On October 23 2011 04:06 Biff The Understudy wrote: If it was impossible to be an entrepreneur in France, we wouldn't have an economy anymore. Apparently, we are still doing fine.
France’s debt stands at 85% of GDP. The last time you were able to boast a balanced budget was back in 1975. And your credit rating is about to be downgraded.
Some stuff are seriously fucked up in France, but our tradition of having a strong State protecting public interest is really one of the great thing about this country.
I'm glad you're happy with it, since you're the one who actually lives there. To me, as an outside observer, that "tradition" represents everything wrong with your country. But that's just me.
On October 23 2011 01:56 Biff The Understudy wrote: Or, you consider the fact that a quarter of people in jail in the world are in jail in America. That's more than a fucking % of your people in jail. And now, consider the fact that your private prison industry (have to be stupid, yeah, to give prisons to private interests) spends 400 millions dollars lobbying every year so that senators keep voting moire and more and more repressing laws.
The harsh laws putting people in prison in America is a result of voters demanding harder sentences, and politicians not wanting to be seen as soft on crime. Corporations have very little to do with it.
Police, prosecutors, and prisons all have a strong voice in the number and types of crimes being prosecuted and the length of prison terms. Politicians only cater to the moneyed interests. Public can't see all the costs while perceiving that a lot is being done to keep them safe.
Certain companies that use prison labor will also favor having a large prison population to draw from.
Eh, no, the politicians make the laws that define the prison term, not the police, prosecutors, or prisons. The politicians cater to whatever keeps them in office, and no American politician has ever lost an election by appearing tough on crime.
In a culture where "soft on crime" is a derogatory term, prisons will eventually be overcrowded.
Sure, lobbyists are always a factor, but you should probably stick to promoting the more believable conspiracy theories.
On October 23 2011 04:06 Biff The Understudy wrote: If it was impossible to be an entrepreneur in France, we wouldn't have an economy anymore. Apparently, we are still doing fine.
France’s debt stands at 85% of GDP. The last time you were able to boast a balanced budget was back in 1975. And your credit rating is about to be downgraded.
Some stuff are seriously fucked up in France, but our tradition of having a strong State protecting public interest is really one of the great thing about this country.
I'm glad you're happy with it, since you're the one who actually lives there. To me, as an outside observer, that "tradition" represents everything wrong with your country. But that's just me.
Fine.
You wouldn't live in France, I wouldn't live in the US. I guess everybody is happy.
Our debt was 65% before the crisis, which is absolutely standard for a western democracy today. England is a super liberal country compared to France with very low corporate taxes and has wose debts problems. So you know...
Our rating hasn't been degraded. At least not yet. US one has.
I didn't want to start this country bashing, but seriously, I don't think you take the right angle.
On October 23 2011 03:05 semantics wrote: Just before someone calls Tien racist imma go try to find the statics that back that up which i know exist, if i remember right it's 1 in 9 black men will spend time in prison in the US
This is the only point that matters and exactly the point I wanted to make. The fact that more blacks are locked up and that too many black children grow up without a father leaves only two points where you can stand. Either you make it about race, "blacks do this and that because that's the way they are", which makes you a racist moron or you accept the fact that there are socio-economic reasons that influence a whole lot what people do and why they do it. (This leads to the point, that not everything lies in the sphere of influence within people, and that this wild-west cowboy style everybody-for-himself is stupid. Which is the point I wanted to make.)
Thank you Tien for making it short and proving my point.
There are no "two points" where you can stand. Developmental psychologists are in unanimous agreement that behavior of people comes from both nature and nurture. Anybody that outright dismisses genetics or environment is just plain wrong because we know it's a combination of the two. It's far more ignorant to dismiss genetics from the conversation than to bring genetics into the conversation.
On October 23 2011 04:35 Serthius wrote: Eh, no, the politicians make the laws that define the prison term, not the police, prosecutors, or prisons. The politicians cater to whatever keeps them in office, and no American politician has ever lost an election by appearing tough on crime.
In a culture where "soft on crime" is a derogatory term, prisons will eventually be overcrowded.
Sure, lobbyists are always a factor, but you should probably stick to promoting the more believable conspiracy theories.
The public buys the argument, and politicians are the final decision makers. Yet, the politicians value the opinion of stakeholders such as police, prosecutors, prisons, etc. Tough on crime is a framing of the issue in a way favored by said stakeholders. Catering to interests of said stakeholders is a way to smooth their time in office. The prison population did however explode in the 1980's long before corporate prisons gained lobbying clout.
Collusion between people that interact on a regular basis isn't a conspiracy. Police and prosecutors asking for favors of more resources isn't exactly improbable. Maybe it's even believable.
On October 23 2011 04:06 Biff The Understudy wrote: Surely the fact that private corporations run prisons and spend half a billion dollar every year in lobbying has nothing to do with the fact that 2 300 000 Americans are in jail right now. Compare to 60 000 in France.
On October 23 2011 03:05 semantics wrote: Just before someone calls Tien racist imma go try to find the statics that back that up which i know exist, if i remember right it's 1 in 9 black men will spend time in prison in the US
This is the only point that matters and exactly the point I wanted to make. The fact that more blacks are locked up and that too many black children grow up without a father leaves only two points where you can stand. Either you make it about race, "blacks do this and that because that's the way they are", which makes you a racist moron or you accept the fact that there are socio-economic reasons that influence a whole lot what people do and why they do it. (This leads to the point, that not everything lies in the sphere of influence within people, and that this wild-west cowboy style everybody-for-himself is stupid. Which is the point I wanted to make.)
Thank you Tien for making it short and proving my point.
There are no "two points" where you can stand. Developmental psychologists are in unanimous agreement that behavior of people comes from both nature and nurture. Anybody that outright dismisses genetics or environment is just plain wrong because we know it's a combination of the two. It's far more ignorant to dismiss genetics from the conversation than to bring genetics into the conversation.
That does not make sense in the context: You might be able to find genes related to certain types of behaviour, but it is not proof that said behaviour will cause crime. At the same time, the genes might have certain triggers, but they will have to be environmental to a very large extend. The matter of the fact is: You can change environment, but not the genes. Therefore it makes a lot more sense to blame environment and not the genes.
On October 23 2011 03:05 semantics wrote: Just before someone calls Tien racist imma go try to find the statics that back that up which i know exist, if i remember right it's 1 in 9 black men will spend time in prison in the US
This is the only point that matters and exactly the point I wanted to make. The fact that more blacks are locked up and that too many black children grow up without a father leaves only two points where you can stand. Either you make it about race, "blacks do this and that because that's the way they are", which makes you a racist moron or you accept the fact that there are socio-economic reasons that influence a whole lot what people do and why they do it. (This leads to the point, that not everything lies in the sphere of influence within people, and that this wild-west cowboy style everybody-for-himself is stupid. Which is the point I wanted to make.)
Thank you Tien for making it short and proving my point.
There are no "two points" where you can stand. Developmental psychologists are in unanimous agreement that behavior of people comes from both nature and nurture. Anybody that outright dismisses genetics or environment is just plain wrong because we know it's a combination of the two. It's far more ignorant to dismiss genetics from the conversation than to bring genetics into the conversation.
That does not make sense in the context: You might be able to find genes related to certain types of behaviour, but it is not proof that said behaviour will cause crime. At the same time, the genes might have certain triggers, but they will have to be environmental to a very large extend. The matter of the fact is: You can change environment, but not the genes. Therefore it makes a lot more sense to blame environment and not the genes.
It doesn't make sense to just blame whatever you can change and ignore whatever you can't. When we're talking about throwing billions of dollars at federal programs it should be extremely important to understand all of the causes of problems so you can know how effective a solution may be.
I'm an African American and I can say my father wasn't around hell just about every kid in my neighborhood didn't have a dad, and I personally believe that it is indeed the environment we are brought up in. Most people growing up in the ghetto are influenced by Hip hop culture, that rags to riches story and bedding as many "bad bitches" you can. It's sad to me because I know if the community took a bigger role in raising the children and removing all those negative influences and that dog eat dog mentality children will be raised to understand that family and community are the most important thing. I wish people wouldn't judge my people based off what they see on tv or hear on the news, I certainly didn't turn out badly and when I have children one day I'm going to be there for them and give them everything that I didn't have.
On October 23 2011 04:06 Biff The Understudy wrote: Surely the fact that private corporations run prisons and spend half a billion dollar every year in lobbying has nothing to do with the fact that 2 300 000 Americans are in jail right now. Compare to 60 000 in France.
Oh please.
Correlation =/= causation.
The prison industry is an industry, like any other. It would be naive to think that they don't benefit from a higher prison population, since they are funded based on demographics.
The private prison industry also has powerful lobby groups and has their tendrils in policy, policing and private security. Old news.
In Canada, the government is ramming legislation through right now which imposes mandatory minimum sentences for minor offences, tougher penalties, more incarceration. This is despite a universally falling crime rate in Canada and a falling crime severity index over the past decade. This also directly follows a huge investement in giant prisons by the same government, which is the same government which created the existence of private prisons.
The contrast between the tea party and occupy crowd is striking:
One has specific concise positions based on timeless principles. The other is just a heterogenous mix of frustrated people who want everything to magically be better.
One is demonized by the media, called racist (must be on to something when the race card is being played) The other is trumpted by the media, honored by diplomats, and lines up perfectly with President Obama and world union leader's agenda for more concentrated power.
One is a loose-knit grass-roots movement. The other is organized, supported, and trained by union activists skilled at manipulation.
Note the name of the movement: 'Occupy' Who is going to 'occupy' What will be 'occupied' This is carefully chosen wording with serious historical implications. Think for a moment about the most familiar occupations of the past century or two.
On October 23 2011 05:25 Kingkosi wrote: I'm an African American and I can say my father wasn't around hell just about every kid in my neighborhood didn't have a dad, and I personally believe that it is indeed the environment we are brought up in. Most people growing up in the ghetto are influenced by Hip hop culture, that rags to riches story and bedding as many "bad bitches" you can. It's sad to me because I know if the community took a bigger role in raising the children and removing all those negative influences and that dog eat dog mentality children will be raised to understand that family and community are the most important thing. I wish people wouldn't judge my people based off what they see on tv or hear on the news, I certainly didn't turn out badly and when I have children one day I'm going to be there for them and give them everything that I didn't have.
Yeah, and I think this touches on with what Tien saying about the African-American community taking more responsibility, instead of everyone else scapegoating racism as an excuse for why they shouldn't have to take responsibility. It's disgusting that rappers diss those that don't have "street cred" or "bling." Going to prison and blowing all your money on stupid jewelry isn't something that should be promoted to children that listen to rap.
EPT
