639
existing wrongly
(lemmy.ml)
I remember talk about banning for profit prisons about a decade or so ago. It didn’t last long. This is one of the things we should be fighting tooth and nail for. Locking people in cages so the rich can get richer is disgusting.
making government incentives align with the good of their population is the best way to make sure government does their job
prison should be a loss for all, and therefor everyone should want to reduce people in prison. you can’t do that by simply not having prisons, so you need to address root causes
everyone should be healthy. ensuring that governments pay for the eventual health issues ensures they setup preventative programs that help people to stay healthy for their entire lives (alternatively the dark side of this is, for example, smokers die early and therefor cost less because the government doesn’t have to pay for care for as many elderly people for as long so where’s the incentive to support quit programmes?)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Even before you get to lobbying to criminalize things that shouldn't be crimes, the fact that anyone pretends to expect for-profit prisons to rehabilitate any criminal is so idiotic.
What is this, a crime for ants?
I don't know that 'one of the main reasons' is fair. For profit prisons are vile cruelty-factories and have pull with lawmakers, but they hold less than 10% of incarcerated individuals. It's a reason, sure. But a main reason?
I think there are two obviously larger reasons:
-
There are more homeless people and homeowners see them. If you're a local politician, you can get very far by promising voters that they won't have to see homeless people. Here in "oregon, tolerant oregon" (to quote jello biafra) this is the most common sentiment to hear, and is reflected in policy.
-
Growing resource pressure leads to a rise in 'punching down'. As climate crisis, imperial turmoil and the rich taking ever more resources fuel poverty and scarcity, the social pressure to distinguish yourself from those further down the social ladder increases. Hating the weak identifies you as strong, which grows in value as more and more insecurity plagues our society.
But why?
Its the lead:
Edit: Found a better figure.
Crime might be down, but homelessness is way up, or it at least feels that way. They're everywhere these days, even in my sleepy suburb, loitering in parks and sleeping in public greenways, destroying the vegetation and often leaving piles of trash behind.
No, I'm not arguing they deserve to go to jail for that, but you have to agree that it's difficult having empathy for people who keep turning every inch of public property into an eyesore. But I don't think the problem will ever be solved by fingerpointing, because that's just passing the blame around, which ultimately helps no one.
I think there needs to be a bigger discussion about what can be done to help these people regain a sense of purpose in life. It seems to me that most of them are simply severely disillusioned or even repulsed by how our current society works – go to work, pay your bills, rinse and repeat until you reach retirement age. They got tired of the rat race and the constant pressure to perform and are simply choosing to live a primitivist lifestyle instead, but without having any higher goals or ideals to strive for, it's inevitable that they're going to sink back into the mud.
Human beings need to have a sense of purpose, they need to feel useful and appreciated in some way in order to keep making an effort day after day. It's not enough to house them and feed them because without purpose, most of them will still end up turning to alcohol and drugs simply in an effort to pass the time.
Kinda like we need to change how society works and have public lands and more dignity and space for not being Capitalist.
Giving them public lands unfortunately doesn't solve anything. They did try that my city, and the result was that this land has basically turned into a huge garbage dump.
did your town actually do anything for them or just say "hey fuck you go to this hill and stay there"
like did they follow any of the recommendations scientists make or even make one effort to do it correctly? having studied this for years, the answer is usually no
Not sure, but I'm guessing likely not. There were a lot more encampments around here last year, but many of them were in places that were either unsafe (such as freeway greenbelts) or privately owned (but accessible to the public). Apparently they did tolerate this one camp, however, because it didn't have any of those issues, but it's still turning into a festering sore at this point.
I honestly don't know what would help here, but all the solutions that I see being discussed on Lemmy always just seem to revolve around giving people free stuff, and I don't think that'll solve anything in the long term. Unless you show people a path to becoming self-sufficient, all you'll ever accomplish is feeding or housing them for a day. While I realize that depending on how deep in the hole someone is, it might take a long time before they feel safe enough again to take risks, but ultimately, unlimited amounts of free stuff will only create dependency.
inadequate measures were inadequate; nobody surprised
The idea that you're independent is an illusion. Independence and the aspiration to it are usually just lies we tell ourselves to justify this stupid cruel system we're using.
What are you independent from? If your grocery store runs out of food you're still as fucked as anybody else. And in the next few years it's likely to. There's no such thing as independence from food. We throw out so much fucking food in this culture, but if we gave it to those guys we'd be acknowledging that feeding people is supposed to be the point of food, rather than making money, and in this culture we cannot have that, that's an unthinkable thought.
As far as I can tell the people in those encampments just tend to be people nobody gives a shit about. That's true independence, in a sense, but I don't think that should be an aspiration, do you? And isn't that one of the only actual useful functions of government, to create systems to take care of those people? I mean it's not like they're regulating businesses properly... anyway that's another discussion.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
We really need UBI. If people just had enough money to live without NEEDING to work these people would be able to live relatively (compared to how they're living now) comfortable lives without making public spaces awful.
I think you missed the part of my comment where I said people need to feel useful. Giving them money for doing nothing will never achieve that. While it might help ease the burden of having to work an unfulfilling job just in order to stay alive to continue working, at best that'll buy them some temporary breathing room. But without a sense of purpose, most people will still end up turning to drugs or alcohol simply to pass the time. It's just far easier to distract yourself than it is to face the vast emptiness of living a meaningless existence.
A big problem related to this is that a LOT of jobs require you to put a home address on the application.
UBI/just getting people housed would not only make it possible for people to have a place to live but also give them way more access to way more jobs.
Yes, I understand that, and I'm not trying to argue it would be better to try nothing at all. What I'm saying is that merely having a roof over your head and food on the table does not automatically translate into a willingness to give back to society by finding ways to contribute in some sort of meaningful way – it merely removes some obstacles and lowers the barrier to entry, but unless people are willing to make an effort to work on overcoming the challenges that still remain after that, they are still not going to ever get better.
Basically, I think it's a mistake to assume that if you give someone free food and housing, they'll just start going out there and look for a job. Some people might, perhaps even most, especially if they don't have to worry about losing their benefits once they do, but some will still prefer to waste their time with drugs and alcohol, and that will foul things up for the rest, because it's difficult to motivate yourself to make a consistent effort when you see others getting the same benefits as you do without doing anything to earn them.
No problem has ever been solved by throwing more money at it. While it certainly may help, it will never be a guaranteed solution.
Nobody is assuming every single person is going to go out and work... Hell I would argue that most people don't want to work in general but hey... Capitalism...
However, I think that this argument is slowing down real progress that could be made. We both agree that housing and food is a great way to lower barriers and help people get stable. This will, at the very least, help every single one of those people regardless of if they decide to get a job after. So we should at least start here and get everyone stable first.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's real hard to find a purpose when your basic needs aren't met. And finding a purpose doesn't need to mean working a job that pays you money. You can find purpose in so many different ways and Id argue finding purpose in something not related to monetary gain is more fulfilling than a job. If your basic needs are met by UBI you're free to find purpose outside of the rat race.
I mean, if you find yourself in that kind of a situation, your purpose could be trying to find a way to sustain yourself without too much unnecessary suffering, no?
And I certainly agree that it doesn't HAVE to come in the form of a job, because not everyone is cut out of that. Some people are made to be artists, for instance, and simply cannot stand being tied down to something like that. And yes, giving them some breathing room in the form of basic sustenance can certainly help by allowing them to use more of their time to practice their craft, but they still have to WANT to do that, and not everyone does. And the ones who don't tend to try and find ways to sabotage those who do.
All I'm saying is, without a plan for dealing with that problem, no amount of money will ever do the trick.
I think part of that larger discussion needs to include the array of reasons that people become homeless in the first place, cause it's not just that they lack motivation like your comment suggests. There's mental health reasons, financial reasons, drug addiction, alcoholism, etc. And once you become homeless, it can be difficult to get out of - jobs require that you have reliable transportation, and an address for mailing stuff to you, that you look presentable, and that you don't smell.
A fair amount of homeless people have smartphones nowadays, so I think a system in place where temporary residence can be set up, a bank account set up, access to therapy, and priority access to remote jobs can take place will be a huge step forward in reducing the homeless population. That and also capping interest rates and market values for houses/condos/apartments so that they're actually affordable to the common person.
Right, that discussion certainly needs to happen, because you simply cannot hope to ever solve a problem without knowing what's causing it, no matter how much resources you throw at it. And perhaps that needs to be a public discussion, because I do think a lot of people out there are willing to help at least in principle, but are often unsure how to go about it. That definitely used to be the case for me because no one ever wanted to talk about it, but after a few very negative experiences where my help wasn't appreciated or even made things worse, I gave up on it for a long time and focused on myself instead, and I have a feeling that this is in fact rather common.
Of course, that did not make the problem go away. In fact, it seems to be getting worse, and clearly we cannot expect any help from the boomers, so it appears to be left to the younger generations to find more effective ways of dealing with it. Sadly, it often seems to devolve into political trench warfare, with people constantly arguing about their preferred strong-arm solutions rather than attempting to find middle ground.
Ultimately, I think it will require much more than political solutions, because those are always temporary and suboptimal. Lasting results will likely require a complete change in culture – meaning a society built on values that people are actually willing to sacrifice for, and that can only happen at the grassroots level.
Standing still for too long? Go to jail for loitering.
Crossing the street? Go to jail for jaywalking?
Existing next to a cop? Arrested for resisting arrest, straight to jail.
Have any money on you? Money is arrested for looking suspicious.
Napping in your car?
Not going to believe this, but straight to jail!
I just found out you have to PAY for your prison stay. $50 dollars a day. What the actual hell?!
Yeah that's real fucked up, my buddy's cousin is going away for 5 years and I calculated that on the lowest end, he'd probably be paying at least $73,000 by the time he leaves
sadistic horrible place
don't forget the police! We need an outlet for our violent people, and some of them are too cowardly to join the military. Those guys need people to beat on and hurt, and if crime's down, they're gonna turn to other shit to get their kicks, and we don't need them turning into pyromaniacs or terrorists just because they're bored.
Private prisons only house 8% of US inmates.
But if public facilities are at capacity, any further surplus will go to them. 2% more prisoners would boost their head counts by 25%.
In that case, it's 8% too many.
They're still not the main issue.
The main issue is the contracts for public prisons.
Orphan crushing machine go brrrrr
I’ve seen this episode of Stargate.
Oh man, I can’t place it. Which episode is this?
Stargate Atlantis - S2E5 - Condemned
Ah, that’s why I couldn’t place it! I’m currently in SG-1 S08 / Atlantis S01 in my first watch through.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Wait, what? Shut up, stop looking at that, go have more kids. We need more cattle.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 22 May 2024
639 points (94.7% liked)
Lefty Memes
4335 readers
1336 users here now
An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.
Serious posts, news, and discussion go in c/Socialism.
If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.
Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low-quality!
Rules
0. Only post socialist memes
That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme)
1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here
Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.
2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such
That means condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.
3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.
That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).
4. No Bigotry.
The only dangerous minority is the rich.
5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.
(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)
6. Don't idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.
- Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:
- Racism
- Sexism
- Queerphobia
- Ableism
- Classism
- Rape or assault
- Genocide/ethnic cleansing or (mass) deportations
- Fascism
- (National) chauvinism
- Orientalism
- Colonialism or Imperialism (and their neo- counterparts)
- Zionism
- Religious fundamentalism of any kind
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS