In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to death

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
cemper93
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:35 pm UTC
Location: `pwd`

In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to death

Postby cemper93 » Mon May 27, 2013 12:17 pm UTC

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/05/24/vitter-p ... nt-crimes/

So, because the death penalty gets abolished in more and more states, some Republican senator had the nifty idea of not handing out food stamps to people who have once been convicted of a violent crime anymore. Of course, I agree that this an ingenious idea. I mean, look. That'll teach 'em. I am also absolutely sure that this will decrease the US crime and incarceration rates even further, because what could possibly go wrong if you take people with high chance of engaging in criminal or violent behavior and basically tell them that if they don't start to steal and murder again, they are going to starve? Nothing at all.
And that's not all! It will even decrease burden on the tax payers. Which of course is super significant, especially if you factor in that you won't have to pay for people in prison at all. Because they're in prison. Out of sight, out of mind!

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9995
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby addams » Mon May 27, 2013 3:54 pm UTC

“It doesn’t save anyone any money,” he told MSNBC. “It just makes sort of a political statement that we don’t forgive people for crimes once they pay their dues. We’re just going to punish them forever.” He argued that making it more difficult for convicted felons to meet their basic nutritional needs would encourage recidivism.
***************************************************************************************************************************************************

We don't forgive people?
We are Bastards.

I know forgiveness is difficult.
It is, still, Right.

To be convicted of a crime and to have ones Freedoms restricted was called Paying a Debt.
After the debt was paid, the person was Free of debt.

What happened?
The US had some high ideals.

The people of the US fell short of their own ideals, sometimes.
When a Law like this is allowed to be considered we are more than falling short of our ideals.

Fuck! Many innocent people are tried and convicted!
And! Many people want to live full, whole, happy lives and don't know how.

So; The movements to reach into jails and prisons and Help are Dead?
What is alive is Sour Souled Bastards reaching in to cause suffering?

Good morning and thank you. I, for one, am not proud. Shameful.
It is shameful. The People of the US are poor; Both of pocketbook and in mind and soul.

That slick Bastard! Is it Law, yet? It seems it is law in some states and not in others.

Spoiler:
Let me see if I get this straight.
I spoke to a Politician and his cohort of mean old men.
They were giggling and proud of:
1. Tortue.
2. The Jail in their town is so far below standard, the dog shelter would be shut down by The State for the same conditions.
3. They know how to maintain Status Quo. (giggle, giggle)
4. Keep that One hundred and sixty thousand dollar paycheck coming into the sheriff's personal account.
Cuts are made where we can afford them. (Did you know Desk Jockey paid that well?)

Now at a National Level the standards are being lowered and there is No Forgiveness.
Bastards! I know I could not reach That Bastard with words. He has no compassion and very little understanding.

One such person is not a surprise. A nation of such Mean People is mildly surprising.

It is good for the individual to receive help to build a new life after any interaction with any court system.
It is good for the nation to give help.

To give help employs people from The Helping Professions.
To give help produces productive and grateful citizens.
To give help allows The People to feel pride in their nation.
To help the Helpless is satisfying. And; Produces grateful and proud people.

I watched a woman behind a counter embarrass and humiliate people for asking for help.
I would rather Knock that Bitch in the Head than ask her for Help. She is our New Standard?

She will Love! this new law.
Even if the state she lives in does not allow this new law, she will enjoy reaching for this new standard.

The pride I felt as an American was tempered with an understanding that we fell short, often.
But; We could be proud that we were Reaching for The Stars with one hand and for our fellow man with the other.

I am Not Proud! My pride in our open vistas and majestic natural beauty is tarnished. Fuck Us!
Maybe the people that Hate us are right.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9995
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby addams » Mon May 27, 2013 4:03 pm UTC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Vitter
http://www.vitter.senate.gov

Here are The Links for This very important person.
Do you have anything to say to him?

I know I could not reach him.
It would take days and days.

Of course, He would not be able to eat while with me, until he memorized some of The constitution.
Then for the next meal he would have to do the Gettysburg Address from memory.
That bastard May eat well with me. Or; not.

In the past I could not eat if others were not eating.
For this guy I could make an exception.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
cemper93
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:35 pm UTC
Location: `pwd`

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby cemper93 » Mon May 27, 2013 4:15 pm UTC

In the past I could not eat if others were not eating.
For this guy I could make an exception.

Well, he sure seems to be able to.

engr
Posts: 322
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:08 am UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby engr » Mon May 27, 2013 4:19 pm UTC

cemper93 wrote:basically tell them that if they don't start to steal and murder again, they are going to starve


I mean, it's not like they can work for a living of something. They either have to rob someone themselves, or have the government do it for them.
It's shit like this that almost makes me sympathize with libertarians. What's the difference - to have some guy take your money under a threat of violence, or to have a government do the same thing and hand the money to him? We may as well eliminate the middle man and officially allow ex-cons to rob people. At least that would be more efficient.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. Gilbert K. Chesterton

User avatar
scarecrovv
It's pronounced 'double u'
Posts: 674
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:09 pm UTC
Location: California

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby scarecrovv » Mon May 27, 2013 4:46 pm UTC

engr wrote:
cemper93 wrote:basically tell them that if they don't start to steal and murder again, they are going to starve


I mean, it's not like they can work for a living of something. They either have to rob someone themselves, or have the government do it for them.
It's shit like this that almost makes me sympathize with libertarians. What's the difference - to have some guy take your money under a threat of violence, or to have a government do the same thing and hand the money to him? We may as well eliminate the middle man and officially allow ex-cons to rob people. At least that would be more efficient.

Is that sarcasm? I can't tell. On the off chance that it's not though, even if you consider taxes to be theft*, when the government levies taxes, they are (theoretically) equitably distributed across everybody. When a criminal steals something, it's all on one person, and people who don't have much to start with are far more likely to be victimized than people who can afford a comfortable house with good locks in a nice neighborhood. Also tax collection is far less likely to involve gunfire and hospital visits.

* I love paying taxes. With them I buy civilization.

User avatar
cemper93
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:35 pm UTC
Location: `pwd`

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby cemper93 » Mon May 27, 2013 5:11 pm UTC

engr wrote:I mean, it's not like they can work for a living of something. They either have to rob someone themselves, or have the government do it for them.
It's shit like this that almost makes me sympathize with libertarians. What's the difference - to have some guy take your money under a threat of violence, or to have a government do the same thing and hand the money to him? We may as well eliminate the middle man and officially allow ex-cons to rob people. At least that would be more efficient.

It's shit like yours that almost make me sympathize with Stalinists.

Do you seriously believe that everybody in your country has a job open to them, at all times, just like that? And the difference between some guy threatening you and taking your stuff and the government doing the same thing is that the latter has been elected. You know, with democracy and such.

I find it absolutely frightening how thoroughly anti-democratic and anti-libertarian the ideology of the self-proclaimed American Libertarians is. These people truly believe that ownership is some kind of absolute, natural right and a total moral justification in and on itself. They're also completely incoherent. If there is some person on a patch of land they do based on a set of arbitrary societal and pseudo-philosophical "insights" consider theirs and they want to have that person removed, they cry for the state so that that person can be aptly crushed between the cogs of the judicial system. However, when it comes to taxes, it's suddenly the state that is the aggressor.

Kids, no matter what you have been told, "private property" is not a magic moral force. It is something that comes from a very specific set of societal circumstances, and unless you plan on defending your stuff with your gun against hordes of starving convicts, you better play by society's rules as well.

(Not that I wouldn't actually prefer it if we had hordes of starving convicts destroying Capitalism. But that's an entirely different matter.)

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9995
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby addams » Mon May 27, 2013 5:52 pm UTC

scarecrovv wrote:
engr wrote:
cemper93 wrote:basically tell them that if they don't start to steal and murder again, they are going to starve


I mean, it's not like they can work for a living of something. They either have to rob someone themselves, or have the government do it for them.
It's shit like this that almost makes me sympathize with libertarians. What's the difference - to have some guy take your money under a threat of violence, or to have a government do the same thing and hand the money to him? We may as well eliminate the middle man and officially allow ex-cons to rob people. At least that would be more efficient.

Is that sarcasm? I can't tell. On the off chance that it's not though, even if you consider taxes to be theft*, when the government levies taxes, they are (theoretically) equitably distributed across everybody. When a criminal steals something, it's all on one person, and people who don't have much to start with are far more likely to be victimized than people who can afford a comfortable house with good locks in a nice neighborhood. Also tax collection is far less likely to involve gunfire and hospital visits.

* I love paying taxes. With them I buy civilization.


Bless you, Child.
May you have the blessings of Civilization.

To rest easy in the Benevolence of your People.
To feel the Pleasure of Giving Back.
To view your land and your people with Pride.

For the rest of US there is....ech.
Taxes? Really? That goes in a different Thread.

Some people understand that stuff.
I know that it is from the government that money comes.
Without a government there is no standardized money.

There is some fun for The Libertarian intellectual elite.
Think about how you are going to talk that Asshole with the Tow Truck into taking Your Money.

What government backs Your Money?
Taxes? What ya' going to pay the Tax with?
Your high ideals and good looks?

Back Breaking Labor under Soul Crushing Conditions?
It's Your Duty as a citizen. Have you done your Duty?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Vahir » Mon May 27, 2013 9:19 pm UTC

addams wrote:
scarecrovv wrote:
engr wrote:
cemper93 wrote:basically tell them that if they don't start to steal and murder again, they are going to starve


I mean, it's not like they can work for a living of something. They either have to rob someone themselves, or have the government do it for them.
It's shit like this that almost makes me sympathize with libertarians. What's the difference - to have some guy take your money under a threat of violence, or to have a government do the same thing and hand the money to him? We may as well eliminate the middle man and officially allow ex-cons to rob people. At least that would be more efficient.

Is that sarcasm? I can't tell. On the off chance that it's not though, even if you consider taxes to be theft*, when the government levies taxes, they are (theoretically) equitably distributed across everybody. When a criminal steals something, it's all on one person, and people who don't have much to start with are far more likely to be victimized than people who can afford a comfortable house with good locks in a nice neighborhood. Also tax collection is far less likely to involve gunfire and hospital visits.

* I love paying taxes. With them I buy civilization.


Bless you, Child.
May you have the blessings of Civilization.

To rest easy in the Benevolence of your People.
To feel the Pleasure of Giving Back.
To view your land and your people with Pride.

For the rest of US there is....ech.
Taxes? Really? That goes in a different Thread.

Some people understand that stuff.
I know that it is from the government that money comes.
Without a government there is no standardized money.

There is some fun for The Libertarian intellectual elite.
Think about how you are going to talk that Asshole with the Tow Truck into taking Your Money.

What government backs Your Money?
Taxes? What ya' going to pay the Tax with?
Your high ideals and good looks?

Back Breaking Labor under Soul Crushing Conditions?
It's Your Duty as a citizen. Have you done your Duty?


Spoiler:
What's with all the people posting like this? I can't read your opinion if you format it like that.


There are more chances of the moon crashing down on earth than of this happening, but it still demonstrates a dangerous opinion among the american public that needs to be redressed.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10211
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby CorruptUser » Mon May 27, 2013 9:20 pm UTC

Spoiler:
Addams' posts are all in that poetic form.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby morriswalters » Mon May 27, 2013 9:31 pm UTC

You have to love representative democracy or whatever you call this mess. This is representative government. That anyone likes or dislikes it is moot.

Vahir wrote:There are more chances of the moon crashing down on earth than of this happening, but it still demonstrates a dangerous opinion among the american public that needs to be redressed.
You didn't think your neighbors all thought like you did you? You should have known better. And they think your opinions are dangerous too.

addams wrote:Bless you, Child.
May you have the blessings of Civilization.
I like them. Particularly flush toilets and pure water with fluoride. Lights are nice as is the ability to pretty much wander at will at very low risk of abuse by my so called neighbors.

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Vahir » Mon May 27, 2013 10:03 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:You have to love representative democracy or whatever you call this mess. This is representative government. That anyone likes or dislikes it is moot.

Vahir wrote:There are more chances of the moon crashing down on earth than of this happening, but it still demonstrates a dangerous opinion among the american public that needs to be redressed.
You didn't think your neighbors all thought like you did you? You should have known better. And they think your opinions are dangerous too.

addams wrote:Bless you, Child.
May you have the blessings of Civilization.
I like them. Particularly flush toilets and pure water with fluoride. Lights are nice as is the ability to pretty much wander at will at very low risk of abuse by my so called neighbors.


If my neighbours wore nazi uniforms and chanted "Death to blacks" and "Torture to death all arabs", wouldn't I be entitled to say that something needs to be done?

User avatar
Magnanimous
Madmanananimous
Posts: 3487
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:11 pm UTC
Location: Land of Hipsters and Rain (LOHAR)

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Magnanimous » Mon May 27, 2013 10:13 pm UTC

Vahir wrote:If my neighbours wore nazi uniforms and chanted "Death to blacks" and "Torture to death all arabs", wouldn't I be entitled to say that something needs to be done?

Yes.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby morriswalters » Tue May 28, 2013 12:25 am UTC

Absolutely. But in a representative type of government, if it isn't illegal it can be expressed, and represented. There is and has been about every type of oddball or dangerous type of thought you might like to mention represented in the US, from my perspective. It's what you do with it that counts. It isn't illegal to hate Jews, Blacks, Arabs or fat people for that matter. But it is illegal to do anything about it. And you are welcome to write it into statute if you so desire. And people have so desired. That is the danger of a representative government. The law protects those it is designed to protect, but that is subject to change depending on the whim of the electorate or the people in the electorate who we choose to lead us.

Edit
Case in point.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9995
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby addams » Tue May 28, 2013 3:20 am UTC

Magnanimous wrote:
Vahir wrote:If my neighbours wore nazi uniforms and chanted "Death to blacks" and "Torture to death all arabs", wouldn't I be entitled to say that something needs to be done?

Yes.

Spoiler:
Jeeze. I had a little Rally outside my home. The theme was, "Go Back to California!"

I thought it was funny, at the time.
It got to be less and less funny.

I was standing only a few miles from where I was born.
My Grand mother and Great Grand Mother were buried near by.

The people that had organized the little Rally were from California.
It is funny. They were politically savvy people. They learned that in California?

Yes. You can say something needs to be done.
Tell the Trees. Tell the Stars.

Who are you going to tell?
The Police? umm. They work for the Politically Savvy.
Your Congressman or Congresswoman?
Those people can not afford to make waves.

You can say something needs to be done all day long.
You can type it into the backwaters of the Internet.

Lucky us. We can type, "Something needs to be done."
Onto our computer screens. I know it does not Do anything.

How can something be Done to help and protect others?
The poverty I am seeing inside the US is heart breaking.

Spoiler:
I lost my home, my business, my property, my art, my furniture, my child, my friend, my stupid dogs, my friend Catherine (i have sense discovered the cat was not as innocent as I had thought. the dogs were covering for him.) All because of Politics?
See?

I said, "Something needs to be done."
I was told, "Yes. You need to Leave."

I loved that Old House.
I bought my Home.
I thought if I bought my home and owned my own business I would be safe.

We don't like Your Kind. "What kind is that?" I asked. Hippie was the only answer I was ever given.
What is a Hippie? White Trash? That is not nice! What about me made that Trashy Woman think I was even more Trashy than she was? pfft. Somethings I will never know.

This is not about me. It is about a Nation that is ok with starving other Human Beings.
That is SO Wrong! What can be done to stand up and say, "No."

There are innocent men and women inside our Jails.
These people often lose everything. Then they are thrown out onto The Streets and are not allowed to have the most basic needs met by their People?

So, Wrong!!

Edit:
ok. This thing is not Law, yet.
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/displa ... -farm-bill

They will start talking about it June 3rd 2013.
Who is on The Committee?

Feel free to contact The Good Senator from The DEEP South.
He has some mean things on his web site.

He is typing about my nation.
He says we are Bloated. A great many things like that.
Spoiler:
We Know what that is. Those are Buzz words.
The People do not know what that is.

Tell them? Nah. They would never believe it.
Conspiracy Theory? No!
It is profoundly accurate Hypnosis.

Marketing Majors Know!
Say the same words over and over.
Tie those words to emotions.

Fear and Anger do not sell toothpaste.
Fear and Anger do close the Purse Strings.
See?

People want to think they thought of it all by themselves.
It is embarrassing to The People.
No Normal person is effected by 21st century advertisements.

Only me. I am the only person that gets hungry at food commercials.
Only me. I am the only person that is riveted by scenes on the screen.
Only me. Do not tell The People. They will turn on you and it will not be pretty.

Here: You can hide under my bed for a while.
Scoot over. I want to hide, too.


This one bothers me. Why?

I went to a Tea Party meeting.
I would do it, again. (The lemon cake was good.)

At the Tea Party meeting one of the Speakers was a paid professional motivational speaker.
He got the crowd all excited and chanting.

The chant was: "If it Feeds we can Starve it; If it Bleeds we can Kill it."
I know, as chants go it is not all that great. Still; Those people are mean.
And; they mean it. This is a powerful Movement to do Something.
I have no idea what. The if it feeds, part bothers me.

That is against the Law. To purposefully starve any creature man or beast is against The Law in civilized nations.
It is against international law. Is it against international law? Are there still international laws? Were there?

Information about The Farm Bill.
http://www.ag.senate.gov/issues/farm-bill

This link may have the information about who is On The Committee.
Who has access to the Minds of Men?

Does anyone Remember the good and proper use and the arguments in favor of the US having a Farm Bill at all?
Let the Farmer figure it out? Nah. Maybe.

What happens if there is No! farm bill? Well?
What the Heck is this Senate Farm Bill?

Spoiler:
ok. I'll read it. Later.

Feel free to find the darned thing for me.
Last edited by addams on Tue May 28, 2013 5:52 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6525
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby sardia » Tue May 28, 2013 5:13 am UTC

Magnanimous wrote:
Vahir wrote:If my neighbours wore nazi uniforms and chanted "Death to blacks" and "Torture to death all arabs", wouldn't I be entitled to say that something needs to be done?

Yes.

Short answer yes with a but, long answer is no with an if.

You can't DO anything to them, you can SAY anything, because everyone is protected by freedom of speech. The tricky part is when you cross from speaking your mind to inciting violence.

As for the topic on hand, republicans are always looking for ways to cut into welfare of any kind by putting on poll taxes to make sure the poor are worthy enough to be given aid. That's the official line anyway. Unofficially, it's a game to poll tax people until they are denied benefits, thus reducing welfare spending. It's pretty biased though. When was the last time you heard a white corporate executive forced to pee in a cup before we give him his bailout money?

HungryHobo
Posts: 1708
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:01 am UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby HungryHobo » Tue May 28, 2013 8:49 am UTC

engr wrote:I mean, it's not like they can work for a living of something.

well actually kinda yes. because of handy searchable government databases once you've been convicted of something serious you essentially become unemployable. Human beings are remarkably bad at just lying down peacefully in the gutter and dying when they can't access things like food so anyone with half a brain can see that leaving people with the choice between starvation and making money from crime is a terrible idea.
Give a man a fish, he owes you one fish. Teach a man to fish, you give up your monopoly on fisheries.

User avatar
Xenomortis
Not actually a special flower.
Posts: 1422
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:47 am UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Xenomortis » Tue May 28, 2013 9:17 am UTC

I'm impressed.
As though crime wasn't attractive enough for some of these people...
The article has a quote that more or less sums it up.

It just makes sort of a political statement that we don’t forgive people for crimes once they pay their dues. We’re just going to punish them forever.

Which utterly undermines the point of non-life sentences.
Oh wait, that already happens!

engr wrote:I mean, it's not like they can work for a living of something.

Would you employ a convicted felon, given the choice? Remember, you're legally allowed to discriminate on that alone.
Don't read this as me adopting some moral high ground argument; I would have reservations too.

What about housing; would you rent out to one?
Or money; would you, as a Bank, lend money to one?
Image

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10211
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby CorruptUser » Tue May 28, 2013 12:04 pm UTC

Depends on the job. Fast food in a shitty neighborhood, sure hire the parolee. You can treat them like shit and if they give you anything other than a 'why yessa massa!' you can send them straight back to prison.

[/snark]

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1816
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby eran_rathan » Tue May 28, 2013 5:43 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
Magnanimous wrote:
Vahir wrote:If my neighbours wore nazi uniforms and chanted "Death to blacks" and "Torture to death all arabs", wouldn't I be entitled to say that something needs to be done?

Yes.

Short answer yes with a but, long answer is no with an if.

You can't DO anything to them, you can SAY anything, because everyone is protected by freedom of speech. The tricky part is when you cross from speaking your mind to inciting violence.


Except slander (or libel, if written down), verbal abuse, verbal assault, or hate speech (or very rarely, 'fighting words').
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9995
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby addams » Tue May 28, 2013 6:09 pm UTC

On a more serious note:

This bill will be The Law of The Land for FIVE YEARS!

It has not passed, yet.
What do you think Americans should do?

If is feeds we can Starve it? That is True.
Starve The Beast! This Beast is Top Heavy!

This is upsetting. Is there one thing I can do?
I can read The Bill. You can read The Bill.

http://www.ag.senate.gov/issues/farm-bill

Can you find it? What do you think about what you read?
Harvard Law school. The man that is the Public face of Cruelty went to Harvard.

Now he lives a Happy and Full life in The Deep South. Such a strange and beautiful land.
What does he know about Farms? What does a person need to know about farms?

What do The Farmers think? Why would anyone grow up and become a farmer?
A full time position as a smarty pants with more money than God is what the Congressman from The Deep South wanted?
That's is what he got. Lucky him.

There is nothing wrong with a Full and Happy life.
To prevent others from having a Full and Happy life is Wrong.

After having Years of Life taken away by The State, ......
How could anyone be so...... unfeeling?

Animals are treated better by Law and by The State. Right?
Law is Hard. It keeps changing. Make them Stop It!

Who are 'They'?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue May 28, 2013 6:41 pm UTC

scarecrovv wrote:
engr wrote:
cemper93 wrote:basically tell them that if they don't start to steal and murder again, they are going to starve


I mean, it's not like they can work for a living of something. They either have to rob someone themselves, or have the government do it for them.
It's shit like this that almost makes me sympathize with libertarians. What's the difference - to have some guy take your money under a threat of violence, or to have a government do the same thing and hand the money to him? We may as well eliminate the middle man and officially allow ex-cons to rob people. At least that would be more efficient.

Is that sarcasm? I can't tell. On the off chance that it's not though, even if you consider taxes to be theft*, when the government levies taxes, they are (theoretically) equitably distributed across everybody. When a criminal steals something, it's all on one person, and people who don't have much to start with are far more likely to be victimized than people who can afford a comfortable house with good locks in a nice neighborhood. Also tax collection is far less likely to involve gunfire and hospital visits.

* I love paying taxes. With them I buy civilization.


The equitable distribution of taxes aspect quickly fails in reality. Taxes are nothing like equitable by any objective measure. One could easily describe our current tax system in a similar manner as one describes criminal activity. One can calculate tax liabilities, just as one can calculate probable impact of theft based on your life circumstances. Neither one is particularly equal.

In any case, describing the only two options as "collect welfare" and "commit crime" is problematic. If your view is that these are literally the only choices available, well, then you already have a severe problem, regardless of if welfare is there or not.

User avatar
cemper93
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:35 pm UTC
Location: `pwd`

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby cemper93 » Tue May 28, 2013 6:53 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:In any case, describing the only two options as "collect welfare" and "commit crime" is problematic. If your view is that these are literally the only choices available, well, then you already have a severe problem, regardless of if welfare is there or not.

Yes. I don't know whether it has been announced in your porcelain tower yet, but there are people on this planet who do have severe problems. Heavy stuff, huh?

Tyndmyr wrote:One could easily describe our current tax system in a similar manner as one describes criminal activity.

Name me something which I am not able to hurl low-quality metaphors with no basis in reality at until it fits my world view better.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9995
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby addams » Tue May 28, 2013 7:23 pm UTC

Words can do more than Break a Heart.

When those words become Law.
Then I would be Proud to Break that Law.

I don't have The Power to Break a Law that says
Government Distributed Resources can and can not be used for (X) ___________. Fill in The Blank.

I have no control over what IS LAW!
I have no control over how Law is enforced.

I feel helpless. Helpless is not a good feeling.
How much more helpless is a person that has been held by The State;
Then thrown onto the Street with not so much as a "Do you have a place to sleep, tonight?"

That is what I was told. Is it true? In my case, 'Yes.'
I had not been held long. It was a long walk to my house.

They could have dropped me off at home. But; No.
In my case it was an open door and a slap on The Ass.

I have heard stories. I am glad That did not happen to me.
I am sorry this has happened to me. Internal or External Lotus of Control?

I talk to The Internet. Everyone! Talks to the Internet!

This is a bunch of people that like to play the Game of What If?
What if? I could do something about The Senate Bill?

Well? Later. It is going to be hard to find and it is going to be boring.
I need to know when the first Farm Bill was Passed.

What were the argument in Favor and what were the arguments Against.

What was the exact wording? The preamble part. The Mission Statement.

___-----**Crap. Children; Is it like all things Political?**----____
Even when it words Wonderfully some of the Compromises are things No One Likes.

The example of The Compromise No One Likes is Washington DC.
The location of The City was a Compromise. See?

It is in a swamp of sorts. Right?
That argument is long over.

DC is a city laid out on a Roman Grid.
How backward looking is That?

Let the Pretty Boys hang out in The Bar and charm one another.
We need some Grown Ups. The Pretty Boys in the Bar have All The Power?

oh. Somethings never change.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue May 28, 2013 7:54 pm UTC

cemper93 wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:In any case, describing the only two options as "collect welfare" and "commit crime" is problematic. If your view is that these are literally the only choices available, well, then you already have a severe problem, regardless of if welfare is there or not.

Yes. I don't know whether it has been announced in your porcelain tower yet, but there are people on this planet who do have severe problems. Heavy stuff, huh?


This issue is not that people have problems, but rather, that the system as a whole has a problem if those are the only options for an entire class of people. There will always be individuals with problems. That's so vague as to be entirely useless. The point is that if you have to say "without welfare, they'll all be forced into crime", you're admitting that welfare is merely acting as a social bandaid over a much worse problem.

Tyndmyr wrote:One could easily describe our current tax system in a similar manner as one describes criminal activity.

Name me something which I am not able to hurl low-quality metaphors with no basis in reality at until it fits my world view better.


By all means, go back and re-read if you'd like to comprehend the context. He based his argument for taxes being different from crime on a purported egalitarianism in taxation. This particular justification is pretty weak, as our system of taxation isn't particularly egalitarian by any standards, being mostly a patchwork of many different philosophies that basically all involved view as problematic.

User avatar
cemper93
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:35 pm UTC
Location: `pwd`

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby cemper93 » Tue May 28, 2013 8:21 pm UTC

So what do you mean by
Tyndmyr wrote:This issue is not that people have problems, but rather, that the system as a whole has a problem if those are the only options for an entire class of people.

Which problems are you talking about here? I guess it's not the same problems that the people you talk about in the next sentence face:
Tyndmyr wrote:There will always be individuals with problems. That's so vague as to be entirely useless.

Because we can both agree that the latter do need welfare, can't we? But the people from the first sentence don't, because they their problems are more like the cancer of society. I am absolutely sure you do have an objective line to draw here.

Also, the absolutely ridiculous idea that because some people's problems are caused by an underlying wrong in society, they do not deserve welfare.

Tyndmyr wrote:He based his argument for taxes being different from crime on a purported egalitarianism in taxation. This particular justification is pretty weak, as our system of taxation isn't particularly egalitarian by any standards, being mostly a patchwork of many different philosophies that basically all involved view as problematic.

Then how do you believe an "egalitarian" system of taxation would work? Randian flat tax? Tithes? Dice roll?

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue May 28, 2013 9:13 pm UTC

cemper93 wrote:So what do you mean by
Tyndmyr wrote:This issue is not that people have problems, but rather, that the system as a whole has a problem if those are the only options for an entire class of people.

Which problems are you talking about here? I guess it's not the same problems that the people you talk about in the next sentence face:
Tyndmyr wrote:There will always be individuals with problems. That's so vague as to be entirely useless.

Because we can both agree that the latter do need welfare, can't we? But the people from the first sentence don't, because they their problems are more like the cancer of society. I am absolutely sure you do have an objective line to draw here.

Also, the absolutely ridiculous idea that because some people's problems are caused by an underlying wrong in society, they do not deserve welfare.


That's....not the point. The point is that in relying on generics like "some people have problems", you have reduced the argument to trivialities. Yes. Some people have problems. That's ALWAYS true, and as such, is utterly useless for determining the correct course of action.

The key is identifying systemic problems. I'm not sure why you're so fixated on "need" and "deserve". One does not need to even consider such notions to accept that society is behaving problematically. A society in which a significant class of people can only choose between crime and welfare is an inefficient one, and such a limited set of options is to be avoided, is it not? Are we not all better off if they pursue a career or at least a job instead?

Tyndmyr wrote:He based his argument for taxes being different from crime on a purported egalitarianism in taxation. This particular justification is pretty weak, as our system of taxation isn't particularly egalitarian by any standards, being mostly a patchwork of many different philosophies that basically all involved view as problematic.

Then how do you believe an "egalitarian" system of taxation would work? Randian flat tax? Tithes? Dice roll?


Multiple definitions exist, depending on your personal version of fairness. However, I have yet to hear a type of "fairness" that would have some millionares able to avoid vast amounts of tax burden due to loopholes, different rates for different sorts of incomes, and all manner of different special rules that some may take advantage of and some may not.

A tithe, incidentally, is identical to a flat tax. And yes, I'd say that a flat tax is indeed vastly more fair than the monstrosity our system has become.

User avatar
cemper93
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:35 pm UTC
Location: `pwd`

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby cemper93 » Tue May 28, 2013 9:45 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Yes. Some people have problems. That's ALWAYS true, and as such, is utterly useless for determining the correct course of action.
Aside from the fact that these people's problems are exactly what we're talking about, I guess?

Tyndmyr wrote:I'm not sure why you're so fixated on "need" and "deserve". One does not need to even consider such notions to accept that society is behaving problematically. A society in which a significant class of people can only choose between crime and welfare is an inefficient one, and such a limited set of options is to be avoided, is it not? Are we not all better off if they pursue a career or at least a job instead?

The amount of wrong in that paragraph is absolutely astounding.

"The key is identifying systemic problems."
Oh, I totally agree! And I'm sure you will address this point in your next sentence, or at least somewhere in your post to actually make clear what systemic problem you believe to have spotted.

"I'm not sure why you're so fixated on "need" and "deserve". One does not need to even consider such notions to accept that society is behaving problematically."
Oh, you don't. However, apparently, there is, according to you, something that's more important than need when it comes to resource allocation? Interesting idea as well. (It is, like most "might makes right" ideas, also a tell for right-libertarian ideology.)

"A society in which a significant class of people can only choose between crime and welfare is an inefficient one"
I absolutely love the fact that you have accused me of being imprecise in my wording, and then do actually have the audacity to use the word "inefficient" without defining what your goal even is.
Note: "efficiency" does only have meaning in the context of well-defined inputs and outputs. Saying "lighting a fire with two rods of wood is inefficient because a fire with one rod would give enough warmth" is a sentence with meaning. Saying "society is inefficient" is not, because you don't make clear what you expect society's output to be. Jet planes? Fast cars? Disney Land? Or maybe that, you know, we don't have people starving in the streets?
Other than that, of course it's bad when we have people who only can choose between crime and welfare. But so far you haven't made any suggestion as to how avoid that situation. That's not what your primary school teacher meant when they were talking about being constructive in your criticism.

"and such a limited set of options is to be avoided, is it not?"
False dilemma.

"Are we not all better off if they pursue a career or at least a job instead?"
False dilemma again. It's also where you're going from somewhat fallacious to completely ridiculous.

Tyndmyr wrote:A tithe, incidentally, is identical to a flat tax.

Except for the part where the landlords don't have to pay taxes because of divine rights.

Oh wait, you're probably against taxation on income from capital as well. So go ahead, then.

Tyndmyr wrote:However, I have yet to hear a type of "fairness" that would have some millionares able to avoid vast amounts of tax burden due to loopholes, different rates for different sorts of incomes, and all manner of different special rules that some may take advantage of and some may not. [...] And yes, I'd say that a flat tax is indeed vastly more fair than the monstrosity our system has become.

Because when there's a flat tax, suddenly you can't park your money on the Cayman Islands anymore since if you tried to the libertarian angel of mercy would descend from the heavens to punish you?

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9995
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby addams » Wed May 29, 2013 5:51 am UTC

How about a discussion of the Farm Bill.

It seems that the president of the US in 1908 was concerned for The People.
That is what wiki says. The Farm Bills have a bit of History.

Not like the stuff the Europeans have, but as short as this history is, it is also Boring.
So; As I pull myself out of pages of internet reading; What?!

ok. The Farm Bill: Look! Look! It's an Omnibus!
How cool is That? Well; The Law students had inside jokes, too.
I can remember an Omnibus at a kinetic sculpt race.

There were people laughing so hard, they were dribbling beer and choking.
Yes. The Omnibus failed spectacularly. It was not as funny to me.

I had Syllabus. The Syllabus never failed. (shrug.)
As I read some of this stuff, what those people were laughing at becomes more clear.

It's an Omnibus. Who is brave enough to read it?
Maybe, me. We will see. We will see.

I want to communicate about The Farm Bill 2013.
It is so boring to read all the laws from 1908 to 2013.
Boring, boring, boring. I won't do it.

The Farm Bill 2013 in the ideal would do Two things.
Not Omi Things. Two things. That is enough.

Thing 1. Support The Farmer in Safe Sustainable farming practices.
Another way to say that if the Sustainable word triggers you to Rage;
Support the Farmer in Responsible Stewardship Practices in the Art and Science of Farming.

This is harder than it sounds. The farmers need Educational Facilities.
Whole Schools where men and women learn about how to do a hard job.

The Farmers need research to be done on All Sorts of Farm Stuff.
It is Right and Proper for The State to support Science that supports Farmers.

The Farmers need oversight. It is important that The State is involved with Food Safety.
Food Safety. Farm Worker's rights and safety. Animal health and safety. Safety is big.

There are a couple of other things that help the Farmer.
The Farmer and his or her employees are important people.
They make food.

I know, you think your Mom makes food.
And; She most likely does.
After someone else has done The Dirty Work.

Thing 2. Feed The People.

That is simple enough. Feed The People.
I am all upset about That Man!
The Face of Cruelty and Indifference.

http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/c ... gressmerge
David Vitter. ech. His job is to feel good about himself. He does.

Feed The People. That is The Job of The Farmer and it is a hard job.
Farmers feed a bunch of stuff before they Feed People. Hard Job.

That is back in Thing One.
We can and should spend a lot on Farms.

Thing 2. Thing 2 is Feed The People.
Clothe the people may be in this omnibus somewhere.
People wear sheep skin and wool.
People wear beef skins and feathers and all sorts of weird Farm stuff.

The Farm Bill is to provide for food for The People.

If these Bastards drive this little Omibus to a place where Personhood is removed from a segment of People......(?)
Well; They are already Bastards! just for suggesting it.

This is serious! There are men and women starving, Now!!

Spoiler:
Some of the people that are in positions to distribute Food Stamps at this very moment talk and act as if the food stamps are something they are giving away from a finite reserve that The People do not have a Right to. Idiots. Some of those people need to spend some time on a Farm.


This Omibus may do Omi things.
If it does not do Thing one and Thing two it is not a Good Bus.

To strip a man of his personhood is Wrong.
If you pay taxes, then you should get down on your bonny knees and thank god you are so fortunate.

To walk over the dead and dying on my way into a Restaurant to eat is not a thing I ever want to do.
I can't. I hope I can't. I want to be a person that could not. Be a Nation that does not ask that of us.

The number of people effected by the part of the Bus that came to my attention is small.
To feed all the people that Vitter wants to starve would take a very little money.
It is not a large number. Is it? I am not good at math.

1 in 4 chance of any person in the US of being in jail or having been in jail.
That is small. 1/4 chance. That number may include people arrested and not convicted.
Maybe.

Of the 1/4 only (let's call it half) 1/2 will need assistance of some kind.
Is half a good guess? Half will have family, friends, job, property, a life waiting for them.
The other half will need help or they will die. Well; Science! We know they will All die.

The number may be small. To that small number of powerless people dying that way is a big deal.
To purposely work to insure that others suffer is a Bad Thing.

David Vitter is a Bad Idea. Yes. It seems God has bad ideas, too.
There are better ideas. David Vitter may be able to have one of them.
He could have a good idea.
Like all humans he will not come up with a Good Idea in a social vacuum.

Remember:
Thing One: Support the Farmer.

Thing Two: Feed The People.

We could re write the Bill by June 3rd.
It would take some work.

Then the Dishonorable Senator from Louisiana, Mr. David Vitter, will disregard it, me, you, the poor, the helpless And The Small Farmer.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Come on.
Someone Likes to Quote Snipe.
http://www.ag.senate.gov/newsroom/press ... -farm-bill

Quote Snipe that. It is too much of a Wall of They Did It Wrong; Therefore; We Must Do It Wronger.

Is it Required to be an Edit Job?
What about doing The Work of Writing a US Farm Bill or the Years 2013-2020.
What is with The Odd year, stuff? Does it Have To be an odd year?

If so Write a Good one and let it Run till 2021.
Scientists can whip one of these up, That Works in No Time.

Tell a bunch of Scientists:

Here: X#$ Grant. The project has two missions.
Thing One: Support The Farmer so that The Farmer can Feed The People.
Thing Two: Feed The People.

A room full of Scientist would be Mildly overwhelmed by What?!

Write it! Then We can all Read it. Jeeze.

What are The Things, again?
Support The Farmer. All the Farmers need Oversight.
The Saints and Sinner, All.

The small farmer needs Continuing Ed.
The small farmer needs the companionship of other Farmers.

We need a lot of Paid Farmers.
People that know All that Farming stuff to go do visits and we need places for the farmers to go for help.
We had a thing called Farm Extension at one time.

Spoiler:
I don't know anything about Farm Extensions. It is not for the Farm hair. Is it?


I Love The Nanny State! The Nanny State has professionals that can baby sit a Farm while the Farmer takes some well deserved R&R. That is not a Waste of Tax Money.

I Know about some Real Waste in Taxpayer Money. Farm Sitters are not a waste of Money.

Big Farms have staff that Rotates. Big Farms don't need sitters.
Big Families don't hire babysitters.

"Watch Your Brother. If he gets hurt, there will be questions."

We are The Family of Man. It is time to Grow Up.
Oh; And; Pay The Nanny.

The Nanny State Pays the Nanny.
The Police State Pays the Police.

In the Nanny State the Police are Nannies.
And; Held to that Standard!

What do you think of Nannies that kill the people placed into their Care?
What do you think of Police that kill the people placed into their Care?

That is a Different Thread!
This Omnibus would be Full if it held Thing One and Thing Two.

What else does these Bill Need? That Thing One is Huge.

Thing Two is not as complicated, yet It needs a little Soul written into it.
Soul; The State has a Soul. It is Her People. eeewww. Have you met The People?
They need Nannies.

Well; Some people need one kind of Nanny, some people need a different kind of Nanny.
Any show of Kindness and Understanding to our fellow Idiots is Nanny like behavior.

The Farm Bill is a document that tell us How to be Nannies inside the Mission of
Thing One! Thing One is So Hard!
Farming is Hard!
Farms are like a place where a bunch of Alien Species Hang out, sometimes.

Small Farms are a Hoot. A human child may think The Goat is his brother.
The child will grow out of it. I know. I thought the dog was my brother.

I can't write to those people.
My writing is too hard to read.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
styrofoam
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 3:28 am UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby styrofoam » Wed May 29, 2013 6:04 pm UTC

I think what Tyndmyr is saying is that we should give wellfare to those who need it, but, especially in the case of ex-cons, we should also try to prevent them from needing it in the first place. Amirite?
aadams wrote:I am a very nice whatever it is I am.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed May 29, 2013 6:26 pm UTC

cemper93 wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Yes. Some people have problems. That's ALWAYS true, and as such, is utterly useless for determining the correct course of action.
Aside from the fact that these people's problems are exactly what we're talking about, I guess?

Tyndmyr wrote:I'm not sure why you're so fixated on "need" and "deserve". One does not need to even consider such notions to accept that society is behaving problematically. A society in which a significant class of people can only choose between crime and welfare is an inefficient one, and such a limited set of options is to be avoided, is it not? Are we not all better off if they pursue a career or at least a job instead?

The amount of wrong in that paragraph is absolutely astounding.

"The key is identifying systemic problems."
Oh, I totally agree! And I'm sure you will address this point in your next sentence, or at least somewhere in your post to actually make clear what systemic problem you believe to have spotted.


Would you like the problem rewritten in smaller words?

The problem is that a class of society has only the options of crime, welfare or starvation. If that's genuinely the case, the limited set of terrible choices is the problem, because all three of those choices suck.

"I'm not sure why you're so fixated on "need" and "deserve". One does not need to even consider such notions to accept that society is behaving problematically."
Oh, you don't. However, apparently, there is, according to you, something that's more important than need when it comes to resource allocation? Interesting idea as well. (It is, like most "might makes right" ideas, also a tell for right-libertarian ideology.)


Of course. Those are all highly subjective criteria. Listen to someone describing what they "need" or worse, what they "deserve". It can be quite the list, and my, there can be variation between individuals. How do you build a society around such a goal when you cannot agree what that goal even is?

I much prefer less nebulous objectives. For instance, one might posit that society exists for the mutual benefit of those within it. This does not require exact evaluation of what is "enough", but provides a clear goal that should be pursued. Obviously, the creation and maintence of a class of people engaged only in crime, welfare or starvation is not really a great step towards that.

"A society in which a significant class of people can only choose between crime and welfare is an inefficient one"
I absolutely love the fact that you have accused me of being imprecise in my wording, and then do actually have the audacity to use the word "inefficient" without defining what your goal even is.
Note: "efficiency" does only have meaning in the context of well-defined inputs and outputs. Saying "lighting a fire with two rods of wood is inefficient because a fire with one rod would give enough warmth" is a sentence with meaning. Saying "society is inefficient" is not, because you don't make clear what you expect society's output to be. Jet planes? Fast cars? Disney Land? Or maybe that, you know, we don't have people starving in the streets?
Other than that, of course it's bad when we have people who only can choose between crime and welfare. But so far you haven't made any suggestion as to how avoid that situation. That's not what your primary school teacher meant when they were talking about being constructive in your criticism.


Unless your goals are crime, starvation, or welfare en masse, then a system that offers only those choices is inefficient.

If you actually HAVE those goals, feel free to defend them. If not, can we be done with the meaningless pedantry?

"and such a limited set of options is to be avoided, is it not?"
False dilemma.

"Are we not all better off if they pursue a career or at least a job instead?"
False dilemma again. It's also where you're going from somewhat fallacious to completely ridiculous.


Merely citing the name of a fallacy. Congrats. You win one(1) internet. I cede everything to your masterful explanation.

Tyndmyr wrote:A tithe, incidentally, is identical to a flat tax.

Except for the part where the landlords don't have to pay taxes because of divine rights.

Oh wait, you're probably against taxation on income from capital as well. So go ahead, then.


Tithes are asked of landowners as well in the modern age. However, this is tangental to the point being discussed. This is not a discussion of the historical nature of landowning in times long past, but of a rather specific issue related to crime and welfare.

Tyndmyr wrote:However, I have yet to hear a type of "fairness" that would have some millionares able to avoid vast amounts of tax burden due to loopholes, different rates for different sorts of incomes, and all manner of different special rules that some may take advantage of and some may not. [...] And yes, I'd say that a flat tax is indeed vastly more fair than the monstrosity our system has become.

Because when there's a flat tax, suddenly you can't park your money on the Cayman Islands anymore since if you tried to the libertarian angel of mercy would descend from the heavens to punish you?


We've taxed income made in other countries for quite some time now...it's an artifact of our monstrously complicated tax system that sheltering exists at all. In any case, merely pointing out one possible flaw with some implementations of a plan that already exists in the current system does not show that the current system is better.

styrofoam wrote:I think what Tyndmyr is saying is that we should give wellfare to those who need it, but, especially in the case of ex-cons, we should also try to prevent them from needing it in the first place. Amirite?


Precisely. The concept of someone being entirely unemployable is worrying. If that person actually IS such a dangerous threat that there is no job he can be trusted with, perhaps we let that person out too early. If such is not the case, then it is preferable to have them at least attempting to seek employment, even if it's not a particularly awesome job.

Part of the problem is, of course, the welfare cliff. Welfare is currently structured such that taking a poor job can reduce the amount of money and benefits you receive overall. This is particularly rough on ex-cons, who have less good-job opportunities to pursue than most.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9995
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby addams » Wed May 29, 2013 7:57 pm UTC

Are you and I on the Same Side of The Issue?

What is The Issue?
The Farm Bill or The Way People are Treated after Jail?

Are these two things The Same Thing.
Is the responsibility for the Safety and Well Being of All People written into The Omnibus?

Personhood removal.
A person can become like a walking Ghost.
Until that person dies along side the Road or on the Street.

Good Grief. What is the Logical Conclusion of Reduction in Care from The State?
There are people starving. That happens in Civilized Nations, too.

In Hospitals and at Home.
Some people lose the ability to eat.

Some people waste away.
In Civilized nations those people are cared for and supported.

What happens to a man that has to wait four days to receive Food Stamps if he is two days past his last meal?

Spoiler:
I studied the subject at University.
I can tell you some things about what will happen to such a man.

I need a little more information to paint you a picture of Hour by Hour starvation.
If he is a young, strong man at the beginning of an event that prevents him from eating for two days,
he will still be a young, strong man at the end of two days.

If he is a frail old man at the beginning of the two day fast he will be even more frail at the end.
In four more days The Old Man will be dead.
In four more days The Young Man will....(?) Only God can know All of The Things a Young Strong man may do.

I once knew a man. He was such a nice person.
He was a Happy Man in Many, Many ways.

He told me a story. He had been starving.
He had no money. He had no food.
He hardly had any clothes on.

He told me he lonely.
There was an Old German Woman.
Forty-five or Fifty. We both laughed.

He had been so Young.
The German Woman was Nice.
She slowed down and talked to him.

She saved his life. She did not throw money at him and Run!
She made arrangements for others to take care of him.

She checked on him. He got food.
He got clothes. He was given a little job.

He got stronger and he was respected by The Right people.
One thing happened, then another thing happened.

He had letters of Recommendation.
From The German Woman.
From His Bosses.
From some of his Co-Workers.

He studied things he was interested in.
He was naturally good at Math.

The English Government Took Him Under Her Wing.
She sent him to a special School for Communication Engineers.

Then she set him to work doing Communications for The State.
He Is Loyal To The Crown. He Loves that German woman.

His wife is so Beautiful. His sister is pretty, too.
He is a fortunate man. Two Beautiful women that Love him wait at Home,
When they are not busy doing other things.

He was Real. I watched while a British Police person Hassled him.
He handled it with Grace. That man had been through Hell.

On the other side of that Jerk in Uniform were an Army of People that Respect and Support him.

Why do I type these stupid stories? Because! That man is a Success Story. And; I could be better.
He and I talked a lot. He could talk about it to me. I understood.

He can not be responsible for what happened to All of The Others.
There were 13 or 15 of them when They began The Journey.

There were 5 alive at the end of That Road Trip.
He was one of 5. He had been One of 13 when the That Road Trip Began.

They had been given a choice.
Kill or Run. Thirteen Ran.

Five lived. Some did not Run.
I don't know how many. Do you?


What is this? A second rate Third World Country?
Worse? How Worse? God! God! Atheists!

Some body! Listen!
The Farm Bill!
Thing 1. Support the Farmer!
The smaller they are the more support they require.
The larger they are the more oversight they require.

Pay The Nanny!

Thing 2. Feed The People!
Do not make a Law that removes another person's personhood!

Feed them All.
Treat them All like Princesses.

Some will act like Princesses.
Some will act like the Reptiles they are.
Ahhhhh! ahhhh! ahhh!

I can not find the Draft of the Bill!
Loads of type about the Bill.
No sign of The Bill.

Where is it! You people can find it. Right?
You know where the draft of the Farm Bill is.
Where? I want to read it.

I Learned the following little tidbit about the way The System works.

The People have a Right to know what is said and by who in Those Meetings.
!!SIX MONTHS AFTER IT WAS SAID!! That makes the information 5.5 months too late.
http://www.ag.senate.gov/about

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/a ... ill-draft-

Spoiler:
I care about the Farm Bill because I Remember something, better.
Maybe I only dream of something better.

The Extension guys were Paid by the State.
The Feds or someone supported the Whole Deal.

And; What a deal it was. Jeeze.
On a Personal Level it was like a Farm Doctor coming to make a Farm Call.

The Farm Doctors did a Well Farm Check every 3 to 6 months.
When a Farmer had a problem, The Extension Guys would make a Farm Call.

Doctor! Doctor! Come Quick! I have a foal in the field and two mares down in the paddock.
Please; Bring Help!

A person can not wrap a Farm in a warm Blanket and take it to The Doctor.
The Doctor must go to The Farm.

One lone Superman with a Ph.D. in Farming Science can not pick up three large animals all by himself.
Other Extension Guys knew about Fungi. Everything anybody would want to know about Fungi that grow on Wheat.

Inside The Farm bill are still provisions for The Farm Extension?
Was there ever such a thing in This Reality? The Internet knows: Is that true or not?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperativ ... ce#Mission

The concept of Farm Extension Service seems to be true.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_extension

It does not look like what I thought it should look like.
It is a concept that works. Right?
That seems to be International.
US? Is it illegal for The People of The US to have a thing like that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperativ ... on_service
That is not direct help to the Farmer nor to The People.
If it is; Show me.

http://www.csrees.usda.gov/qlinks/extension.html

Well; I am not entirely happy with the Mission Statement.
Still; It does exist is a nearly recognizable form.

Farming is a darn hard job. Small Farmers need support from the State.
I know. I know. Gentleman Farmers. As if the World was not strange enough.

I am Suggesting that The State supports The Small Farmer.
Not the Rich Guys with a Third House with a big yard.

Yes. Yes. Those guys need extension Services.
The Small Farmer needs Cash Up Front with No Expectation of Repayment.
Yes. It could be called Welfare. It is for the Welfare of both The Farmer and The People.

I had a House that By Law I had to Open to The Public one day a year.
I opened it to the Public 250 days a year.

If The State supports a Farm, The People should be able to see it one or two times a year.
Of course, The Extension Guys can come visit Any Day they want. They are like Gods.

Don't mess with them. They Know stuff.
Do as The Extension Guys say to do;
With Their Help!
And; Everything will usually work out fine.

What a sweet world it could be.

Feed The People! Not because they deserve to eat. (shrug.)
Because it says more about You as a criminal
Than it does about the criminal, if you torture.

Abandonment and Starvation of POW's were against international Law.
In my Dream World.

To treat ones own people with less regard than International Law requires of POW's is, kind'a, creepy.

Spoiler:
That Guy Vitter wrote that The Bill is one example of a Bloated Federal Government.
He might be right. May I read The Bill?

If he is correct. Well; Most of us have backgrounds in Science.
We know. We can look at The Truth. We don't have to Like it.

If it is All Bloated Up. If it does not function well or at all.
If it is Leaking and Smells bad. Well; It may be Dead.

Those are Signs of Death. Just passed or Just Coming Up.

Bloated? Vetter, He keeps calling my Government Bloated.
Remember the stages of Death? Not the before; The After.

First the muscles go slack. All of 'em.
Then one thing. ewww. Rigors. Remember?
How long does that last? Did our Nation have Rigors?

Now; It is Bloated? That is Not Good. Dead? Really?
ok. People have been attempting to Kill It for a long time.

Why? Sport; I suppose. Powerful, Powerful People.
With nothing to do.

What would be The Ultimate? Sitting around eating with Your favorite Billionaires;
What suggestions would come up?

"Let's Kill The Government."
"We can't Kill The Government."

"So? It would be fun to try."
"ho hum. We've done everything else."

"We have nothing to Lose. Let's Do It!"

Other Billionaires are sitting around talking about Safe Water Sources for Sub Saharan Families.
And; What The Goat ate This Week.

Some of those old Germans philosophers got it backwards.
One said; The Happy are all The Same. The Miserable are interesting.
Fuck that guy. He was Wrong.

Spoiler:
The Happy are interesting and have such wide variations!
The Miserable are all the same; Miserable.

Some miserable people are Rich, Rich, Rich.
Still miserable.

Or; Like Richard Cheney.
Only Happy when he is certain others are Miserable.

Have you ever met some of These Guys?
They are, just, men and women. People.

Some of The Softest Fucking hands I have ever seen.
On A Man! That man had hands every 1950's housewife dreamed of.

(shrug.) No wonder no one will talk to me.
I piss 'em off all All sides of the Aisle.

Looking for a Horse? Aisle 5.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Trasvi
Posts: 310
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 12:11 pm UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Trasvi » Fri May 31, 2013 7:18 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
styrofoam wrote:I think what Tyndmyr is saying is that we should give wellfare to those who need it, but, especially in the case of ex-cons, we should also try to prevent them from needing it in the first place. Amirite?


Precisely. The concept of someone being entirely unemployable is worrying. If that person actually IS such a dangerous threat that there is no job he can be trusted with, perhaps we let that person out too early. If such is not the case, then it is preferable to have them at least attempting to seek employment, even if it's not a particularly awesome job.

Part of the problem is, of course, the welfare cliff. Welfare is currently structured such that taking a poor job can reduce the amount of money and benefits you receive overall. This is particularly rough on ex-cons, who have less good-job opportunities to pursue than most.


I don't think it's a problem of someone being entirely unemployable: just in a market where employers can afford to be choosy, the ex-con will be the last choice. There are plenty of qualified people seeking employment of any kind, so the'll get chosen long before the (potentially) risky ex-criminal.
Now how do we get out of the situation where employers have the power of choice? For unskilled labor you probably don't at anything less than full employment. Not realistically, not for any extended period of time, and not without wide social and economic damage.

The 'solution' then is to make it easier for ex-cons to get back in to the work force. They could be supported by the state to learn trades while incarcerated or when they get out, or not have to report certain crimes when applying for certain jobs. Or, you can neglect the problem - which leads to the welfare/steal/die situation.


This isn't a problem for any specific form of government - as long as there is some concept of crime, and ex-criminals have to tell potential employers of their criminal history, they're going to be less desirable employees. And at the very best, employers are going to hire ex-cons for the lowest they can get away with to exploit the desperateness of their situation.

User avatar
sam_i_am
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:38 pm UTC
Location: Urbana, Illinois, USA

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby sam_i_am » Fri May 31, 2013 5:15 pm UTC

I hate these clusterfucks of bills.

If you want to be opposed to food stamps than oppose food stamps. Don't try to introduce new complexities to try to reduce food stamps for certain people under certain circumstances for a reason that's not really related to food stamps in the first place.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri May 31, 2013 9:36 pm UTC

sam_i_am wrote:I hate these clusterfucks of bills.

If you want to be opposed to food stamps than oppose food stamps. Don't try to introduce new complexities to try to reduce food stamps for certain people under certain circumstances for a reason that's not really related to food stamps in the first place.


Well, yeah...it's a purely political manuever. They don't like food stamps, and seek to limit the program...and violent criminals make a really unsympathetic target.

You would be MUCH better off restructuring the food stamp program in any number of other ways, but in practice, one side is very pro-food stamps, and the other is very anti-food stamps, so they're both finding ways to creatively increase or decrease usage to push their team's agenda. The end result will probably become increasingly ineffective as complexity of the program grows.

User avatar
Internetmeme
Posts: 1405
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:16 pm UTC
Location: South Carolina, USA

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Internetmeme » Sat Jun 01, 2013 3:20 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
sam_i_am wrote:I hate these clusterfucks of bills.

If you want to be opposed to food stamps than oppose food stamps. Don't try to introduce new complexities to try to reduce food stamps for certain people under certain circumstances for a reason that's not really related to food stamps in the first place.


Well, yeah...it's a purely political manuever. They don't like food stamps, and seek to limit the program...and violent criminals make a really unsympathetic target.

Or, possibly, they're trying to reduce the budget. Why does everything have to be political these days?
If it had been a group of democrats expanding the food stamps program, then republicans would be decrying that as a move to buy more votes. Surely there is a better reason that goes beyond "playing politics?"
Some things are purely political, like what the IRS did to the Tea Party groups, and the way they're doing all they can to avoid Congress bringing a hammer down on the upper echelons of their organization.
I don't think this one is; I see it as an effort to tighten the budget while maintaining a good program.


You would be MUCH better off restructuring the food stamp program in any number of other ways

How would you fix food stamps? I don't see any way it can be fixed. That isn't to say it's a good idea on paper, and I'm not saying we shouldn't fund such programs, but it does get abused from time to time, and social welfare programs aren't as important when compared to infrastructure, public safety, utilities, and science.
one side is very pro-food stamps, and the other is very anti-food stamps, so they're both finding ways to creatively increase or decrease usage to push their team's agenda. The end result will probably become increasingly ineffective as complexity of the program grows.

While I agree with you that the left is usually for food stamps, and the right usually tries to cut down on the number of social programs, you're making pretty broad generalizations there. There are democrats who oppose it, and republicans who are for it.
Spoiler:

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9995
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby addams » Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:49 am UTC

Have you seen a copy of The Bill?
The word on the internet is A Draft has been released.

Where is that draft?

It is mean spirited to target a population because that population is in a weak position.
It is such a mean thing to suggest! Of course, it may become Law.

Then we can fuss on the internet about that.
Who wrote, "In the beginning God created the World; Many think it was a bad move." ?

It is the way we hold one another in our minds.
Those people do not deserve to X, nor Y, nor Z.

It is mean. It is wrong.
It is The Way we are?
We suck!

I want to see The Draft of The Bill.
Where is it?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Leia
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 4:56 pm UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby Leia » Sat Jul 13, 2013 6:26 pm UTC

Only in America. What more can I say

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10211
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Jul 13, 2013 8:10 pm UTC

Leia wrote:Only in America. What more can I say


And in Switzerland, they sterilized rape victims until the 80's. The French abuse the Romani (gypsies). Italy can't even take out the garbage without mafia approval. Where do think the toxic waste in the Gulf of Aden is coming from?

The US is a big country; somewhere one of the states will do something the rest see as awful. But don't pretend this sort of thing 'only happens in the US'.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9995
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In the US, criminals will be intentionally starved to de

Postby addams » Sat Jul 13, 2013 9:39 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
Leia wrote:Only in America. What more can I say


And in Switzerland, they sterilized rape victims until the 80's. The French abuse the Romani (gypsies). Italy can't even take out the garbage without mafia approval. Where do think the toxic waste in the Gulf of Aden is coming from?

The US is a big country; somewhere one of the states will do something the rest see as awful. But don't pretend this sort of thing 'only happens in the US'.

Two Wrongs do not make a Right.
Spoiler:
Three Lefts Do.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests