hanging fruit, victimless crimes, and worst of all, entrapment or framing schemes. But there are real crimes with victims that deserve justice and dangerous people that need to be removed from society. Murders go unsolved, rape kits get thrown in closets and forgotten about. When my mom's car was found after being stolen, we asked the cops if they were done collecting evidence, like finger prints or would we need to wait to pick up the car, and from behind the safety of bullet proof glass they informed us that they were"not Columbo".
Let's get rid of prohibition of drugs and prostitution, and let people freely immigrate pending a background check for violence/theft/fraud, a health screening and vaccinations, give them a work permit and connect them to private charities and organizations for any social services they may need like temporary housing or means to travel to reunite with family.
Now this is a bit over simplified, there are other issues that need addressed at the same time. But I think these are some of the primary steps to ultimately reduce violent crimes and
violent enforcement.
Perhaps you should go back and re-read the article. It wasn't just this one kid that got caught up in bullshit profiling from stupid policies driven by moral panic.
ICE and law enforcement in general have plenty of actual crime and dangerous persons to keep them busy without being inundated with demands to check under the beds of racist and foolish white people for monsters because they stayed up too late watching Fox news.
All of our immigration policies come from racist, xenophobic, moral panic (as well as our drug laws). Given the misery, and violence,and infringement of rights, geez and the financial cost from these laws we should actually stop trying to control everyone. Throw out all those laws and focus on facilitating peaceful interactions where needed and protecting private property rights.
The Nexus is a combination of groups like AIPAC and ADL, which are pro-Israel, pro-zionist, are very friendly with ultraconservative Christian evangelicals because the restoration/creation of a true Jewish ethnostate in Israel is one of the necessary components of bringing about the rapture, and the return of Christ and end of the world. Or something along those lines. Arkansas, like other states that have or tried these laws is obviously a deeply conservative Christian state. I don't have any good citations, or religious texts to refer to, but I'm sure a quick Google search will back me up if your interested.
It amazes me that Bernie Sanders, a Jew, points out that these laws are unconstitutional, and yet a bunch of Christians call BDS anti-Semitic and vote in favor of unconstitutional laws anyways. There is nothing anti-Semitic about demanding that Israel be held to the beliefs and teachings of it's official religion and reason for existing.
This whole shitshow is not an example of capitalism or the libertarian ideology. This is cronyism. The Telecom and cable industries that have become broadband ISP have never been a free market system. Libertarians believe in the non-aggression principle and private property rights. Regulations that prevent fraud (theft by deception) or provide recourse for harm are within our beliefs. We oppose rules like licencing because they the only protection they offer is from competition. (Having a medical degree and credentials proving education are not the same as a state issued medical license) It's fair to say that libertarians hold foolish utopian ideals that utilities could all be thriving competitive businesses. Seriously, there's only so much physical space to run water, sewer, power, and cable lines, and no return value on redundancy. But it's wrong to blame capitalism for an industry that has never been a free market
Re: Re: Only allowing governments ownership of anything is immoral t
While you are correct that the citizens are clearly out gunned by the government, it doesn't mean that private gun ownership doesn't protect citizens from the government. Because ultimately, if the government should attempt gun confiscation, or god forbid some kind of martial law take over, every single citizen would have to be treated as potentially armed and accordingly subdued by whatever means enforcement deems necessary to accomplish their mission, where the enforcers safety would be primary of course. Door to door raids are going to get very bloody, very quickly; and private homes of enforcers, their families, friends and neighbors would be be subject to this same brutality. Do you really believe anyone would be willing to be an enforcer if no one is exempt from the disarming process, which will ultimately mean terrorizing fellow citizens? Is the US going to use our means of defense against our own citizens? Gun confiscation would require a level of violence that nobody is going to be willing to level at our own people.
Ranked choice is an alternate system that allows voters to select third party candidates without "spoiling". Maine is using this system for federal elections-not just the primaries- for the first time so it's worth watching how it works out.
I'm sick of the two party system too. The difficulty I see with enforcing real change is dismantling the powerful, deeply entrenched and usually very wealthy institutions that be, without causing a harm and unintended consequences.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! The reason that "education" is mandatory has nothing to do with learning of knowledge and skills necessary to self sufficiency and employment. Compulsory education is because of a xenophobic worry that Catholicism could gain dominence due to a wave of Catholic immigrants. Irish and Mediterranean people like Italians, were regarded as lesser people, almost as poorly as blacks and Native Americans. All of these disfavored people we're considering immoral, unable to assimilate, and therefore unwilling and unable to suitably educate their own children without the Protestant State stepping in. School is mandatory because it is an indoctrination process, and because it would benefit the established upper class with submissive and educated workers for their businesses.
Considering the ethnocentric reasons that made education compulsory and systematic, truency laws should be stricken. The only rule should be that no person can be denied or restricted from pursuing basic education.
There is no widespread lack of education of young people, and this perception that there is just what I call curmudgeon belief. Curmudgeon think the youth are more disrespectful, lazy, violent, or promiscuous than in their day. Truth is crime and violent crime is down significantly, teens wait longer, have fewer partners and are getting pregnant less, and many continue to pursue education as teen parents by comparison. Teens have never not been smart asses. And I guarantee none of these curmudgeon ever lived with the intensity of organized activities that today's teens do.
I just had my first baby, and her father and I have decided to unschool her precisely because we do not want her to suffer her rights being infringed, her creativity and individualism stifled, her love of learning squashed, and her social skills damaged.
Perhaps if compulsory rules were eliminated and families had a greater choice in education we would see the bullying 'epidemic' dissapate. No one has to go to school with a relentless bully, because just like an adult would not tolerate such treatment, a kid could quit and get a new school. Children unhappy at home could seek out education programs that bring them happiness and satisfaction instead of victims to exercise control over or take out their frustration on.
Did none of these goons have grandmothers, great-aunts, elderly neighbors, or ever enter a grocery store or Ho-jo's any weekday before 2pm? Many, if not most, elderly people are hearing impaired. My Mommom loved NASCAR and when I would pull up in front of her house on Sundays the mirrors of my car would visibly shake from her television inside. And rather than ask someone to repeat what they said a little louder for her, she would pretend she heard what you said and respond with her best guess of what she thought you said- which could be so off and random you couldn't help but laugh.
If this was my Mommom.... dammit this infuriates me so much, I think I would end up dead confronting them, that is unless they keel over from fright first. If I had the spare cash I would send pallets worth of adult diapers to the police station...
Re: Re: Re: You are free to start your own cell phone company.
That idiot isn't spouting libertarian beliefs about capitalism or Austrian Economics. While mainstream Libertarians don't understand Net Neutrality and default to regulation is always bad, libertarians are against cronyism and allowing the government to have the power to piss away our tax dollars and childrens' futures in the form of debt to benefit private enterprise.
No, that guy is out of touch curmudgeon, who is willfully ignorant of the facts. I'm surprised he didn't reference to anyone as a snowflake quite honestly. This guy came of age during a time that only demanded hard work to guarantee success. He doesn't understand why the kids today don't put their phones down and get up off their lazy asses and get a job and stop demanding handouts from hardworking men like him. He will never acknowledge how his generation is responsible for a number of the economic woes that our generation faces- after all he bought and paid for his house, it was only 10% of his income, whereas it runs around 1/3rd of todays income. Or that his generation absolutely demanded that we get a college or we would never have the credentials to be trusted to take over businesses as they retired, so now we all of 10s of thousands of dollars in student loan debt- and dammit why don't we just go learn a trade if we can't do anything with our fancy degree (which we can, it just doesn't pay enough to pay our loans and a very modest lifestyle outside of our parents basement....)
This guy doesn't even realize that these old school government enabled monopolies from many generations ago have rigged the system of purchasing the spectrum so to price out any meaningful competition. He's too busy railing against the edge providers whose monopoly powers rest solely on providing a product that the users like enough and use enough that it will attract advertisers, ya know, since they censor people like him.
Anyway, don't trash libertarians and lump us in with the crazies just because they say something resembling a belief in capitalism.
Excellent suggestion! And there's tons more custom ROMs and guides and advice on XDA Developers.
Because Cathy, I feel your pain. Until this July, I was using a "legacy" device from 2011, Motorola Droid RAZR. While the battery was not supposed to be user accessible, I did my research and successfully swapped out the battery, twice. I learned how to back-up, install a custom bootloader and flash a 5.x ROM and later 6.x ROM that developers had continued to work on for practice and enjoyment. Android is open source, just because official support has ended doesn't mean you are entirely at their mercy.
I couldn't afford a new phone, and my good ol' RAZR had plenty capable hardware to run the newer operating systems. Again, I did my research to make sure I understood the steps and that I found ROMS that were stable and met my needs. I literally could not afford to brick my device, so I was scared to take the plunge. It really wasn't that difficult, mostly just learning the lingo, and it extended the life of that phone quite a few years.
Most devices are more on the disposable side, especially since wireless carriers scaled back most of their subsidy programs that made people accustomed to getting a new device for free, or very cheap, every two years. People still want a new phone for cheap on a regular basis, so hardware quality lower.
Well I'm not sure how young you are, but the government attempted to break up Ma Bell, dividing it into 7 regional companies. But like drops of mercury, they slithered back together. The problem was that they assigned a company to a region of customers, which were effectively 7 monopolies. And in the 80's localities were given the power franchise monopolies to cable companies, which made mergers of small companies into companies of scale all but guaranteed.
Truth is, the government doesn't do a very good job central planning. They pick winners and losers, artificially alter market forces, which take away incentives and consequences for companies to serve consumers. The only incentive for businesses under the heavy hand of government have is to gain more government control. That said, I am in full favor of net neutrality as it is a mitigating force on the government's "winners". We'll never know if telecommunications would have evolved as quickly and widespread as it did without government intervention, or conversely even faster and more robust; but the situation is what it is today and that is the reality that as a champion of free markets I believe we must proceed from.
A living wage is an incredibly relative number. There's no way to come up with a fair and appropriate rate that fits every person, and quite frankly, I think it's a horrible idea to have to disclose all of the personal information to anyone else, government or private business, to come up with such a number. I also think laws used to calculate such a rate would end up giving power to an employer or government to say that no you can't have another child, no you can't move out to your own place away from your spouse or roommate because they cannot afford to pay you the adjusted living wage. (Don't think so, see China's one child rule!)
Did you know that the minimum wage was introduced as a way to prevent women, young people, people of color, the disabled, from getting jobs? The less desirable people would take jobs for less pay than the white able-bodied adult males (with the proverbial family to take care of), which allowed these people the opportunity to earn something instead of nothing, to get their foot in the door and demonstrate their value or learn a new skill, eventually earning higher wages and having some sense of control over their own lives and destiny. But patriarchs didn't want women working and gaining financial independence. Progressives (yes progressives, which Hitler was impressed by, look it up!) wanted to cleanse these less desirable, which was easiest to do if they didn't have financial independence.So a wage floor was enacted, so that businesses would hire the worker with the lowest risk of failing to meet the return of investment. If you don't think this applies today, because today's progressives have good intentions, consider: Would you pay an inexperienced 15 yr old $15/hour, and train them, only have them available to fill partial shifts because of labor laws, when you have a bunch of candidates without restrictions and some experience? How about if you could pay them $8 or 9$ an hour, does it seem worth training them over an experienced worker you can't afford to pay that much more, and thus is more likely to leave to moment a better opportunity comes up? Shouldn't you the employer be the one to decide? Shouldn't the 15 year old have the choice to take a job for $8 and gain some experience if they want? Now under which situation are people more readily able to decide for themselves what is in their best interest? Welfare was created to prevent financial independence and control certain people, particularly those the white patriarch felt lacked the morality and intelligence adequately care for themselves. (hmmmm, see my post above about how my baby was tested for drugs when she was born because I am on Medicaid, or how SNAP and TANF benefits have strict spending rules, or how someone has to certify the apartment you want to rent because you couldn't determine for yourself if it meets your needs in order to get housing voucher.)
I don't think we should abolish welfare- I'm on Medicaid- but we could knock down a lot of barriers to self-sufficiency (employment licensing, and rules against home based businesses) and that raise costs of living (like zoning laws that prevent enough housing to be built because a bunch of NIMBY don't want apartment buildings that don't match look of the rest of buildings, or might cast a shadow on an already shady playground, or tiny houses because they are too tiny, or trailers because they are trailers and a group is a trailer park) and unnecessary regulations on childcare that require expensive education which the cost is passed onto parents. We need medical/mental health providers which means shaking the AMA's hold that artificially limits how many doctors get educated trained and licensed (which should end wage stagnation that directly correlates with AMA limits put in place when MEdicaid and Medicare were enacted to keep doctor pay high, as employer health insurance costs have eaten up wages) end policing for profit/debtors prisons, and the war on drugs that rips young black males from their families and destabilizes their communities. If we could end all of these unnecessary, arbitrary, unfair, destructive controls, and allowed for more freedom for self determination and to make mistakes or decisions others disagree with we would probably see less dependence on government assistance. "Minimum and living wages are just more controls, one-size fits-all non-solutions that demonize success.
Welfare "bums"? Bums? Do you know who the majority of welfare recipients are, children. Then the elderly. Then the mothers/daughters who provide care for their children and parents.
And by what measure do you hold that these employed welfare bums are undeserving of a job? And what divine knowledge do you have that these welfare bums with jobs they don't deserve, are also overpaid?
Um, because yeah, I'm on welfare (Medicaid only), and have held a few crappy part-time retail jobs since I lost my last full-time job. I have worked for more years in my life than not, and I'm now a stay at home mom. Bum my ass.
Private pensions do little damage to your pocketbook, especially considering its paid from a private companies investments. Now public pensions, that's a whole other ball of wax. While that screwed up system needs reform to say the least, I don't believe it's ok not to live up to a contract.
Capitalism isn't the problem, it's the cronyism that manipulates the markets, picking winners and losers, distorting outcomes. And the unabashed drive to control what everyone else does through the might of the government. There oughta be a law, because won't someone think of the children!?! Uber is unfair to Taxis and the mismanaged run-down subways. You need a license to shampoo hair and arrange flowers! Got a permit for that lemonade stand? UBI won't work in the US because people on both the left and right won't give up their control over how the poor spend their money. You can't use SNAP to buy toilet paper, toothpaste, or deodorant, which I'm sure we all can agree are not frivolous items. Your newborn will be tested for illegal drugs at birth if you are on medicaid and there's nothing you can do about it, because poverty is some how synonymous with moral failing and a lack of intelligence. We are poor because we can't manage money, not because there simply isn't enough to manage. Funny, because I actually know how to write a proper budget and stick to it unlike the government.....
Anyway, watch the welfare bum accusations. You have no idea what we have contributed, will contribute, or lean politically or economically.
While I appreciate your goal in preventing potential harm, this sounds a little like thought policing.
People are always going to say hurtful, rude, ignorant, inappropriate things. Even if you can cocoon yourself from upsetting remarks online, unless you are a hermit, you are going to encounter them in the wild.
Why not take these unfortunate experiences and use them for some good? Build up your own tolerance for the intolerant, so that you can better control how you react and feel. So that you can still find the humanity in a bigot and respond with love and truth. Or so that you can resist feeding a troll that thrives on provoking a reaction.
I'm not saying words can't/don't hurt, they do. But words can also heal, and spontaneous kindness is running around in the wild too.
On the post: California AG Steps Up To Help Cops Pretend New Public Records Law Doesn't Apply To Past Misconduct Docs
Re: Back to the legislation session boys and girls
Yup, time to go back and write legislation that makes all records ever produced past present and future public, to be made available on a free to access database, record keeping of all incidents legally required, illegal to destroy or tamper with records. Most private citizen information would be redacted, accessible for attorneys for legitimate things like civil suits. Legislators should pass some crystal clear laws that say public employees are accountable to the public and they are not entitled to the same constitutional protections, let alone more than private citizens. These laws should cover all government employees, from cops and teachers (and if you think public school teachers should be exempt, there's a nasty story about a teacher bringing in a third party to whip a little boy in the bathroom in Chicago and the district has no idea how many teachers have hurt children and ultimately been disciplined, or if any teachers have a pattern of accusations) prison guards, prosecuting attorneys, judges, magistrates, sherriffs, principals, everyone. I can see a fair exemption of medical records, including incidents relating to a mental health condition so long as direct supervisors are accountable for continued employment. . And while I'd bet the unions would drop their opposition to the current laws if full transparency gained steam, legislators should push on and air all the whiney grievances against accountability. It's utterly ridiculous that government employees get special privileges and immunities and yet constantly whine and cry how they are under attack, and how they selflessly devote themselves to thankless public service. (And I hold teachers in high regard, but they aren't as poorly paid as they claim because no one considers the mega health insurance they have to contribute almost nothing to both now and after retirement along with the salary they collect in the form of a pension. They also continue to support the unions that are responsible for the working conditions good and bad).
Yeah, back to the drawing board and do it right this time.
On the post: Sheriffs' Union Boss Says Officers Have No Reason To Do Their Job If They Can't Score Forfeiture Cash On The Side
So if I want my loved ones murder solved, I need to come up with reward money as an incentive (or my dearly departed had wads of cash on them, although then they could get paid without rendering service...)? I mean, he's basically saying they have no incentive to put in the effort to solve crimes.
On the post: New Study Says The Removal Of Craigslist Erotic Services Pages May Be Linked To An Increase In Murdered Females
Re:
Well if you're attitude is "fuck 'em" then you needn't concern yourself with advocating for laws on other people's private business that has no effect on you. You don't possess some unique moral or social authority to tell adults how to live their lives the right way. Mind your business
On the post: New Study Says The Removal Of Craigslist Erotic Services Pages May Be Linked To An Increase In Murdered Females
Re:
Can anyone tell me where all these predators that want to do awful sex things to children are hiding in our society? I am not saying they don't exist, I'm just saying that the amount of legislation and media reporting make it seem like most normal looking men I encounter are secretly monsters. I mean, the vast majority of children victimized are hurt by trusted people they know, like coaches and doctors and priests. Anyone who thinks our president isn't exaggerating (like the Qanon folks) when he talks about thousands of women and children from South America being trafficked here for sex slavery should be far more concerned that the US has such a demand than about the coyotes trying bring the supply (and why would women and children come here for asylum if there are so many predators?) Again, I acknowledge that there are victims, I'm not dismissing them and I want justice for them. But all of this sex trafficking nonsense is just another avenue to control women and punish them for not conforming to social norms.
On the post: Another Pre-Super Bowl 'Sex Trafficking Sting' Busts A Bunch Of People Trying To Buy Sex From Cops Pretending To Be Teens
Re: A useful resource
Shoot, I should have read further down before responding! I'm a libertarian (I disagree with some things like the official position on net neutrality) and I am in favor of more individual liberty. FEE is a great libertarian website! Libertarians and liberals actually have many common goals and ideals, just different ways of accomplishing them.
On the post: Another Pre-Super Bowl 'Sex Trafficking Sting' Busts A Bunch Of People Trying To Buy Sex From Cops Pretending To Be Teens
Re:
You're passing a whole lot of judgement on buyers and sellers of sex by assuming they all fit the same dynamic of a poor desperate woman prostituting herself to a married man spending the rent money. Sure, that dynamic exists, but it's not the only one, and who are you to judge the actions of consenting adults? Have you ever considered that sex work is not just a last resort to keep the lights on, and is actually preferable to some than service shut off or eviction. Some people make a very good living doing sex work, and enjoy their job. Not all John's are married men running around on their doting wives. Some men are painfully shy and awkward and suffer from loneliness. Some men simply have no interest or time to establish a relationship. And married men have their reasons too, not all of them unsympathetic. All the deterrence of these ridiculous police crack downs does is drive prostitution further underground, creating a greater likelihood of victimization and shame adults who aren't hurting anyone. Just like drug prohibition. And immigration restrictions. We need to stop trying to control people and let everyone live their lives to the extent that it doesn't infringe on anyone else's rights. And while poverty is often a factor in street prostitution, especially when youth is involved, scaling back regulations that have no public safety value would decriminalize poverty, stop impedeing charity from helping the needy, and allow for people to take on more entrepreneurship to provide for themselves as well.
On the post: How My High School Destroyed An Immigrant Kid's Life Because He Drew The School's Mascot
Re: "Better things to do"
You're absolutely right, law enforcement of all kinds spends way too much time on low hanging fruit, victimless crimes, and worst of all, entrapment or framing schemes. But there are real crimes with victims that deserve justice and dangerous people that need to be removed from society. Murders go unsolved, rape kits get thrown in closets and forgotten about. When my mom's car was found after being stolen, we asked the cops if they were done collecting evidence, like finger prints or would we need to wait to pick up the car, and from behind the safety of bullet proof glass they informed us that they were"not Columbo". Let's get rid of prohibition of drugs and prostitution, and let people freely immigrate pending a background check for violence/theft/fraud, a health screening and vaccinations, give them a work permit and connect them to private charities and organizations for any social services they may need like temporary housing or means to travel to reunite with family. Now this is a bit over simplified, there are other issues that need addressed at the same time. But I think these are some of the primary steps to ultimately reduce violent crimes and violent enforcement.
On the post: How My High School Destroyed An Immigrant Kid's Life Because He Drew The School's Mascot
Re:
Perhaps you should go back and re-read the article. It wasn't just this one kid that got caught up in bullshit profiling from stupid policies driven by moral panic. ICE and law enforcement in general have plenty of actual crime and dangerous persons to keep them busy without being inundated with demands to check under the beds of racist and foolish white people for monsters because they stayed up too late watching Fox news. All of our immigration policies come from racist, xenophobic, moral panic (as well as our drug laws). Given the misery, and violence,and infringement of rights, geez and the financial cost from these laws we should actually stop trying to control everyone. Throw out all those laws and focus on facilitating peaceful interactions where needed and protecting private property rights.
On the post: Federal Judge Says Boycotts Aren't Protected Speech
Re:
The Nexus is a combination of groups like AIPAC and ADL, which are pro-Israel, pro-zionist, are very friendly with ultraconservative Christian evangelicals because the restoration/creation of a true Jewish ethnostate in Israel is one of the necessary components of bringing about the rapture, and the return of Christ and end of the world. Or something along those lines. Arkansas, like other states that have or tried these laws is obviously a deeply conservative Christian state. I don't have any good citations, or religious texts to refer to, but I'm sure a quick Google search will back me up if your interested. It amazes me that Bernie Sanders, a Jew, points out that these laws are unconstitutional, and yet a bunch of Christians call BDS anti-Semitic and vote in favor of unconstitutional laws anyways. There is nothing anti-Semitic about demanding that Israel be held to the beliefs and teachings of it's official religion and reason for existing.
On the post: Marsha Blackburn Continues To Be Rewarded For Screwing Up The Internet
Re: Consumers
Libertarians believe in the non-aggression principle and private property rights. Regulations that prevent fraud (theft by deception) or provide recourse for harm are within our beliefs. We oppose rules like licencing because they the only protection they offer is from competition. (Having a medical degree and credentials proving education are not the same as a state issued medical license)
It's fair to say that libertarians hold foolish utopian ideals that utilities could all be thriving competitive businesses. Seriously, there's only so much physical space to run water, sewer, power, and cable lines, and no return value on redundancy. But it's wrong to blame capitalism for an industry that has never been a free market
On the post: New York Lawmakers Want Social Media History To Be Included In Gun Background Checks
Re: Re: Only allowing governments ownership of anything is immoral t
On the post: Verizon Just Obliterated Ajit Pai's Justification For Killing Net Neutrality
Re: First Past The Post
I'm sick of the two party system too. The difficulty I see with enforcing real change is dismantling the powerful, deeply entrenched and usually very wealthy institutions that be, without causing a harm and unintended consequences.
On the post: Ninth Circuit Says No, You Fucking May Not Arrest A Bunch Of Middle School Students To 'Prove A Point'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: school Bully with Badge & Gun
Considering the ethnocentric reasons that made education compulsory and systematic, truency laws should be stricken. The only rule should be that no person can be denied or restricted from pursuing basic education.
There is no widespread lack of education of young people, and this perception that there is just what I call curmudgeon belief. Curmudgeon think the youth are more disrespectful, lazy, violent, or promiscuous than in their day. Truth is crime and violent crime is down significantly, teens wait longer, have fewer partners and are getting pregnant less, and many continue to pursue education as teen parents by comparison. Teens have never not been smart asses. And I guarantee none of these curmudgeon ever lived with the intensity of organized activities that today's teens do.
I just had my first baby, and her father and I have decided to unschool her precisely because we do not want her to suffer her rights being infringed, her creativity and individualism stifled, her love of learning squashed, and her social skills damaged.
Perhaps if compulsory rules were eliminated and families had a greater choice in education we would see the bullying 'epidemic' dissapate. No one has to go to school with a relentless bully, because just like an adult would not tolerate such treatment, a kid could quit and get a new school. Children unhappy at home could seek out education programs that bring them happiness and satisfaction instead of victims to exercise control over or take out their frustration on.
On the post: Police Officers At A Tactical Disadvantage Bravely Tase 87-Year-Old Woman Into Submission
If it were my grandmother...
If this was my Mommom.... dammit this infuriates me so much, I think I would end up dead confronting them, that is unless they keel over from fright first. If I had the spare cash I would send pallets worth of adult diapers to the police station...
On the post: After Nabbing Billions In Tax Breaks, AT&T's Promised Job Growth Magically Evaporates
Re: Re: Re: You are free to start your own cell phone company.
No, that guy is out of touch curmudgeon, who is willfully ignorant of the facts. I'm surprised he didn't reference to anyone as a snowflake quite honestly. This guy came of age during a time that only demanded hard work to guarantee success. He doesn't understand why the kids today don't put their phones down and get up off their lazy asses and get a job and stop demanding handouts from hardworking men like him. He will never acknowledge how his generation is responsible for a number of the economic woes that our generation faces- after all he bought and paid for his house, it was only 10% of his income, whereas it runs around 1/3rd of todays income. Or that his generation absolutely demanded that we get a college or we would never have the credentials to be trusted to take over businesses as they retired, so now we all of 10s of thousands of dollars in student loan debt- and dammit why don't we just go learn a trade if we can't do anything with our fancy degree (which we can, it just doesn't pay enough to pay our loans and a very modest lifestyle outside of our parents basement....)
This guy doesn't even realize that these old school government enabled monopolies from many generations ago have rigged the system of purchasing the spectrum so to price out any meaningful competition. He's too busy railing against the edge providers whose monopoly powers rest solely on providing a product that the users like enough and use enough that it will attract advertisers, ya know, since they censor people like him.
Anyway, don't trash libertarians and lump us in with the crazies just because they say something resembling a belief in capitalism.
On the post: United Airlines Made Its App Stop Working On My Phone, And What This Says About How Broken The Mobile Tech Space Is
Re: Re: Re:
Because Cathy, I feel your pain. Until this July, I was using a "legacy" device from 2011, Motorola Droid RAZR. While the battery was not supposed to be user accessible, I did my research and successfully swapped out the battery, twice. I learned how to back-up, install a custom bootloader and flash a 5.x ROM and later 6.x ROM that developers had continued to work on for practice and enjoyment. Android is open source, just because official support has ended doesn't mean you are entirely at their mercy.
I couldn't afford a new phone, and my good ol' RAZR had plenty capable hardware to run the newer operating systems. Again, I did my research to make sure I understood the steps and that I found ROMS that were stable and met my needs. I literally could not afford to brick my device, so I was scared to take the plunge. It really wasn't that difficult, mostly just learning the lingo, and it extended the life of that phone quite a few years.
Most devices are more on the disposable side, especially since wireless carriers scaled back most of their subsidy programs that made people accustomed to getting a new device for free, or very cheap, every two years. People still want a new phone for cheap on a regular basis, so hardware quality lower.
On the post: Court Rules It's Fine If FCC Wants To Deem Just One Available ISP As 'Competition'
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Truth is, the government doesn't do a very good job central planning. They pick winners and losers, artificially alter market forces, which take away incentives and consequences for companies to serve consumers. The only incentive for businesses under the heavy hand of government have is to gain more government control. That said, I am in full favor of net neutrality as it is a mitigating force on the government's "winners". We'll never know if telecommunications would have evolved as quickly and widespread as it did without government intervention, or conversely even faster and more robust; but the situation is what it is today and that is the reality that as a champion of free markets I believe we must proceed from.
On the post: Internet Content Moderation Isn't Politically Biased, It's Just Impossible To Do Well At Scale
Re: Re: Re: It will all work out
Did you know that the minimum wage was introduced as a way to prevent women, young people, people of color, the disabled, from getting jobs? The less desirable people would take jobs for less pay than the white able-bodied adult males (with the proverbial family to take care of), which allowed these people the opportunity to earn something instead of nothing, to get their foot in the door and demonstrate their value or learn a new skill, eventually earning higher wages and having some sense of control over their own lives and destiny. But patriarchs didn't want women working and gaining financial independence. Progressives (yes progressives, which Hitler was impressed by, look it up!) wanted to cleanse these less desirable, which was easiest to do if they didn't have financial independence.So a wage floor was enacted, so that businesses would hire the worker with the lowest risk of failing to meet the return of investment. If you don't think this applies today, because today's progressives have good intentions, consider: Would you pay an inexperienced 15 yr old $15/hour, and train them, only have them available to fill partial shifts because of labor laws, when you have a bunch of candidates without restrictions and some experience? How about if you could pay them $8 or 9$ an hour, does it seem worth training them over an experienced worker you can't afford to pay that much more, and thus is more likely to leave to moment a better opportunity comes up? Shouldn't you the employer be the one to decide? Shouldn't the 15 year old have the choice to take a job for $8 and gain some experience if they want? Now under which situation are people more readily able to decide for themselves what is in their best interest?
Welfare was created to prevent financial independence and control certain people, particularly those the white patriarch felt lacked the morality and intelligence adequately care for themselves. (hmmmm, see my post above about how my baby was tested for drugs when she was born because I am on Medicaid, or how SNAP and TANF benefits have strict spending rules, or how someone has to certify the apartment you want to rent because you couldn't determine for yourself if it meets your needs in order to get housing voucher.)
I don't think we should abolish welfare- I'm on Medicaid- but we could knock down a lot of barriers to self-sufficiency (employment licensing, and rules against home based businesses) and that raise costs of living (like zoning laws that prevent enough housing to be built because a bunch of NIMBY don't want apartment buildings that don't match look of the rest of buildings, or might cast a shadow on an already shady playground, or tiny houses because they are too tiny, or trailers because they are trailers and a group is a trailer park) and unnecessary regulations on childcare that require expensive education which the cost is passed onto parents. We need medical/mental health providers which means shaking the AMA's hold that artificially limits how many doctors get educated trained and licensed (which should end wage stagnation that directly correlates with AMA limits put in place when MEdicaid and Medicare were enacted to keep doctor pay high, as employer health insurance costs have eaten up wages) end policing for profit/debtors prisons, and the war on drugs that rips young black males from their families and destabilizes their communities. If we could end all of these unnecessary, arbitrary, unfair, destructive controls, and allowed for more freedom for self determination and to make mistakes or decisions others disagree with we would probably see less dependence on government assistance. "Minimum and living wages are just more controls, one-size fits-all non-solutions that demonize success.
On the post: Internet Content Moderation Isn't Politically Biased, It's Just Impossible To Do Well At Scale
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It will all work out
And by what measure do you hold that these employed welfare bums are undeserving of a job? And what divine knowledge do you have that these welfare bums with jobs they don't deserve, are also overpaid?
Um, because yeah, I'm on welfare (Medicaid only), and have held a few crappy part-time retail jobs since I lost my last full-time job. I have worked for more years in my life than not, and I'm now a stay at home mom. Bum my ass.
Private pensions do little damage to your pocketbook, especially considering its paid from a private companies investments. Now public pensions, that's a whole other ball of wax. While that screwed up system needs reform to say the least, I don't believe it's ok not to live up to a contract.
Capitalism isn't the problem, it's the cronyism that manipulates the markets, picking winners and losers, distorting outcomes. And the unabashed drive to control what everyone else does through the might of the government. There oughta be a law, because won't someone think of the children!?! Uber is unfair to Taxis and the mismanaged run-down subways. You need a license to shampoo hair and arrange flowers! Got a permit for that lemonade stand?
UBI won't work in the US because people on both the left and right won't give up their control over how the poor spend their money. You can't use SNAP to buy toilet paper, toothpaste, or deodorant, which I'm sure we all can agree are not frivolous items. Your newborn will be tested for illegal drugs at birth if you are on medicaid and there's nothing you can do about it, because poverty is some how synonymous with moral failing and a lack of intelligence. We are poor because we can't manage money, not because there simply isn't enough to manage. Funny, because I actually know how to write a proper budget and stick to it unlike the government.....
Anyway, watch the welfare bum accusations. You have no idea what we have contributed, will contribute, or lean politically or economically.
On the post: Internet Content Moderation Isn't Politically Biased, It's Just Impossible To Do Well At Scale
Re: Ass backwards
People are always going to say hurtful, rude, ignorant, inappropriate things. Even if you can cocoon yourself from upsetting remarks online, unless you are a hermit, you are going to encounter them in the wild.
Why not take these unfortunate experiences and use them for some good? Build up your own tolerance for the intolerant, so that you can better control how you react and feel. So that you can still find the humanity in a bigot and respond with love and truth. Or so that you can resist feeding a troll that thrives on provoking a reaction.
I'm not saying words can't/don't hurt, they do. But words can also heal, and spontaneous kindness is running around in the wild too.
Next >>