- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 12, 2012 at 2:14 pm #743231
redblackParticipantoops. forgot the link:
http://money.cnn.com/2010/08/17/news/economy/private_prisons_economic_impact.fortune/index.htm
According to research firm IBISWorld USA, private corrections is a $22.7 billion industry with an annual growth rate in the last half-decade of 4.7%. While growth slowed from 2009 to 2010, projections for the industry remain largely optimistic.
January 12, 2012 at 3:34 pm #743232
JoBParticipantthanks redblack..
i just didn’t have the energy last night to pull references…
Kootch…
you talk about the “decision” a “young adult” makes at 16 to quit school without addressing the failure that is generally the root of that decision…
the failure that occurred long before that “young adult” was 16.
poverty is not a lifestyle choice for children..
however.. it is the inevitable conclusion of some “public” policies.
“Take away a woman’s reproductive freedoms and you plunge women back into poverty or dependence upon a working spouse. That dependence is one of the riskiest choices a woman can make in light of that statistics that nearly 44% of all mothers with custody of their minor children are either separated or divorced.”
i will go find the link to this quote from a Forbes website..
January 12, 2012 at 7:07 pm #743233
kootchmanMemberredblack… I said as much… that’s why all the “nanny state” advocate here drive ya nuts… let’s make a law, there should be a law, call the police, turn ypur neighbor in.. etc etc etc…. the essence of our civil government.
Poverty? You keep dragging that old pony out. Poverty is a consequence of bad decisions for the most part. Not all, but most. Poverty is an economic condition, dropping out of school is decision. A very bad one. Particularly in an urban setting.
And who does this? Don’t do the humpty bumpty….or use birth control. Is that hard? How did I manage to not have children until it was the right time? Latex rubber… and one event where I had to come up with a couple hundred dollars…. and women who were equally adament that the little swimmers never made it to home base.
“”Take away a woman’s reproductive freedoms and you plunge women back into poverty or dependence upon a working spouse”
You are free as a bird to: say no, use birth control. Decisions have consequences. Maybe we should teach that FIRST in before we teach contrived “fairness” doctrines. I support reproductive freedoms, I have seen no serious efforts to curb access to any of a myriad of birth control methods.
Decision… meet Consequence. You are going to be life partners. You will never get a divorce, neither of you can walk out on the other, bound by destiny until your last breath.
The preponderance of consequence.. JoB, not the relatively minor exceptions of tragic fate. Are you suggesting that incarceration is a direct result of birth control access?
January 12, 2012 at 7:45 pm #743234
JanSParticipantKootch..you do realize that there is at least one man actually running to be the prez of these United States who actually thinks birth control should be illegal. And there are people who voted/will vote to make him the GOP pick. Yes, there are plans afoot to do away with BC…of all types. Imagine that. We may not all agree that is a right thing to do..some of us may even feel that it’s the totally wrong thing to do. But that won’t change the minds of the supporters.
January 12, 2012 at 8:20 pm #743235
kootchmanMemberNo.. who did that? Jan, there are people out there who think we should be communists, there are people out there who endorse pedophilia,,, and have supporters… ya think they are credible or rational, or have a chance? No, they don’t. Even Catholics, the main stream ones, practice birth control. Show me the GOP candidate that wants to outlaw preventative conception birth control.
January 13, 2012 at 4:33 am #743236
JoBParticipantkootch..
are you even listening to the Republican candidates?
both Santorum and Romney have been vocal about outlawing birth control…
Romney would only go after the pill .. any pill.. and the IUD..by way of personhood bills.
Santorum would do away with all birth control…
Too many of us are the result of failed latex and the rhythm method…
so that leaves abstinence as the only option…
Tehehehe … guys who fire blanks are going to have a real advantage ;->
January 13, 2012 at 10:58 pm #743237
kootchmanMemberI have listened to Santorum… he has not advocated outlawing birth control pills. And you cannot show an instance where he has. Show me ONE speech, one uTube, one writing,,,, where either has said they are against any method prior to conception. You can’t. He did say that birth control, is not a constitutional issue, not a right specifically given as a power to the federal government, and birth control is a state issue. Are you worried that Santorum is actually going to get elected? Sleep easy tonight. It ain’t going to happen. Evangelicals have no dog in the fight either. There ya go, weaving a tapestry out of a thread. Heck I’ll go one farther…. I would listen to an argument to make it mandatory…. like after siring two kids, no child support,, on welfare, no skills, high school dropout… snip the vans deferens. Funny you want to impose stronger laws and penalties on “puppy mills”…. how about kiddie mills?
January 13, 2012 at 11:04 pm #743238
JoBParticipantJanuary 15, 2012 at 12:32 am #743239
kootchmanMemberForced? No… a cash bonus.
January 15, 2012 at 12:59 am #743240
JoBParticipantkootch..
so what’s a snip snip worth to you?
and what exactly do you think that would solve?
January 15, 2012 at 9:27 am #743241
waterworldParticipantWhy just this week, the New Yorker quoted Santorum discussing his views on contraception last October: “It’s not O.K. It’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.” He said that states should be allowed to outlaw birth control. Does that count as an instance in which he advocated outlawing birth control pills? I guess you could say he only said that states should be free to do it, not that he would do it. But then he did also say that using birth control is “counter to how things are supposed to be.”
.
More recently, on January 2 of this year, Santorum reaffirmed this view of birth control, and specifically said that Griswold vs. Connecticut, the 1965 case holding that a law criminalizing the use of birth control violated the constitution, was wrongly decided and should be overruled. That clip is on the ABC Political Punch blog. (It’s interesting to me that Santorum said he personally doesn’t support the anti-sodomy law at issue in Lawrence vs. Texas, but he wasn’t asked about that case — he was asked about the Connecticut birth control case.)
.
I’m not worried Santorum will be elected. I’m worried that people bend over backwards to say that guys like him aren’t really a threat to personal freedom.
.
By the way, how did this thread wind its way to the government’s authority to decide whether adults may employ birth control? Way back in the beginning, when Kootchman advocated civilian review of cases of police brutality and abuse of power, I was thinking “yes!!” And then I read that the police guild is too powerful and I was thinking “yes!!” — at least insofar at it has been able to prevent meaningful independent review of civil rights abuses (review that the guild disingenuously claims will alter the working conditions officers). Then, somewhere along the way, y’all lost me.
January 15, 2012 at 5:37 pm #743242
JoBParticipantJanuary 16, 2012 at 3:35 am #743243
kootchmanMemberWe have “enabled” government to interfere with every aspect of our lives. I doubt you could walk down the street for 5 blocks without committing some kind of infraction. However asinine or nebulous the charge. Every law, from plastic bags, to wrong side parking that consumes so many nannies here, has in the end, a police authority to enforce it. I do think it amazing that the left wants rules, rules, rules, for their perfect society…. and when a far right conservative tries to do the same…. horror of horrors that he would burden you with the power of the state. Either side, brings arbitration of being a citizen to the police…. the more they are in your life… the worse it is. Look at the John T Williams video…. what even gave that cop the authority to ask a citizen going about his business to “stop” ? Unless you have probable cause…. it’s none of your damn business what my name is, where I am going, day or night. We empower the abuse.
January 16, 2012 at 3:56 am #743244
JoBParticipantkootch..
after spending the day trying to make sure that those most affected by the policies you promote make it through the night..
i simply don’t have the energy to deal with your unrelenting negativity tonight.
please don’t take it personally.
January 16, 2012 at 4:31 am #743245
sydneyMemberNotice he didn’t say he was wr-wr-wr-wr-wr-w-rwr-wr-rw-rwr-wr-wr-wr-wr-wr-r-wr-wr-wr-wr-rwr-wrong!
January 16, 2012 at 4:34 am #743246
JanSParticipanthey, Kootch…how about we just get rid of gov’t. , get rid of laws, get rid of taxes, and let you , and everyone else, have at it. Would that make you happy? If not, where do we draw the line? What WOULD make you happy, since you seem to want to be the decider..?
January 16, 2012 at 9:57 am #743247
kootchmanMemberSoooo many laws…. how did we manage to evolve from simple organic compounds to this elevated position without them? Every single facet of life is being regulated or governed…. . Some species prefer their captivity status. Posted feeding times, climate controlled environment, restricted movement, and a risk free life. 1984 was a novel, not a “how to” manual. Most don’t. Certainly not humans. Where do we draw the line? We could start with… hey, if if ain’t hurtin’ someone else do we really NEED to make a law? What won’t you regulate? ! What you regulate..you have to enforce… and that involves more and more police power… to herd the sheep along. More resources too JoB… they all consume resources… better spent elsewhere. But those stacked up hierarchies..getting much help from them? No I am guessing… rules and laws getting in the way?
January 16, 2012 at 4:07 pm #743248
JoBParticipantkootchman…
wouldn’t it be nice if people would just do the right thing and we wouldn’t have to have so many laws?
but you know that isn’t the way it is.
our society has bought the idea that the end justifies the means.. especially if we are talking about personal gain.
getting there faster justifies endangering lives by speeding…
getting in and out of a store faster justifies using the handicapped parking for just a minute
the desire to exercise your dog with minimum effort justifies letting your dog off leash in public parks
personal gain justifies finding a way to avoid the taxes that create public resources…
you add in might makes right
and you get the very conditions you complain about…
a police force that has begun to believe that it has to force citizens to comply…
and in too many cases..
that has become an accurate perception
it’s enough to make a grown person cry kootch
January 16, 2012 at 10:35 pm #743249
kootchmanMemberJoB it’s human behavior. Some are courteous. Most are. Tell me, is there not a parent alive who does not KNOW for a fact that smoking in the house, in a closed car, is detrimental to kids? I doubt it. Yet, some do it. If they are not compelled by overwhelming common sense of it..are so dismissive of the health of their child, that they would do not consider the stupidity of the act to be compelling enough to defer their addiction gratification. No law will stop it. Yet there is a law pending in the state legislature… I have yet to see the penalties… ya think for one second it will “stop” a car smoker? No, it won’t. It is just another tier of feel good legislation. What HAS dramatically cut down on the incidence of child exposure to second hand smoke? Societal norms. My dogs are leashed in the parks because we bought into the norm,not because it is illegal. Some norms are pure bullshit IMHO… and I don’t and won’t follow them, and you can legislate away all day. This “avoiding taxes” argument you flail away it is hokum. If the tax code has a practice or convention that reduces tax liability… I am not avoiding taxes. I pay what the law requires. No more. Your mortgage deduction is as much tax ‘avoidance” as is keeping offshore earnings offshore. It is allowable and in the massive 72,000 pages of tax code. How much of the national resource is committed to that rat maze? The code is the source and origin of a multi-hundreds of billions of dollars industry and millions of man hours. It is the well spring of perpetual incumbency and political corruption. There is just enough sugar in the code for everyone to insure it has a perpetual life. Your home mortgage deduction included. I return to the “ban puppy mills” discussion. The progresses made have little to do with convoluted machinations of law. Over time, with the power of a moral argument measurable progress. Here’s the true story of homelessness…. in Seattle, today, more homeless are sheltered by private resources, not public ones. One would think we would like to empower more private resources. The moral argument stops, the change of norms goes astray, when manpower whose participation is wanted, and needed, assumes government is “taking care of it” and they can opt out. The fashionably PC’ism is to actualy vilify some of the very same institutions who provide those services from private resources until they adopt the “perfect” model of correctness, whatever that may be. I happen to believe that the tithe I give does more for the alleviation of homelessness than the taxes I give to city government. In fact, I know so. Government, while few like to admit, is losing it’s very legitimecy because it is viewed as constraining freedoms and too damned intrusive. Poll after poll shows this is the dominant view of most of our fellow citizens. We are being governed unto numbness or outrage.
January 16, 2012 at 11:09 pm #743250
JanSParticipantI’m sure a lot of homeless persons would just love to know what those myriads of private resources are…you’ve been to NV…tell them, not us. Are these private resources putting roofs over these people during this cold, snow event? I don’t see it happening, but then, I’m pretty much a recluse right now. Are the churches opening up their buildings to keep people warm? All I see are people, individuals, doing what they can, as in…taking blankets, socks, gloves, etc…donating the use of a chain saw. It’s unconscionable in this rich nation that all of this is needed, and that there are arguments about who is doing more…when it looks to me that it never gets beyond the arguing, and the actual people involved are left to mostly fend for themselves at times. Sad. We’re (you, me, etc) all guilty. You tithe, so you feel like you’ve done your part. I volunteer, you volunteer a few times…we’ve done our part. An extra blanket? Sure…again, someone has done their part. And the never ending argument about who is or should be responsible goes on and on…oh, the tax code is wrong, the prez is wrong, congress isn’t doing it’s part, city hall is stupid, police guild is corrupt…it’s never ending…and tiresome. When do we stop talking (bitching) to each other about it, and talk to the ones that need talking to? Or are we, and just not saying so? I don’t know.
Time for me to go outside…
it’s not a perfect world, and there are people who will push things to the limit no matter what. And those people who smoke in their cars around children? If they get fined enough, they will think twice about doing it. Sometimes people need an incentive, and if it happens to be a law, then so be it. I have no sympathy. Yes, anyone can procreate, but not everyone can be good at raising the children, as we have seen too many times in the past. Left up to their own devices idiots will be idiots. Maybe a law will provide the education that nothing else is giving. You and I see things differently, obviously.
January 17, 2012 at 12:23 am #743251
waterworldParticipantSeems to me that on some of these issues, Jan and Jo and Kootch agree on what the world ought to be like (say, people not smoking in the car with the kids), but disagree on how to get there.
I am not persuaded that private action alone, or whatever it is that Kootch believes shapes our “societal norms,” will achieve even the results we may all agree on. The reductions in exposure to second-hand cigarette smoke, for example, did not spontaneously arise through education and social evolution. Its has taken decades of unrelenting litigation, legislation, and boycotts to beat back the tobacco industry and its fabricated science. The research linking tobacco to cancer goes back to the 1950s, and warnings from the surgeon general followed shortly thereafter. Cigarette sales continued to rise steadily, though, until Congress banned TV and radio ads starting in about 1971. Tobacco companies have continued to lie to the American public about the risks of smoking and of second-hand smoke in spite of all the evidence to the contrary. I credit the slow but steady regulatory pressure with protecting me from cigarette smoke on airplanes, public transit, and at work. Having traveled in places where the government does not regulate tobacco I cannot trust “societal norms” to address the issue.
.
Does that mean we need a law banning smoking in a vehicle if there’s a child in the car? (The proposed legislation, which died in session in 2011 and is coming back around this year, makes a violation a secondary traffic infraction, meaning the officer cannot pull a car over for violating the smoking rule, but he or she can ticket the smoker after pulling the car over for a primary infraction, such as speeding or DUI.) Maybe, maybe not. It would depend on what evidence there is that it works (meaning producing results that I believe are appropriate), that it’s cost-effective, and that it’s not prone to abuse. One advantage of certain rules like this is that the data collected over time accumulates as actuarial data that insurance companies can use to set rates. On the other hand, the true objective of the anti-tobacco movement is to eliminate tobacco use altogether. I have never been able to get behind that, not because I don’t worry for all the people who will live shortened lives, but because I want to be free to indulge my own vices, and I would be a hypocrite to think I could have it both ways.
So, yeah, it’s not a perfect world, and we are all deeply flawed individuals. Just in our own western civilization, people have been debating for centuries whether a human being has a “right” to be paid a wage that would allow him or her to have food and shelter and be able to raise a family. Or whether there is a shared obligation to protect and support those who cannot do it for themselves. It makes my head spin to think that we have not come to a consensus on such fundamental elements of a social compact.
Time to go take some blankets and whatnot over to Nickelsville.
January 17, 2012 at 12:45 am #743252
kootchmanMemberJan… a simple measure of truth… what the hell has the city done except neglect the obvious re” N ville? My preferred charity will be housing hundreds tonight. Do they cover ALL the bases, no? Do they cover a lot? yes. At least there is running water and sanitation facilities. BTY… the airlines loved the smoking ban… it saves them money… lots of money. But I agree, the government ban and exposure to second hand smoke was critical… too bad they gave out tobacco crop subsidies until late 1998 ish….. funny too… Big Tobacco was slammed with the 248 billion settlement… payable over 25 years. How much went to cure the addiction, associated health problems? Reimburse state health care expenditures? Not much.
“50 percent of the settlement was allocated to tobacco farmers. Only 10 percent was set aside for anti-smoking efforts and the remaining 40 percent was distributed for roads, education, and other undetermined initiatives (Lauterstein 2008).” What did WA state do? Ms. Gregoire? Pitiful. She siphoned off the money like it was candy from a Pinata… nary a dime to healthcare. The injured parties were the smokers…the addicted… Cool eh? The farmers are going to get paid for the next 25 years to compensate them for the demand curve trending downwards… while… acreage is expanding as we ship the crap to Asian countries… that’s our government… hard at work. Spreading the sugar.
http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/what_we_do/state_local/tobacco_settlement/
http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/what_we_do/state_local/tobacco_settlement/washington
Private housing…. private resources
January 17, 2012 at 1:16 am #743253
JoBParticipantkootch…
those laws you think aren’t effective allow me to go out in public without fear of making an emergency room stop on the way home because of smoke inhalation.
societal norms didn’t create that safe environment..
laws did.
January 17, 2012 at 1:56 am #743254
waterworldParticipantKootch: I agree with you about Gregoire and the tobacco money. Same things still going in our legislature, too. This year, they are considering a law that will supposedly get the state in on all kinds of big whistle-blower medicaid fraud cases they think they are missing out on — you know, the ones where an insider at a big pharmaceutical company outs the corporate executives engaged in fraud, and the company settles for billions with all the states that pile on. You might think that our state government would want to use some of that money to increase access to or funding for Medicaid? You’d be wrong. If passed, the law requires that every penny of these Medicaid fraud recoveries will go to — you guessed it — increased enforcement. They wouldn’t even have the discretion to spend some of it on actual healthcare for actual poor people.
But foolish spending doesn’t necessarily mean, as I think you may be suggesting, that the underlying litigation or legislation was unwarranted. Either could be dumb, or not dumb, without reference to the other. I’d rather work on how my government is spending the money than leave it in the hands of cheating healthcare executives or lying tobacco companies.
January 17, 2012 at 4:11 pm #743255
redblackParticipantGovernment, while few like to admit, is losing it’s very legitimecy because it is viewed as constraining freedoms and too damned intrusive. Poll after poll shows this is the dominant view of most of our fellow citizens. We are being governed unto numbness or outrage.
that’s not my view, and i don’t know any other average working person who feels that way. most people i know and interact with feel that government fails when it becomes corrupted by money. and most people don’t have the money to buy politicians.
now, if you run a business, i can see that point of view, in lieu of all of the taxes and fees you pay to the several governments. but business owners are not a majority of the citizenry. and i don’t think most people even aspire to run businesses, possibly because of those regulations, taxes, and fees; but more likely, they just want to eearn a comfortable living and be left alone.
and, for the most part, we average working people are left alone by the several governments. i can’t think of any behaviors i would readily engage in but don’t, simply because they’re illegal. and even behaviors that are illegal but harmless to other people are largely ignored by cops and government. smoking pot is a good example. prostitution is another. selling pot? or pimping working girls on a busy street? i.e. making money off of multiple infractions? that’s another story.
the simple truth in all of this is that the cops have to deal with a variety of human behaviors that are as old as humanity. whenever i think that this country and this society has become the sickest, cruelest, most aggressive in human history, i think of charles dickens. oliver twist. a tale of two cities. rife with thieves, murderers, pickpockets, etc. not to mention corrupt government and devious business owners.
these problems get worse as the populace becomes more crowded and ever more connected. and therefore the questions of levels of authority and enforcement become stickier and far more complicated. petty, even. in a bad economy, people of lesser means become more desperate and may do desperate things to survive. when crime rates rise – as they have been – what’s the response from the rest of the community? it’s invariably, “where are the cops?”
like i’ve said before, it’s our government to lose. and we have lost it, to a certain extent. but that’s because it has been usurped by those with the means to usurp it. not because it has become some nefarious force that is bent solely on taking away freedoms for the sake of taking away liberty in general. this country is not authoritarian, and comparing it to stalinist russia is absurd. the laws you question have in no way shifted the balance of power – or wealth! – to average C-student workers. and those average workers in no way, shape, or form have a boot on your neck.
which leads me to my last observation: all of the cases where SPD used excessive force? how many of the victims were rich white people?
not advocating any of those beatings, by the way. they should stop forthwith, and there should be more community interaction with cops. for example, foot patrols – not car patrols – should be brought back to places like alaska junction. maybe seattle cops should be incentivized; maybe require them to get to know at least one average, law abiding citizen every shift.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.