Forum Replies Created
-
From where I sit, no one should be a cop on the streets if he or she thinks shoot first, or feels instantly threatened by unarmed teens they are supposed to “protect and serve.” They shouldn’t be on the streets if they do as the cop did in the Michael Brown case . . . get out of his car, after Brown had walked away, go after him — while saying he felt in fear of his life — and shoot him down.
Wait in the car, call for backup. Or send other officers to Brown’s home if he must. But there is no reason or excuse to escalate the confrontation — especially when the cop says he fears for his life.
If a cop is too fearful to try to deescalate things with citizens, he’s too fearful to be on the streets with a badge and a gun. If the first thing he or she thinks about is self-preservation at all costs, he or she is in the wrong line of work.
So many cases now to look at, tragically. But the Laquan McDonald murder comes to mind. A teen with a knife, obviously having major issues. The cops could easily have gotten him off the streets without firing a shot. They have all kinds of tools at their disposal, and if they don’t feel competent to deal with it, if they can’t talk him down, call for backup. Nets, sprays, hell, tear gas, while causing a great deal of pain, is preferable to shooting someone to death. There is just no reason in 99% of these cases to jump straight to killing mode.
Yes it is all on the politicians. It is easy to see the new owners turned the company around to take their windfall profit. They screwed over people they owed money. It is a form of fraud or should be. That is up to the politicians. The politicians who remain easily bought. The value in the company is the product it produced. The company still exists making the same products so those creditors should be paid. Labor under contract should have some value stake in the business but again that is up to the politicians.
It always starts with the politicians.
I guess you and I will just never see things like this the same way. And not saying you believe this, cuz I don’t know, but most people on the right constantly tell us that government should get out of the way, leave business alone, let it do as it pleases. They want our gubmint to be laissez faire. But, at the same time, they’re the first people to blame government when it fails to stop private sector venality. Can’t have it both ways. Do they want the government in or out? If they say out, they can’t then blame it for failing to step in and stop fraud, abuse, exploitation, etc. etc.
Another way to look at this: Rapists and murderers. Government can’t always prevent their actions. When it can’t, is that “all on the politicians,” or is that on the rapists and murderers? Moving over to the actions of business owners, financiers, hedge fund guys, corporate raiders and the like . . . . These are adults. They know right from wrong. They know when their actions hurt workers, their families, the communities and so on, but they still do these things. Shouldn’t they be held responsible for their own choices, and the consequences of those choices? Their own actions, and the repercussions? Is it really the fault of mommy and daddy gubmint for not preventing adults who should know better from doing these things?
As to the question regarding how these things transfer from generation to generation. It’s pretty much how things like religious preference transfer, too. A lot of people just “trust” their parents and don’t think they’d tell them something that was wrong — to believe in or do. Lots of studies also show that people will dig in even deeper when confronted with evidence that goes against their beliefs.
These studies say this is more common with those on the right than the left — but it’s something that impacts a lot of people. They dig in. They’re just more likely to believe their own parents, or their ministers, or their neighbors, than any “ivory tower egg-head.” Though I’m sure they’re using different terms for that these days.
Sadly, changing these attitudes is just going to take time, and we’ll have to move through the generations a bit longer. It’s so much a part of our American history, as you’ve noted . . . and even with people like Lincoln, who fit the classic definition of “racist,” at least until his last two years or so. And he was one of the good guys in his day, being an anti-slavery advocate for his entire adult life.
Tragedy, thy name is America.
Apparently, “conceal carry rights” only apply to white guys. And it’s yet one more case where the existence of a gun escalates an encounter into a deadly one. The mere existence.
Conceal carry should be illegal, and there is no Constitutional grounds to protect it. “Keep and bear arms” — if we ignore the militia context. Keep and bear. Not keep and hide.
But the main issue here looks like police racism, which comes from societal racism, which is helped along via endless denial of that racism by all too many white people.
Aah, should have read that more carefully. James says it’s a hard-drive failure. That pretty much closes off any software solutions, obviously. They’re going to have to replace the SSD drives and install a new OS, and all of their webserver software on top of that — and that’s extensive. Complicated configuration on top of the installation, etc. I’m guessing Troy uses Linux. That does take time. Windows might be faster to install, but most IT folks think it’s less secure than Linux. Debates about that. But most like Linux more.
Another one of those bottom lines: If you’re being consistent about unemployment, you would have been raging against high levels under every American president going back generations, at least. If this just started with Obama for you (as in, for Trump and his supporters), then you have zero credibility. I don’t remember hearing Trump complain about this during Bush’s presidency, for example. How convenient to say the stats just suddenly went bogus with Obama in the White House.
bnw,
It should be obvious. Just look what I quoted. You say unemployment is low. You believe the unemployment data. I don’t. When people compare it to other times it means nothing since the methodology was changed. Thats why I use Shadow Stats to get as close to an apple to apple stat as possible.
The ShadowStats Alternate Unemployment Rate for May 2016 is 23.0%
I missed this comment the first time through.
The part in bold. No. The methodology hasn’t really changed, though the data collection has gotten better, and they look at U1 – U6 now. They’ve been using the Current Population Survey (CPS) method since 1940, when it was first instituted as a part of FDR’s WPA programs. Which is why I said if you compare apples to apples, it’s a very low unemployment figure. Far from perfect, and the government says as much. It’s an estimate, one that does let a lot of people slip through the cracks, especially those who have given up looking for work after a certain period of time.
From Wiki:
The Bureau of Labor Statistics measures employment and unemployment (of those over 15 years of age) using two different labor force surveys[35] conducted by the United States Census Bureau (within the United States Department of Commerce) and/or the Bureau of Labor Statistics (within the United States Department of Labor) that gather employment statistics monthly. The Current Population Survey (CPS), or “Household Survey”, conducts a survey based on a sample of 60,000 households. This Survey measures the unemployment rate based on the ILO definition.[36]
The Current Employment Statistics survey (CES), or “Payroll Survey”, conducts a survey based on a sample of 160,000 businesses and government agencies that represent 400,000 individual employers.[37] This survey measures only civilian nonagricultural employment; thus, it does not calculate an unemployment rate, and it differs from the ILO unemployment rate definition. These two sources have different classification criteria, and usually produce differing results. Additional data are also available from the government, such as the unemployment insurance weekly claims report available from the Office of Workforce Security, within the U.S. Department of Labor Employment & Training Administration.[38] The Bureau of Labor Statistics provides up-to-date numbers via a PDF linked here.[39] The BLS also provides a readable concise current Employment Situation Summary, updated monthly.[40]
U1–U6 since 1950, as reported by the Bureau of Labor StatisticsThe Bureau of Labor Statistics also calculates six alternate measures of unemployment, U1 through U6, that measure different aspects of unemployment:[41]
You don’t know shit about the topic at hand the safeguarding and managing access to federal documents especially sensitive or higher. But that will never stop you.
Ease up, bnw. You’re making it personal again.
Yes, I know about the topic at hand. And I’m guessing Comey knows a lot more than either of us. He didn’t think it amounted to anything illegal. I don’t either. I just see it as stupid, arrogant, reckless and negligent of Clinton. And if we jailed people for those things, not many Americans would be able to walk down the street. They’d be in jail, too.
Money is not fictional. Money has intrinsic value. Federal Reserve Notes are not money and are quite fictional. Printing the $1 bill costs just as much as printing the $100 bill.
What do you mean by “money” then? It’s currency. And no currency has any intrinsic value other than what humans agree to. As in, it’s a fiction we agree to. Well, at least the rich and powerful agree to this, and then we go along with that.
___
Better trade deals. Bringing money back from abroad to create jobs here in the US. I’ve answered this many times.
Come on, bnw. Even you have to admit that’s incredibly vague. What exactly does “better trade deals” mean? Specifically? And how will Trump bring money back here from abroad? Details, please. And what policy would he implement to turn that money into jobs?
Seriously, you haven’t answered this. Nor has Trump. He’s far, far too vague about everything.
Billy,
What is really funny is that you of all people are concerned about the national debt!
(Tried to respond multiple times over a half hour but keep getting 403 Forbidden message when quoting your post.)
Unlike most people on the right, I actually favor paying for the government we use, as we use it. Most on the right prefer steep tax cuts, which create massive deficits and debt.
I’d rather raise tax rates on the wealthy so we can balance the budget. Of course, that’s under our current system. I’ve also put forward ways to make it so we don’t need any taxation at all, and there is no debt.
Money is a fiction. It’s an agreed upon fiction. Like capitalism, nation-states and religion. We could very easily agree to a different kind of fiction, one that benefits 100% of us, instead of just the 1%.
But if we remain in our current fiction, yeah. I’d prefer we have no debt. Though it’s economic suicide to try to pay it down during a recession or a weak recovery. The time to do that is when the economy is doing well. The CBO, for instance, told Bush back in 2000/2001 that if he just left tax rates alone, we could pay off the entire debt by 2009. He cut rates for the rich twice — 2001 and 2003 — and doubled the debt instead.
And I’m still waiting for you to tell us how Trump would bring back jobs.
;>)
Btw, when you say rich people create jobs? Um, no. Consumer demand for products and services create them. Rich people don’t want to hire any workers at all. They only hire them when they have to to meet demand.
Nick Hanauer “Rich people don’t create jobs”
Also: Trump calls for massive tax cuts for the rich. This will result in massive job losses — unless the government just puts the ginormous lost revenues on our national credit card. His tax cut plan will add an additional 10 trillion in debt over the course of his presidency, if he wins. That’s in addition to any debt that would be accrued without those tax cuts.
