|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On November 19 2018 16:55 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2018 02:40 Ryzel wrote:As a behavior analyst who has worked in the special education field for about a decade and at residential facilities for several years, I can say with confidence that the state of care for intellectually and physically disabled individuals, especially those that exhibit aggressive and/or adversarial behaviors, are appalling. Yes both the level of care and efficacy of treatments have made leaps and bounds over the past 100 years, but when baseline is being locked in cages 24 hours a day that’s not saying much. The resources required to learn the skills to provide meaningful behavior change for these individuals do not come close to the resources being allocated to the providers. The one-on-one or one-on-two staff responsible for providing their personal care, meals, and enrichment throughout the day require only high school diplomas and get paid minimum wage. They are incentivized to do the bare minimum possible (sleeping with sunglasses on in individuals rooms, yelling at individuals to stay in their rooms, etc.) to make their jobs easier. Non-reported abuse (sexual, physical, and neglect) runs rampant, direct supervision is minimal, and the turnover rate in the field is so astronomical (with state mandated employee training so expensive) that agencies are incentivized to turn a blind eye. That’s not to say that there aren’t genuinely caring staff, and those lucky individuals who receive their care are much more likely to thrive. I feel fortunate that my current place of employment is a cut above the rest in this regard, but they are still far from perfect, and it’s basically a gamble to get a “good” staff member. TLDR; it’s better than it has been, but you still wouldn’t want to put a family member somewhere if you could help it. EDIT - On November 17 2018 07:34 Plansix wrote:On November 17 2018 07:06 IgnE wrote:On November 17 2018 06:06 Plansix wrote:On November 17 2018 05:23 IgnE wrote:
i think the bigger question is: what to do with people that no one wants to take care of (the right way)? Are you under the impression that there is not a set of best practices already in existence? it seems to me that my question pertains to the execution of ‘best practices,’ specifically to the question of how to execute them when apparently no one wants to but now that you mention it, i do have serious doubts that anything like a ‘current best practices’ is ‘best,’ or even that it has obtained broad consensus. it seems more accurate to say that we have a list of ‘bad practices’ that bring shame and ignominy I think your question assumes too much. First, that it assumes that no one wants to care of the special needs children with the exclusion of other factors, like pay. Or that there are not enough people willing to care for extreme cases of special needs children. Or that the children are so undervalued that the state is unwilling to provide funds to care for them sufficiently. It supposes an economic and or emotional cost assessment on the children and that because of those high costs, no one wishes to care for them. I do not believe that is the case at all, giving my experience reading about the Judge Rotenberg Center for so many years. I do not believe desire to care for them is in short supply. These children have parents and families who do advocate for them. What they lack is sufficient, sustained advocacy toward legislation that would prohibit the practice and force the Judge Rotenberg Center to change. There are regulations that have prevented its use on new students, but nothing that would outright prohibit it. And because of that, the practice continues. Current best practice for treatment of autism is 20-30 hours a week of applied behavior analysis (ABA) treatment from a registered behavior technician (RBT, $40-50 an hour average), with board certified behavior analysts (BCBAs) providing around 10 hours a month of supervision ($1000 on average). That brings the cost to about $70k a year. This does not include medical expenses, actual day-to-day care of the individual, or cost of state services in providing residential placement or potential 911 calls. There is simply NO way that the state can provide funding at levels that can maintain best practice. They’re barely able to provide funding for anything past the essentials. The only individuals receiving best practice treatment are those living at home and who have either rich families who can pay out of pocket, or families that have private health insurance. EDIT 2 - Electroshock therapy is a relic of behaviorism from the ‘40s-‘60s and I’m shocked (heh) that any state government is willing to provide funding to an agency that utilizes it. Good post. I used to be a support worker in the UK and I experienced a very similar industry. The whole thing is funded by our government but since the tories took over it went down the pan because people with learning disabilities have no economic value. To get the right standard of care is totally possible, but it requires everyone to do the right thing from the parents/family to the government and everyone in between. Getting good staff on practically minimum wage is a lottery, and if the care provider doesn't want to spend money on good training even having lovely, caring members of staff isn't enough. The place we should be starting is at least rooting out the bad places, the institutions that torture, bully and inflict misery on the people they are supposed to be caring for.
I totally agree, but the problem is that even these child torture centers (by which I mean “bad” inpatient/residential care facilities) serve a community need. Shut them down, and unless a new one comes to take its place all the residents are either on the streets or in their old homes. Most families that have their children placed at these facilities do so because they feel they have no other choice, and/or are scared of their children. I have a client whose parents WANT to see as many problem behaviors as possible to justify him never coming home, and get upset when his behavior rates are lower than usual.
The sad fact of the matter is that in a society run by our lord and savior capitalism, there will likely never be a way to justify the necessary funding for best practice care for these individuals. The economic value of treatment of special needs individuals should ideally be supplied by 1) the productivity increase of a vocationally trained, behaviorally managed individual vs. baseline and 2) the productivity increase of parent caregivers who no longer have to spend time and effort providing care. Unfortunately this rarely pans out as most individuals do not receive best practice treatment when needed, which results in semi-trained individuals being able to work, but requiring constant maintenance whose value required cancels out the value being brought in.
That being said, even if it did work consistently, there’s no way for someone to “invest” in an individual or group of individuals in this way and receive direct benefit, so there’s no capitalist incentive to fund this type of service. It would be for a long-term societal good, and we all know how popular those are in US politics right now.
|
The sad fact of the matter is that in a society run by our lord and savior capitalism, there will likely never be a way to justify the necessary funding for best practice care for these individuals.
Compounding the initial problem is that there's no way to effectively protect any gains made. Even if you got a group of politicians to work together and improve the conditions, a few elections later and you'll end up with a Ronald Reagan and the whole thing will far apart.
|
On November 20 2018 01:01 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +The sad fact of the matter is that in a society run by our lord and savior capitalism, there will likely never be a way to justify the necessary funding for best practice care for these individuals. Compounding the initial problem is that there's no way to effectively protect any gains made. Even if you got a group of politicians to work together and improve the conditions, a few elections later and you'll end up with a Ronald Reagan and the whole thing will far apart.
The greatest generation builds the welfare state. The boomer generation does their damndest make sure they don't have to share it with anyone else.
|
Well mentalities change, and that’s the most important factor in democratic countries. The GOP demographic is very much in decline and a Trump would have had probably no chance in only ten years.
I think the siege mentality conservatism that the GOP represent will go with time, simply because there won’t be enough uneducated, rural white voters to constitute a solid base. And the numbers give every indication that the voters of tomorrow will care more about social security, workers rights, environmental protection and so on than their elders.
|
On November 20 2018 03:12 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Well mentalities change, and that’s the most important factor in democratic countries. The GOP demographic is very much in decline and a Trump would have had probably no chance in only ten years.
I think the siege mentality conservatism that the GOP represent will go with time, simply because there won’t be enough uneducated, rural white voters to constitute a solid base. And the numbers give every indication that the voters of tomorrow will care more about social security, workers rights, environmental protection and so on than their elders.
Didn't Trump score really well with college-educated whites though?
|
Demographic change is also an undercurrent in US politics. The children that will make up the non-white majority of US citizens have already been born. They are in kindergarten right now. Every time the demographic makeup changes in America we see this. The white flight of the 1950 and 1960s came when the walls of segregation were eroded. Boston saw huge backslash in the 1980s to school busing programs to create more diverse schools and end destiny determined by zip code. The anger about PC culture in the 1990s. When Republicans said Obama inflamed the racial tensions in this country, they were not wrong. Though I doubt they would admit that winning the election is what caused the increased tension.
But you just need to look at who Republicans are electing and who Democrats are electing to see the undercurrent of race in our modern politics given form.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/03/04/390672196/for-u-s-children-minorities-will-be-the-majority-by-2020-census-says
On November 20 2018 03:54 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2018 03:12 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Well mentalities change, and that’s the most important factor in democratic countries. The GOP demographic is very much in decline and a Trump would have had probably no chance in only ten years.
I think the siege mentality conservatism that the GOP represent will go with time, simply because there won’t be enough uneducated, rural white voters to constitute a solid base. And the numbers give every indication that the voters of tomorrow will care more about social security, workers rights, environmental protection and so on than their elders. Didn't Trump score really well with college-educated whites though?
Romey did better. Trump managed not to lose them.
Meanwhile, college-educated whites appear to have preferred Trump slightly, according to current exit poll figures (which, once again, could still shift some). That would mean Trump moderately underperformed Romney, who won this group by 14 points, according to the data from Pew.
However, that would still essentially be a win for Trump, considering that at one point, it looked like Trump might be the first Republican in decades to lose white, college-educated Americans.
https://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501378673/how-trump-won-according-to-the-exit-polls
|
|
|
United States44181 Posts
And now Finland is on the list, with Canada, Australia, Mexico, Germany, UK, France, South Korea, and so forth. Are you happy now?
|
The White House Correspondents dinner won't have a comedian any more. Trump's White House is so fully of cry babies that they ended 30 year tradition of comedy.
|
On November 20 2018 05:15 KwarK wrote:
And now Finland is on the list, with Canada, Australia, Mexico, Germany, UK, France, South Korea, and so forth. Are you happy now?
Which list is that?
And again, as a foreigner, I struggle to understand how GOP guys believe Trump is making America respected around the world. I mean. Make America Rake Again. It's brilliant. But not what I'd call respectful.
|
United States44181 Posts
On November 20 2018 07:58 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2018 05:15 KwarK wrote:
And now Finland is on the list, with Canada, Australia, Mexico, Germany, UK, France, South Korea, and so forth. Are you happy now? Which list is that? And again, as a foreigner, I struggle to understand how GOP guys believe Trump is making America respected around the world. I mean. Make America Rake Again. It's brilliant. But not what I'd call respectful.
America’s new enemies.
|
On November 20 2018 07:39 Plansix wrote:
The White House Correspondents dinner won't have a comedian any more. Trump's White House is so fully of cry babies that they ended 30 year tradition of comedy.
I imagine this is a great opportunity for the new generation of news-comedy hosts to have their own special for the same purpose.
|
The troops deployed against the caravan are coming home. The election is over so the stunt can stop The horrible dangers of the invasion must have been averted. Mission completed!
The 5,800 troops who were rushed to the southwest border amid President Donald Trump’s pre-election warnings about a refugee caravan will start coming home as early as this week — just as some of those migrants are beginning to arrive.
Democrats and Republicans have criticized the deployment as a ploy by the president to use active-duty military forces as a prop to try to stem Republican losses in this month’s midterm elections.
The general overseeing the deployment told POLITICO on Monday that the first troops will start heading home in the coming days as some are already unneeded, having completed the missions for which they were sent. The returning service members include engineering and logistics units whose jobs included placing concertina wire and other barriers to limit access to ports of entry at the U.S.-Mexico border.
All the troops should be home by Christmas, as originally expected, Army Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Buchanan said in an interview Monday.
"Our end date right now is 15 December, and I've got no indications from anybody that we'll go beyond that," said Buchanan, who leads the land forces of U.S. Northern Command. source
|
|
|
On November 20 2018 21:25 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2018 18:53 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:The troops deployed against the caravan are coming home. The election is over so the stunt can stop The horrible dangers of the invasion must have been averted. Mission completed! The 5,800 troops who were rushed to the southwest border amid President Donald Trump’s pre-election warnings about a refugee caravan will start coming home as early as this week — just as some of those migrants are beginning to arrive.
Democrats and Republicans have criticized the deployment as a ploy by the president to use active-duty military forces as a prop to try to stem Republican losses in this month’s midterm elections.
The general overseeing the deployment told POLITICO on Monday that the first troops will start heading home in the coming days as some are already unneeded, having completed the missions for which they were sent. The returning service members include engineering and logistics units whose jobs included placing concertina wire and other barriers to limit access to ports of entry at the U.S.-Mexico border.
All the troops should be home by Christmas, as originally expected, Army Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Buchanan said in an interview Monday.
"Our end date right now is 15 December, and I've got no indications from anybody that we'll go beyond that," said Buchanan, who leads the land forces of U.S. Northern Command. source What is the spin? As a outsider it seems hard to even pretend its a win. What is trump camp saying?
The spin is that their mission is complete and they will be home in time for christmas as expected. There isn't a spin, basically, because spin has become irrelevant.
|
|
|
US military is notorious for not keeping the most immaculate books. There will be a lot of questions regarding that, but don't expect clear cut answers. At most, someone could sue the admin for wasting money on a political stunt. But I don't see that ever happening.
|
|
|
|
|
On November 21 2018 00:28 JimmiC wrote:Some of these mistakes by the Trump government are amazing. Like How does Ivanka not know that you can't use your personal email. Did she not even understand what the "lock her up chants" were all about? This will be another interesting story to watch because Trump sure got a lot of mileage about Hillary's emails it will be interesting to see what kind of mileage the Dem's can get. I'm not sure that the "I didn't know it was wrong" defense is going to fly. https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/politics/ivanka-trump-email/index.html
easy...
Hillary did it and didn't go to jail, so it is fine Ivanka did it. Also, Hillary needs to go to jail for it so lock her up!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
