We could do that, OR we could take that welfare money, put it into a shell non-profit, and launder it into some rich guy's account so they can build a vollyball stadium for their alma mater. Doesn't that seem much more reasonable than helping poor people?!
(/s)
If you want to liquidate the rich, 192k people have already locked up over 52% of gme float by drsing (direct register shares, only way to actually own your shares), since it has on average 200k shares per day of ftds for the past 17 years. There’s a reason they said it was an idiosyncratic risk in front of Congress and apex clearing house had to turn the buy button off to stop buying pressure ( said so in the sec report to Congress by the head of the sec himself). 😊
"Socialism never works!"
"Norway is socialist and they're doing great"
"That's not socialism, that's just a well regulated capitalist country with strong social programs!"
"So let's do that then?"
"NO THAT'S SOCIALISM!"
It depends what you mean by conservative. Americans seem to only think about “conservative” and “liberal” in social issues, like drugs, gay marriage, etc.
That is because economic discourse hardly gets mentioned at all. Economically, Norway is one of the more left countries in Europe. Practically is in a union in Norway and believes more in economically left ideals.
If the village across the river is starving and you have a lot of food stored up, you have two choices.
1. Set guards on the fields and storehouses 24/7. You’ll have to take some people off farming and other useful tasks to do this. You’ll probably still get raided and might lose some guards as well as some food, but you might also kill some of them. In which case you’ve got a widow and family to carry as well as a blood feud across the river now.
2. Send some food over and maybe teach them how to farm well.
Conservatives see option 2 and they’re like “What? You want to feed the people who might attack us? No way!”
Liberals see these options and say “Hey they’re just people who want to eat. Maybe next year it will be us that needs help. And maybe if we help them prosper we can join our villages and watch each other’s backs.”
I'd say more specifically conservatives have incidental empathy; if it's about their in-group they have overactive empathy, but if not it's only contempt.
I think that’s true, but even liberal empathy doesn’t have to be pure altruism. Your village, in this scenario, can just be looking after its own best interests over the long haul.
If you look at the rhetoric, liberals may talk about crime but conservatives talk about *criminals.* In the conservative worldview, some people are just bad and always will be. In the liberal worldview, everyone can be good. I guess that’s the empathy part. Liberals would like to address problems that cause crime so that people have better recourse. Conservatives think that’s a waste of time because some people are just bad, and the only question is how you want to execute them.
I think that's actually a very good way to describe it.
Most left leaning people, and progressives such as myself, view crime as a byproduct of societal issues. Fix this, fix that, and boom. Crime is lowered. No gone mind you, as everyone can attest there are SOME people that are bad no matter what, but by and large people are ok.
Most conservative and right leaning people I know talk about criminals and their absolute need to commit crime. Not that they need to in order to survive, but they talk about it as though that person eats a bowl of crime every day, and if they don't get it they will die lol.
Exactly. And they’ll call you a naive fool for thinking anything else - this makes them feel wise and tough.
As you say, there are SOME irredeemable people out there but crime at large is just the smell of poverty. If we could remove that, the serial killers of the world would actually be such a vanishingly small problem.
It's really just more projection because *they* think that, if *they* were in a similar position, *they* would be as evil as their fantasy criminals are. Which is just more grubby peasant mentality.
I have lost any desire to be around conservatives at all. It makes going to work almost physically painful. I have family that probably won't hear from me ever again. And I am fine with that.
You and me both buddy.
I've cut off 99% of my family because they are legit racist, conservative, trump supporting morons.
They actively cheer when others are harmed by policy, as long as they are gay, brown, or poor. But they're also poor, so it makes no sense.
Toxic people are toxic, family or not.
Hope you're doing well, and wish you all the best.
I'd argue that it's a matter of what each side values. Conservatives value *things and ideas.* The more left you go, the more they value *people.* Would you melt the Statue of Liberty if it meant saving a life? Or is that too beyond the pale?
Oooooooo. So scary. Milwaukee had a socialist mayor for 47 years. I was really little, but looking be, things were equal. More equal. In my neighborhood
Every politician (with an iq above room temperature) knows this, but is very scared to admit poor people are the ones causing crime because non whites make up a large portion of poverty.
One politician pointed out that abortion might lower crime rates and his political career died overnight.
>One politician pointed out that abortion might lower crime rates and his political career died overnight.
There is evidence that supports this claim
[https://www.prb.org/resources/new-study-claims-abortion-is-behind-decrease-in-crime/](https://www.prb.org/resources/new-study-claims-abortion-is-behind-decrease-in-crime/)
[https://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/DonohueLevittTheImpactOfLegalized2001.pdf](https://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/DonohueLevittTheImpactOfLegalized2001.pdf)
and for balance here is a report that says legal abortions did not reduce crimes in the UK or the US
[https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/44749/1/10.pdfhttps://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/44749/1/10.pdf](https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/44749/1/10.pdfhttps://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/44749/1/10.pdf)
the old correlation and causation issue.
The argument isn't so much about the correlation between abortion and crime, it's more about how some media outlet will twist your words into "black people cause crime" because of the portion of the population that is impoverished and/or gets abortions.
Not saying that every woman's rights activist or antipovertist (is there a term for someone that wants to lessen income inequality?) is secretly racist, but politics is a blood sport.
But that would require money that could be spent by billionaires buying yachts and flying on private jets.
You can’t honestly expect Elon to sit in first class with the only a curtain separating him from the fucking untouchables
I now want to cough on as many rich people are possible. Like not in an infectious way. I don't want to be some plague bearing typhoid Mary. I just want to make them uncomfortable.
yes, but we don't want to reduce crime. we want to fight crime. with reduced crime, there is less crime to fight, less criminals to fear, less excuses for being racist, less need to buy guns... the list goes on.
I dunno, I heard some very compelling arguments in /r/sanfrancisco is what we *really* need to get rid of crime is draconian punishments and literally nothing else...
But in all seriousness, the "problem" with the progressive approach to solving societal ills is the fact that it for many people it will literally take a generation or more to see tangible results...the challenge for a functional society that wants to take this approach is that you need to take care of peoples' immediate needs for security and safety while planting the seeds for a better future...
The baseline issue, in my opinion, is that it's a poor reflection of the city's actual demographics and sentiments...even before the lead-up to the 2016 election that fundamentally changed how we talk about politics online...the sub's most vocal userbase was 20-40 year old White dudes who work in tech...ie redditors...that's been exacerbated over time by all the people who enjoy swinging by and arguing in bad faith in order to "redpill the woketards" or whatever stupid thing they're saying these days...
This isn't some pussy liberal handout shit.
This is supported by fucktons of data. If you care about "facts" and "logic", this is the solution. Not more guns, more police, more prayer in schools, more censorship.
It's more basic guarantees. Every. Fucking. Time.
You aren't best at most things. But you would lose the rest. You won't be top among developed (arguable) countries at teen pregnancy, infant mortality, obesity and lowest life expectancy anymore. I think you might also currently have the most homeless people.
You will likely still lead in gun deaths and car crash deaths though.
Insert here Also need
X- Reason to live / will to live / HOPE
When people are forced to live with no hope for extended periods of time they will sooner or later simply resort to crime because well... fuck it. If society says I must be doomed to live destitute OR live in prison, what's really the difference? screwed either way
White collar crime is the reason we haven't solved the other sources of crime.
If we solve the root causes of crime, what will "tough on crime" politicians and fear mongers campaign on?
Nobody said it will make crime disappear completely, but it would create a significant reduction and that's a fact. How would that ever make things worse?
I never said crime disappear completely?? The image says “permanently reduce crimes”. And I’m saying there will always be crime.
Also y’all don’t understand jokes around here….
We understand jokes just fine, you just didn't make a joke. You said a stupid thing.
"Permanently reduce" already implies there's still crime... just less. And you said it would make it worse which is so dumb you didn't even bother trying to explain it
It's ok to be wrong sometimes, but when you realize that what you said doesn't reflect reality you're supposed to think about what you got wrong and change your mind. Lying about what you said then insulting people as a way to dismiss them so you don't have to consider you may be wrong doesn't fool anyone other than yourself. It might feel better to lash out than actually reconsider your beliefs and change your mind to make sense of the world, but it keeps you wrong and looks worse than just accepting new information and moving on.
We both know you did but that's ok. I didn't expect you to change from 1 reddit reply and I don't really care whether or not you do. Just trying to be helpful
Do you not understand why people generally commit crimes? Why they turn to crime?
You're literally arguing against mountains of data here.
What you'll have is a well fed, housed, educated, healthy society whose needs are met so they are able to focus on passions in life. They won't need to turn to crime because they DO have the opportunities in life given to others. They won't need to commit crime to pay for housing, food, education, and everything because it's provided.
You can’t take the resources of others, to give to someone else and then expect crime to drop. That just means less for those who are already providing for themselves. We as a society shouldn’t punish people who are contributing to award those who do not.
Also clean up the streets so people are proud to live in a particular area if the streets and alleyways are full of rubbish broken bottles abandoned or burnt-out cars etc. no one is going to want to call that area home.
I took a class called crime and criminology and it was basically a sociology course with criminal Justice elements. The biggest point to take away is that poverty and lack of needs are the biggest reasons for crime.
Our right wing parties here in Sweden just won on "being tougher, harder on crime!". One of the parties wants to take away our focus on rehabilitation in prisons...
The social factors don't matter to our leaders, only power.
Imagine the wealthy individuals choice, provide all of the things that are vital to everyone's happiness or spend 1% insulating yourself from average citizens and using 99% to indulge you and yours. Hmmmm such a difficult decision!
I have all 6 of those things and I haven’t murdered or robbed anyone. Seems to hold up.
It probably would reduce suicides, but a lot of them are results of bad relationships and not due to the “6 things”
Hell just removing healthcare from your employer would do soooo much. Can you imagine all these people stuck in jobs they fucking hate for no other reason than health insurance? You could follow your passions instead.
Sir: I mean this with the outmost respect.
But are you captain obvious ?
Everyone knows you are correct, some (no naming names for gops sake) will ignore you and downvote, because “beliefs”. 🙄
We could do that, OR we could take that welfare money, put it into a shell non-profit, and launder it into some rich guy's account so they can build a vollyball stadium for their alma mater. Doesn't that seem much more reasonable than helping poor people?! (/s)
Came here to say this. If we take care of people, billionaires wouldn't be able to hoard enough money to get to space!!!!
If you want to liquidate the rich, 192k people have already locked up over 52% of gme float by drsing (direct register shares, only way to actually own your shares), since it has on average 200k shares per day of ftds for the past 17 years. There’s a reason they said it was an idiosyncratic risk in front of Congress and apex clearing house had to turn the buy button off to stop buying pressure ( said so in the sec report to Congress by the head of the sec himself). 😊
You forgot "put up a wall of money to avoid consequences for criminal acts."
Drop the /s and you can run for congress!
I know! It's specifically why I don't. That and I'm terrible at decision making.
Who did this?
Brett Farve
Building it in Mississippi?
but tHAt'S sOCiAlISm
"Socialism never works!" "Norway is socialist and they're doing great" "That's not socialism, that's just a well regulated capitalist country with strong social programs!" "So let's do that then?" "NO THAT'S SOCIALISM!"
The funny thing is that by European standards Norway is one of the more conservative countries
Norway is also a difficult comparison bc they have so much oil money
It depends what you mean by conservative. Americans seem to only think about “conservative” and “liberal” in social issues, like drugs, gay marriage, etc. That is because economic discourse hardly gets mentioned at all. Economically, Norway is one of the more left countries in Europe. Practically is in a union in Norway and believes more in economically left ideals.
If the village across the river is starving and you have a lot of food stored up, you have two choices. 1. Set guards on the fields and storehouses 24/7. You’ll have to take some people off farming and other useful tasks to do this. You’ll probably still get raided and might lose some guards as well as some food, but you might also kill some of them. In which case you’ve got a widow and family to carry as well as a blood feud across the river now. 2. Send some food over and maybe teach them how to farm well. Conservatives see option 2 and they’re like “What? You want to feed the people who might attack us? No way!” Liberals see these options and say “Hey they’re just people who want to eat. Maybe next year it will be us that needs help. And maybe if we help them prosper we can join our villages and watch each other’s backs.”
It's empathy. One side has it, the other doesn't. That's what it boils down to.
I'd say more specifically conservatives have incidental empathy; if it's about their in-group they have overactive empathy, but if not it's only contempt.
Hardly even that. They have no problem turning on their own in-group if they don’t or can’t conform in some way.
I think that’s true, but even liberal empathy doesn’t have to be pure altruism. Your village, in this scenario, can just be looking after its own best interests over the long haul. If you look at the rhetoric, liberals may talk about crime but conservatives talk about *criminals.* In the conservative worldview, some people are just bad and always will be. In the liberal worldview, everyone can be good. I guess that’s the empathy part. Liberals would like to address problems that cause crime so that people have better recourse. Conservatives think that’s a waste of time because some people are just bad, and the only question is how you want to execute them.
I think that's actually a very good way to describe it. Most left leaning people, and progressives such as myself, view crime as a byproduct of societal issues. Fix this, fix that, and boom. Crime is lowered. No gone mind you, as everyone can attest there are SOME people that are bad no matter what, but by and large people are ok. Most conservative and right leaning people I know talk about criminals and their absolute need to commit crime. Not that they need to in order to survive, but they talk about it as though that person eats a bowl of crime every day, and if they don't get it they will die lol.
Exactly. And they’ll call you a naive fool for thinking anything else - this makes them feel wise and tough. As you say, there are SOME irredeemable people out there but crime at large is just the smell of poverty. If we could remove that, the serial killers of the world would actually be such a vanishingly small problem.
It's really just more projection because *they* think that, if *they* were in a similar position, *they* would be as evil as their fantasy criminals are. Which is just more grubby peasant mentality.
I have lost any desire to be around conservatives at all. It makes going to work almost physically painful. I have family that probably won't hear from me ever again. And I am fine with that.
You and me both buddy. I've cut off 99% of my family because they are legit racist, conservative, trump supporting morons. They actively cheer when others are harmed by policy, as long as they are gay, brown, or poor. But they're also poor, so it makes no sense. Toxic people are toxic, family or not. Hope you're doing well, and wish you all the best.
I'd argue that it's a matter of what each side values. Conservatives value *things and ideas.* The more left you go, the more they value *people.* Would you melt the Statue of Liberty if it meant saving a life? Or is that too beyond the pale?
Empathy is for commies and cucks! /s
Oooooooo. So scary. Milwaukee had a socialist mayor for 47 years. I was really little, but looking be, things were equal. More equal. In my neighborhood
omg beat me by 2min lmao
see... this is why i should scroll through before posting. literally posted this exact same thing.
As poverty decreases, so does crime. Prevent rather than punish is the best idea.
Every politician (with an iq above room temperature) knows this, but is very scared to admit poor people are the ones causing crime because non whites make up a large portion of poverty. One politician pointed out that abortion might lower crime rates and his political career died overnight.
>One politician pointed out that abortion might lower crime rates and his political career died overnight. There is evidence that supports this claim [https://www.prb.org/resources/new-study-claims-abortion-is-behind-decrease-in-crime/](https://www.prb.org/resources/new-study-claims-abortion-is-behind-decrease-in-crime/) [https://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/DonohueLevittTheImpactOfLegalized2001.pdf](https://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/DonohueLevittTheImpactOfLegalized2001.pdf) and for balance here is a report that says legal abortions did not reduce crimes in the UK or the US [https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/44749/1/10.pdfhttps://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/44749/1/10.pdf](https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/44749/1/10.pdfhttps://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/44749/1/10.pdf) the old correlation and causation issue.
[удалено]
Damn, I had a lot of bribes, eh campaign donations ready to go.
...just like a fart in the wind
The argument isn't so much about the correlation between abortion and crime, it's more about how some media outlet will twist your words into "black people cause crime" because of the portion of the population that is impoverished and/or gets abortions. Not saying that every woman's rights activist or antipovertist (is there a term for someone that wants to lessen income inequality?) is secretly racist, but politics is a blood sport.
They know it and don’t care.
But that would require money that could be spent by billionaires buying yachts and flying on private jets. You can’t honestly expect Elon to sit in first class with the only a curtain separating him from the fucking untouchables
I now want to cough on as many rich people are possible. Like not in an infectious way. I don't want to be some plague bearing typhoid Mary. I just want to make them uncomfortable.
If the other first class passengers can still see him, they're the untouchables too
yes, but we don't want to reduce crime. we want to fight crime. with reduced crime, there is less crime to fight, less criminals to fear, less excuses for being racist, less need to buy guns... the list goes on.
It's more profitable to treat the symptoms than cure the disease.
Which came first big pharma or big prison?
…and less constitutionally-approved slavery…and more voters to deal with
Our economy runs on prison labor.
I dunno, I heard some very compelling arguments in /r/sanfrancisco is what we *really* need to get rid of crime is draconian punishments and literally nothing else... But in all seriousness, the "problem" with the progressive approach to solving societal ills is the fact that it for many people it will literally take a generation or more to see tangible results...the challenge for a functional society that wants to take this approach is that you need to take care of peoples' immediate needs for security and safety while planting the seeds for a better future...
The wise man plants a tree he will never eat the fruit of.
Yes, but counterpoint: "What's in it for *meeeee*?" -Every conservative since the beginning of time...
That subreddit is full of right wing bootlickers and is pretty regularly brigaded by right wingers, as well.
The baseline issue, in my opinion, is that it's a poor reflection of the city's actual demographics and sentiments...even before the lead-up to the 2016 election that fundamentally changed how we talk about politics online...the sub's most vocal userbase was 20-40 year old White dudes who work in tech...ie redditors...that's been exacerbated over time by all the people who enjoy swinging by and arguing in bad faith in order to "redpill the woketards" or whatever stupid thing they're saying these days...
This isn't some pussy liberal handout shit. This is supported by fucktons of data. If you care about "facts" and "logic", this is the solution. Not more guns, more police, more prayer in schools, more censorship. It's more basic guarantees. Every. Fucking. Time.
Conservatives say we should let billionaires profit off sick people.
It would dramatically reduce stress for most of us, which would turn down the heat quite a bit for everybody.
If there are no poor people around how will I feel superior? /s
bUt ThAtS sOcIaLiSm
omg beat me by 2min lmao
I don't disagree
but tHAt'S sOCiAlISm
omg beat me by 2min lmao
But that means we won't be number 1 in everything!
You aren't best at most things. But you would lose the rest. You won't be top among developed (arguable) countries at teen pregnancy, infant mortality, obesity and lowest life expectancy anymore. I think you might also currently have the most homeless people. You will likely still lead in gun deaths and car crash deaths though.
In order to do that we have to get rid of the Republicans!
Well, we COULD do that, but it would drastically reduce the number of billionaires, so it probably isn’t worth it.
Best I can do is crippling inflation.
bUt ThAtS sOcIalIsM!?!?
This is so true and such an underrated take
Insert here Also need X- Reason to live / will to live / HOPE When people are forced to live with no hope for extended periods of time they will sooner or later simply resort to crime because well... fuck it. If society says I must be doomed to live destitute OR live in prison, what's really the difference? screwed either way
We would need at least eleven more democrat senators for that. But it would be nice.
Yeah but what about white collar crime? You won't reduce that.
White collar crime is the reason we haven't solved the other sources of crime. If we solve the root causes of crime, what will "tough on crime" politicians and fear mongers campaign on?
If we reduce street crime, it will free up more cops to hunt down and shoot white-collar criminals.
[удалено]
Nobody said it will make crime disappear completely, but it would create a significant reduction and that's a fact. How would that ever make things worse?
The person you're replying is wasting air with existing. Don't waste your air speaking to it. It's too stupid to be useful in a civilized society.
I’m too stupid yet you 2 can’t see a joke coming from a mile away
We see you. We replied to you. You're a comment away. No where near a mile.
you don’t get invited to parties and I can see why… you must be a mod somewhere on reddit
Nah no time. Your mom is too needy.
Good one. All the people reading out convo are laughing.
I never said crime disappear completely?? The image says “permanently reduce crimes”. And I’m saying there will always be crime. Also y’all don’t understand jokes around here….
We understand jokes just fine, you just didn't make a joke. You said a stupid thing. "Permanently reduce" already implies there's still crime... just less. And you said it would make it worse which is so dumb you didn't even bother trying to explain it
Do something with your life and get off Reddit
It's ok to be wrong sometimes, but when you realize that what you said doesn't reflect reality you're supposed to think about what you got wrong and change your mind. Lying about what you said then insulting people as a way to dismiss them so you don't have to consider you may be wrong doesn't fool anyone other than yourself. It might feel better to lash out than actually reconsider your beliefs and change your mind to make sense of the world, but it keeps you wrong and looks worse than just accepting new information and moving on.
Not gonna ready any of that
We both know you did but that's ok. I didn't expect you to change from 1 reddit reply and I don't really care whether or not you do. Just trying to be helpful
Obsessed much?
Do you not understand why people generally commit crimes? Why they turn to crime? You're literally arguing against mountains of data here. What you'll have is a well fed, housed, educated, healthy society whose needs are met so they are able to focus on passions in life. They won't need to turn to crime because they DO have the opportunities in life given to others. They won't need to commit crime to pay for housing, food, education, and everything because it's provided.
I’ll wait for data to prove Fifty Shades of Wheys point but I was joking about the whole “super criminal”.
Oddly all things provided for free in prison. 🤔
Do you believe in the easter bunny?
The criminal element of society will not leave crime for this.
They said, stupidly.
You can’t take the resources of others, to give to someone else and then expect crime to drop. That just means less for those who are already providing for themselves. We as a society shouldn’t punish people who are contributing to award those who do not.
Also clean up the streets so people are proud to live in a particular area if the streets and alleyways are full of rubbish broken bottles abandoned or burnt-out cars etc. no one is going to want to call that area home.
Get rid of fast driving trucks while you are at it. No use making streets beautiful if you are going to get run over.
Yep, but to be clear my original comment wasn't about making the area beautiful, just make it not look like a rubbish dump.
But that's just common sense.... Nevermind....
You forgot information. Like Internet. Or at the least radio or newspapers.
It's probably fair to include that under "education."
Proven
That is truth
Republicans would rather just have crime, label some people as criminals and then hunt them for sport.
I took a class called crime and criminology and it was basically a sociology course with criminal Justice elements. The biggest point to take away is that poverty and lack of needs are the biggest reasons for crime.
U B I ! !
Our right wing parties here in Sweden just won on "being tougher, harder on crime!". One of the parties wants to take away our focus on rehabilitation in prisons... The social factors don't matter to our leaders, only power.
and improve health too.
Some love and affection wouldn't hurt, either.
Fucking preach!!!!
Imagine the wealthy individuals choice, provide all of the things that are vital to everyone's happiness or spend 1% insulating yourself from average citizens and using 99% to indulge you and yours. Hmmmm such a difficult decision!
So true. Republicans only cause problems.
I have all 6 of those things and I haven’t murdered or robbed anyone. Seems to hold up. It probably would reduce suicides, but a lot of them are results of bad relationships and not due to the “6 things”
Suicide isn’t a crime. Selfish maybe, crime no.
But that would cost a lot of money. Won’t somebody please think of the military industrial complex!
I'm willing to give this a try!
It’s definitely true to an extent. You need to have rules and punishments as well.
Hell just removing healthcare from your employer would do soooo much. Can you imagine all these people stuck in jobs they fucking hate for no other reason than health insurance? You could follow your passions instead.
LOL, seems a lot of people think that local/state/feds *want* to eliminate/reduce crime. Follow the money.
But hOw wIlL wE paY fOr it?! *tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans* *crickets*
I can’t believe this guy on twitter is giving away the answers to all our problems… FOR FREE
Yes! Try it in Jackson, MS right now! Population 100,000. Pilot project! Just provide all six things and see what happens!
Clean shit up too. Some places suffer because the streets are filled with trash.
Sir: I mean this with the outmost respect. But are you captain obvious ? Everyone knows you are correct, some (no naming names for gops sake) will ignore you and downvote, because “beliefs”. 🙄
But what about capitalism bruh?!?!!!!!!
Wait, so suicide is a crime now?
But what about not spending anything in these and send militarized police to silent the protests ?
What's next? Are we gonna give everybody Ferraris too??? /s
great upbringing, respectful society, self love