patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,191,072 comments by 13,859 users - ElYorsh, just_passing_through, NuttBoxer, Onvacation, RWSGFY online now
Possible law: proportionality
invite response
2022 Nov 15, 10:51am 725 views 9 comments
by Zak ➕follow (0) 💰tip ignore
Comments 1 - 9 of 9 Search these comments
1
Eric Holder
2022 Nov 15, 2:08pm
Eric Holder
2022 Nov 15, 2:08pm
Zak says
Where do homeless illegals fall on this spectre?
What if we specified that the total state spending on all non-citizen services (healthcare, legal, employment benefits/welfare) must not be greater than 35% of the spending dedicated to citizen homeless services?
Where do homeless illegals fall on this spectre?
2
Shaman
2022 Nov 15, 2:39pm
Shaman
2022 Nov 15, 2:39pm
Problem is that most of the money set aside or allocated toward homelessness is wasted or spent as exorbitant salaries for family and friends of politicians z. It’s also spent on contacts to build ridiculously expensive housing for homeless that takes forever and costs a large fortune. When it’s done, it’s often unused.
There’s one solution for homeless:
-involuntary commitment until they’re weaned off their drugs, then psychological therapy to address the reasons they turned to drugs to ease their emotional pain. After that, work release to do something productive and/or build skills. The whole program should be less expensive per head than the amount it costs to imprison someone for a year.
At the end of it, instead of having drug addled indigents, you’ll have productive workers.
It’s the kindest thing we could do for both them and society.
There’s one solution for homeless:
-involuntary commitment until they’re weaned off their drugs, then psychological therapy to address the reasons they turned to drugs to ease their emotional pain. After that, work release to do something productive and/or build skills. The whole program should be less expensive per head than the amount it costs to imprison someone for a year.
At the end of it, instead of having drug addled indigents, you’ll have productive workers.
It’s the kindest thing we could do for both them and society.
3
Onvacation
2022 Nov 15, 3:06pm
Onvacation
2022 Nov 15, 3:06pm
Zak says
You left out enforce the law. Conservatives want to live in a society of laws, rules, and customs where all can be friendly and prosper. Conservatives recognize that there are "Bad Seeds" out there that society needs to be protected from.
Progressives* don't believe in the rule of law. They believe their utopian end goal justify any means.
*NOT liberals. Classical liberalism is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market and laissez-faire economics; civil liberties under the rule of law with especial emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech.
Democrats have hijacked the term liberal and forced classical liberals to define themselves as libertarians. Of course a true classic liberal wouldn't associate with the Libertarian party and would claim to be and be an independent.
I claim independence. I am sick of this political theatre that brought us Nancy Pelosi and Kamala Harris, not to mention Mitch McConnell and the Bushes.
Conservatives put forward the viewpoint that we should be limiting taxes and oversight, and spending our social service dollars first on taking care of our own citizens, painting liberals as irresponsible.
You left out enforce the law. Conservatives want to live in a society of laws, rules, and customs where all can be friendly and prosper. Conservatives recognize that there are "Bad Seeds" out there that society needs to be protected from.
Progressives* don't believe in the rule of law. They believe their utopian end goal justify any means.
*NOT liberals. Classical liberalism is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market and laissez-faire economics; civil liberties under the rule of law with especial emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech.
Democrats have hijacked the term liberal and forced classical liberals to define themselves as libertarians. Of course a true classic liberal wouldn't associate with the Libertarian party and would claim to be and be an independent.
I claim independence. I am sick of this political theatre that brought us Nancy Pelosi and Kamala Harris, not to mention Mitch McConnell and the Bushes.
4
Zak
2022 Nov 15, 9:36pm
Onvacation says
Ehh.. I'm pretty much done with this do/don't all/none red/blue my team/your team stuff. that's kind of my point. Some progressives don't believe in the rule of law. Some do. Same with conservatives. I don't think speeding for instance is universally liberal or conservative.
Can we make the conversation about recognizing that people are coming from different viewpoints, then prioritize in a quantifiable way, where we want to dedicate and limit resources (and taxes)?
Progressives* don't believe in the rule of law.
Ehh.. I'm pretty much done with this do/don't all/none red/blue my team/your team stuff. that's kind of my point. Some progressives don't believe in the rule of law. Some do. Same with conservatives. I don't think speeding for instance is universally liberal or conservative.
Can we make the conversation about recognizing that people are coming from different viewpoints, then prioritize in a quantifiable way, where we want to dedicate and limit resources (and taxes)?
5
Zak
2022 Nov 15, 9:56pm
Onvacation says
I recognize your motivation for claiming to be independent. I basically agree with the premise. But take this quote for example.. both sides always claim to want to "protect you from something" . might be guns, might be illegals crossing the border. Mostly all BS. Mostly just a way to get you to cede your autonomy to the state through fear. Or for a politician to try to look like they did something for you... "saved you" from something... and gave them a vote and some tax money to be in control of.
For the most part, small communities can police, defend against fire, educate kids, build roads, and decide on zoning/construction. For some reason, everyone is fine sending huge amounts of tax money to a central source, and then begging a very few people for it to be parcelled back out to us again at their whim. No idea why we are all ok with this.
Conservatives recognize that there are "Bad Seeds" out there that society needs to be protected from
I recognize your motivation for claiming to be independent. I basically agree with the premise. But take this quote for example.. both sides always claim to want to "protect you from something" . might be guns, might be illegals crossing the border. Mostly all BS. Mostly just a way to get you to cede your autonomy to the state through fear. Or for a politician to try to look like they did something for you... "saved you" from something... and gave them a vote and some tax money to be in control of.
For the most part, small communities can police, defend against fire, educate kids, build roads, and decide on zoning/construction. For some reason, everyone is fine sending huge amounts of tax money to a central source, and then begging a very few people for it to be parcelled back out to us again at their whim. No idea why we are all ok with this.
6
NuttBoxer
2022 Nov 15, 11:13pm
NuttBoxer
2022 Nov 15, 11:13pm
Zak says
You've obviously never worked in social services. While there is certainly a desire to care by some in the system, the over-arching concern is securing the next contract, not helping people.
Zak says
Taxes are armed robbery. Wealthy don't pay tax, they find loopholes, same for big business. Again, seems like you don't have much real world experience with the subject.
What if we specified that the total state spending on all non-citizen services (healthcare, legal, employment benefits/welfare) must not be greater than 35% of the spending dedicated to citizen homeless services? This way we meet at a compromise showing a caring for all people, but a budgetary responsibility to the citizens.
You've obviously never worked in social services. While there is certainly a desire to care by some in the system, the over-arching concern is securing the next contract, not helping people.
Zak says
Another example:
Personal income tax percentage collected per income quintile (incomes broken into 5 levels) may not exceed corportate or capital gains tax rates per quintile. In other words, bigger companies would have to get taxed more the same way higher income individuals are taxed more (or if capital gains/corporate rates stay the same, income taxes would be forced to come down)
Taxes are armed robbery. Wealthy don't pay tax, they find loopholes, same for big business. Again, seems like you don't have much real world experience with the subject.
7
NuttBoxer
2022 Nov 15, 11:15pm
NuttBoxer
2022 Nov 15, 11:15pm
Onvacation says
Because laws = morality? Protection meaning police who write up frivolous tickets, steal our property using asset forfeiture, and beat us if we resist? No thank you, I'll protect myself, and use my God given personal morality.
You left out enforce the law. Conservatives want to live in a society of laws, rules, and customs where all can be friendly and prosper. Conservatives recognize that there are "Bad Seeds" out there that society needs to be protected from.
Because laws = morality? Protection meaning police who write up frivolous tickets, steal our property using asset forfeiture, and beat us if we resist? No thank you, I'll protect myself, and use my God given personal morality.
8
FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden
2022 Nov 16, 2:32am
Eric Holder says
they fall on homeless industry complex spectre. i lived in CA, corruption chasing government dollars was out of this world.
Zak says
What if we specified that the total state spending on all non-citizen services (healthcare, legal, employment benefits/welfare) must not be greater than 35% of the spending dedicated to citizen homeless services?
Where do homeless illegals fall on this spectre?
they fall on homeless industry complex spectre. i lived in CA, corruption chasing government dollars was out of this world.
9
HeadSet
2022 Nov 16, 8:47am
HeadSet
2022 Nov 16, 8:47am
Zak says
Because that "central source" can print money and send back more than they took.
For some reason, everyone is fine sending huge amounts of tax money to a central source, and then begging a very few people for it to be parcelled back out to us again at their whim. No idea why we are all ok with this.
Because that "central source" can print money and send back more than they took.
Wondering what you all think of this idea: encoding funding proportionally to set system priorities.
Example:
Homelessness vs social services for non citizens.
What if we specified that the total state spending on all non-citizen services (healthcare, legal, employment benefits/welfare) must not be greater than 35% of the spending dedicated to citizen homeless services? This way we meet at a compromise showing a caring for all people, but a budgetary responsibility to the citizens.
Another example:
Personal income tax percentage collected per income quintile (incomes broken into 5 levels) may not exceed corportate or capital gains tax rates per quintile. In other words, bigger companies would have to get taxed more the same way higher income individuals are taxed more (or if capital gains/corporate rates stay the same, income taxes would be forced to come down)
A third example:
Income tax standard deductions as a percent of gross income (by quitile) must be as large as the average corporate deduction from gross revenue (by quintile).