talking to much
I talk too much. My five year old son called me out on this. Interestingly, it coincides with another run at jury duty, and, as usual, I was not picked because I 'talk too much.' Yes, I am flibbertigibbet. Except on dates. On dates I am rather lucky to have more words than NPC that has no side quests scripted.
I don't understand things and I will certainly say as much. Like, we had to fill out a form for the attorneys to determine our attitudes towards. crimes. I live in Texas. 'Build more prisons!' has been the motto probably forever. When's the last time the state of Texas built a psychiatric hospital? 1968?
Follow my math with me and tell where I got it wrong. If building more prisons was a deterrent to crime, wouldn't we need to stop building prisons at some point? No! The more prisons you build means the more space you have to lock folks up and that translates into greater emphasis being put on filling them. Senators get re-elected by running on meaningless slogans like "I am tough on crime." That should translate, "This will cost you." It does. It cost society. There is research that shows treating people for mental health actually cuts recidivism in half.
Why doesn't fiscal policies reflect scientific understanding? A question on the form asked if I thought our criminal justice system was fair. I asked, 'why is that you are more likely to be convicted of a crime if you're male, under 30, and black?" Is that fair? Statistically, how many fat, rich, white bastards go to jail? Some do. Good luck finding one in a sample size of any prison.
Does being harsh on crime stop crime. NO. People were hung for pick pocketing back in the day, and there were people pick pocketing the audience watching people swing. In California, the '3 strikes and you're out' policy was implemented. They took discernment away from judges and made an absolute. They did this with drugs, too. If you were abusing drugs or selling drugs, you were to receive a minimum sentences, no leeway. There were drug offenses that held greater charges than murder or rape.
To quote lore, "There can be no Justice as long as laws are absolutes."
What happened with California's '3 strikes' policy? They filled up jails. They filled up jails faster than they could build them. They can't process people fast enough and get them out and there are new people wanting to come in. So, to adjust, they raised the minimum theft to like a thousand dollars. Police are way too busy to come out for anything less, because anything less is a misdemeanor and that's just writing a ticket. Did crime go down? No! It's sky rocketed. People now know they can walk into Nike, steal three boxes of shoes, or more, and walk right out and no one will stop them. Some tried. They got maced. These videos are available on youtbue of people robbing stores and accosting clerks because no one is allowed to think, use common sense, and no one teaches discernment.
To illustrate that, politicians more and more use a variety of memes to slander their opponents and or improve their own image. These are doctored photos that appeal to visceral, subliminal attitudes that short circuit reasoning and go right for the emotional jugular. It's so bad even Jankowicz was quoted saying, in an article about 'Doctored images:'
"People are going to trust their politicians less, they’re going to trust institutions less and they’re not going to want to participate in civil discourse. Without that participation, our democracy just doesn’t work."
YOU THINK? We didn't just wake up here, Jankowics. We arrived her on a paved road. It is not laziness for the citizenry to want to trust the government, but trust has been gone since at least the forties, maybe even the thirties... Or maybe, hell since the founding of our country? We departed from English rule because we didn't trust the government to have our back! Now, we have an institution that majority of people don't trust to have our back! People can be abusive. Systems can be abusive, especially if the systems employed help the abusive people. You might find that most systems are employed to establish a since of fairness, but it's the people that can't compete in a fair world that use system to manipulate others in giving them more voice. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have systems, but the ones getting the most benefits are usually men who can't win in a fair fight, or a rational debate. The ones that go to jail can't win in any system, because the system is actually geared against them so someone else can maintain their authority or wealth. All of us participate in a system. We're not all evil. At some point, good versus evil is the wrong paradigm. It's not that people are evil, but they get caught up in the system and stop thinking because if they asked question, they get penalized.
The people that were picked for the jury didn't speak. There were two licensed master level clinicians in that room, and both of us (I am one) were the first clicked off the boxes. They don't want people thinking. That messes with the status quo. I am not saying throw out the baby with the bathwater, but at some point, when the system isn't helping- it's time to make changes.
How about this change- instead of 12 people that just say 'guilty or not guilty' but the 12, the lawyers, the judge, and all of us communicate like a community, and actually debate and come up with better resolutions that help the victim, help the accused, and help's society. For that to work, you would actually need people who think and talk back. You would actually want experts, not just black and white hang em folks.
You don't think this needs changing? Parent unable to get a job and can no longer pay child are vilified without understand situations or the person. People have a general, visceral response to just those words or those images. And rightly so. We care about children! People imagine some lazy bastard just sitting around playing video games. Does that happen? Maybe. More likely the person just isn't equipped to compete in today's market. And guess what, it's getting harder for folks to compete. There are college grad that can't find employment. This is going to get worse as tech gets better and more and more jobs go to machines or computers. Oh, so this guy goes to jail for not paying child support. That's the punishment. It cost society about 150,000 dollars to keep this man in jail for a year. This took 150K out of taxpayer money that could have gone to other resources, and that child still got zero support, and the father is now in jail, which brings in a whole other slew of disparaging stigmas that both the child and the father have to face.
Want to save money? Don't put the guy jail, take 30k from the 150k you would have to put him in jail, and make sure that damn kid has food and clothes!Oh, I don't know, give it to state entity to regulate and take care of kids that live in poverty? What? Don't like that? Don't trust the government to care for you? Or for kids? And why not? It's not like people abuse money, or systems with money, now is it?
Oh, you don't want to do that because now you're afraid everyone will go this route of not paying their kids. Too late. It's already a done deal. We're not educating people to compete in world markets; seriously, our science and math is down, in favor of sports. What happens to those folks who can't compete? They live at their parents? We still have to have kids. Seriously, the nation needs more kids, or we'll be like Japan. We send our kids to school cause we don't raise them, and it takes two parent incomes to hold the middle income way- that's slipping away, too. More and more people would rather be single and independent, because we went too far on favoring individualism. More and more old folks don't die in their family homes, but in nursing homes, alone, because the families are too wound up in work and other necessary compulsory life functions.
This is not hate message. This is reality. It's complex. Our lives are complex. There are no quick solutions and simple answer and just following the system has gotten us.... well, here. Just saying.
Yeah, I talk too much. We should all communicate more.
I don't understand things and I will certainly say as much. Like, we had to fill out a form for the attorneys to determine our attitudes towards. crimes. I live in Texas. 'Build more prisons!' has been the motto probably forever. When's the last time the state of Texas built a psychiatric hospital? 1968?
Follow my math with me and tell where I got it wrong. If building more prisons was a deterrent to crime, wouldn't we need to stop building prisons at some point? No! The more prisons you build means the more space you have to lock folks up and that translates into greater emphasis being put on filling them. Senators get re-elected by running on meaningless slogans like "I am tough on crime." That should translate, "This will cost you." It does. It cost society. There is research that shows treating people for mental health actually cuts recidivism in half.
Why doesn't fiscal policies reflect scientific understanding? A question on the form asked if I thought our criminal justice system was fair. I asked, 'why is that you are more likely to be convicted of a crime if you're male, under 30, and black?" Is that fair? Statistically, how many fat, rich, white bastards go to jail? Some do. Good luck finding one in a sample size of any prison.
Does being harsh on crime stop crime. NO. People were hung for pick pocketing back in the day, and there were people pick pocketing the audience watching people swing. In California, the '3 strikes and you're out' policy was implemented. They took discernment away from judges and made an absolute. They did this with drugs, too. If you were abusing drugs or selling drugs, you were to receive a minimum sentences, no leeway. There were drug offenses that held greater charges than murder or rape.
To quote lore, "There can be no Justice as long as laws are absolutes."
What happened with California's '3 strikes' policy? They filled up jails. They filled up jails faster than they could build them. They can't process people fast enough and get them out and there are new people wanting to come in. So, to adjust, they raised the minimum theft to like a thousand dollars. Police are way too busy to come out for anything less, because anything less is a misdemeanor and that's just writing a ticket. Did crime go down? No! It's sky rocketed. People now know they can walk into Nike, steal three boxes of shoes, or more, and walk right out and no one will stop them. Some tried. They got maced. These videos are available on youtbue of people robbing stores and accosting clerks because no one is allowed to think, use common sense, and no one teaches discernment.
To illustrate that, politicians more and more use a variety of memes to slander their opponents and or improve their own image. These are doctored photos that appeal to visceral, subliminal attitudes that short circuit reasoning and go right for the emotional jugular. It's so bad even Jankowicz was quoted saying, in an article about 'Doctored images:'
"People are going to trust their politicians less, they’re going to trust institutions less and they’re not going to want to participate in civil discourse. Without that participation, our democracy just doesn’t work."
YOU THINK? We didn't just wake up here, Jankowics. We arrived her on a paved road. It is not laziness for the citizenry to want to trust the government, but trust has been gone since at least the forties, maybe even the thirties... Or maybe, hell since the founding of our country? We departed from English rule because we didn't trust the government to have our back! Now, we have an institution that majority of people don't trust to have our back! People can be abusive. Systems can be abusive, especially if the systems employed help the abusive people. You might find that most systems are employed to establish a since of fairness, but it's the people that can't compete in a fair world that use system to manipulate others in giving them more voice. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have systems, but the ones getting the most benefits are usually men who can't win in a fair fight, or a rational debate. The ones that go to jail can't win in any system, because the system is actually geared against them so someone else can maintain their authority or wealth. All of us participate in a system. We're not all evil. At some point, good versus evil is the wrong paradigm. It's not that people are evil, but they get caught up in the system and stop thinking because if they asked question, they get penalized.
The people that were picked for the jury didn't speak. There were two licensed master level clinicians in that room, and both of us (I am one) were the first clicked off the boxes. They don't want people thinking. That messes with the status quo. I am not saying throw out the baby with the bathwater, but at some point, when the system isn't helping- it's time to make changes.
How about this change- instead of 12 people that just say 'guilty or not guilty' but the 12, the lawyers, the judge, and all of us communicate like a community, and actually debate and come up with better resolutions that help the victim, help the accused, and help's society. For that to work, you would actually need people who think and talk back. You would actually want experts, not just black and white hang em folks.
You don't think this needs changing? Parent unable to get a job and can no longer pay child are vilified without understand situations or the person. People have a general, visceral response to just those words or those images. And rightly so. We care about children! People imagine some lazy bastard just sitting around playing video games. Does that happen? Maybe. More likely the person just isn't equipped to compete in today's market. And guess what, it's getting harder for folks to compete. There are college grad that can't find employment. This is going to get worse as tech gets better and more and more jobs go to machines or computers. Oh, so this guy goes to jail for not paying child support. That's the punishment. It cost society about 150,000 dollars to keep this man in jail for a year. This took 150K out of taxpayer money that could have gone to other resources, and that child still got zero support, and the father is now in jail, which brings in a whole other slew of disparaging stigmas that both the child and the father have to face.
Want to save money? Don't put the guy jail, take 30k from the 150k you would have to put him in jail, and make sure that damn kid has food and clothes!Oh, I don't know, give it to state entity to regulate and take care of kids that live in poverty? What? Don't like that? Don't trust the government to care for you? Or for kids? And why not? It's not like people abuse money, or systems with money, now is it?
Oh, you don't want to do that because now you're afraid everyone will go this route of not paying their kids. Too late. It's already a done deal. We're not educating people to compete in world markets; seriously, our science and math is down, in favor of sports. What happens to those folks who can't compete? They live at their parents? We still have to have kids. Seriously, the nation needs more kids, or we'll be like Japan. We send our kids to school cause we don't raise them, and it takes two parent incomes to hold the middle income way- that's slipping away, too. More and more people would rather be single and independent, because we went too far on favoring individualism. More and more old folks don't die in their family homes, but in nursing homes, alone, because the families are too wound up in work and other necessary compulsory life functions.
This is not hate message. This is reality. It's complex. Our lives are complex. There are no quick solutions and simple answer and just following the system has gotten us.... well, here. Just saying.
Yeah, I talk too much. We should all communicate more.
Comments
Post a Comment