"...and can absorb the certainty that some will freeload..." is a very important point in your comments on the homeless. There seems to be a trend in thinking that we should avoid doing good if even the tiniest minority will freeload. No! If we really think we are a Christian society (I'm looking at you, right wingers) then we need to help those less fortunate, even if some will take undue advantage of us.
So does your recent snarky response to the person who asked how to unsubscribe mean that by hitting “unsubscribe” I can also stop my paid subscription? Because what I thought might be a serious forum for discussion and debate has turned into the usual “social media” mutual insult contest, and I no longer wish to support such juvenilia. Serious question.
We have the Russians dropping ordinance close to nuclear plants and you are worried about who Pat Sajak takes pictures with? How about some perspective here!
Does the “euphemism treadmill” work? I don’t have a disability (no slur intended) so I can’t personally judge the relief it provides. Of course, the underlying urge to use differences and stereotypes as insults keeps the treadmill turning. But sometimes, for example with “deaf” there isn’t any slur. How does switching from “Are you deaf?” to “are you hearing-impaired?” change anything?
“ Call me a socialist, but I think everyone should have a clean, safe, climate controlled indoor space to sleep as well as enough food to eat and access to basic health care, which obviously includes mental health care. I believe human decency demands it and that a nation as rich as ours can afford it and can absorb the certainty that some people will freeload off taxpayers.”
This is why I follow you. And though I can be a callous smartass, I agree with you on this 100%.
I would like to imagine that the drone scenario would work, and it is probably worth a try. But the Police1 scenario had two magical moments. The sudden appearance of cars that can block in the driver without the driver being aware or able to avoid it. And ignoring the likelihood that the occupants of the car would simply bale out and run, knowing the police cannot chase them on foot. But drones are far cheaper than helicopters and the ability to launch and guide a drone from the pursuing police car could be a plus. Another idea which I like, is the ability to tag a car with a tracking device launched from a police car. https://www.cbsnews.com/video/police-in-minnesota-can-launch-tracking-device-from-their-vehicles-onto-stolen-cars/
Another idea is to allow the police to access the GPS system built into the car, as when an owner can activate ONStar.
For many conservatives, the premier adage is that we should each pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps. I happen to agree with that - IF people have the resources to do that. But John F Kennedy once observed that we, as a people, have to disabuse ourselves of the notion that life is fair. (If you care enough, you can look it up - start with "Cuban Missile Crisis.") My brother was a college professor who ended up homeless due to childhood diabetes that became so chronic he could not continue his career. He ended up on the streets, spent some time in shelters, and died in his car - too far gone to ask his family for help. I defy anyone to say that this was his fault. Homelessness has many faces, and it is just so sad that we expect everyone to be able to go it alone.
With reference to "fake newspapers", Mr. Zorn commented, "the fact that most recipients either don't subscribe or don't have access to a conventionally trustworthy area newspaper makes them ripe targets for ... downright false journalism". In my neck of the woods, GOP candidates for the mid-term elections are creating lengthy tv commercials blaming the Biden administration for the high price of gas and food, as well as the immigration crisis. People who aren't knowledgeable about economics and favor the red stance will believe these falsehoods.
It has often been my experience, among many friends in the often-homeless zone, that they are occasionally happy enough to find shelter and sustenance in housing communities of various degrees of severity in rules they must follow to remain there, but usually in fairly short order they are back out on the streets, sleeping in park shrubbery, makeshift tents, stairwells or open doorways, over air shafts or under bridges, telling me they need their “freedom” or “independence” or “autonomy” or “agency” or whatever word is circulating around them and their social workers to try to describe the persistent, nagging need they have (sometimes drug- or alcohol-inspired) to live their lives the way they want to, undisturbed by our world’s more common social norms — like showing up for work on time, paying rent, maintaining a civil level of sobriety or cleanliness, attending to the needs, wants, concerns, fears of others — even our concerns and fears for their own health and well-being. For, after all, that’s only OUR sense of well-being, not necessarily theirs. They will often be quick and sharp to remind me.
Very good comment regarding Helen Lewis and Chaédria LaBouvier. I have some sympathy for any public figure that would like to have control over what is written about them and are suspicious or hostile towards writers that they do not like or cannot control. But that is not possible in a free speech society. The interesting new spin is the anti-racist notion that only 'legitimate' black writers or speakers have the right to tell a story or voice an opinion about a racial issue. Ms LaBouvier certainly seems to believe that the Oxford educated, white, Englishwoman Helen Lewis does not have that right.
I tend to agree with Eric regarding public responsibility for caring for people that are unable to care for themselves, even at the risk of a small number of freeloaders. But when someone says 'a nation as rich as ours ...' they really mean that we should all be willing to pay higher taxes to pay for something. Or maybe they imagine someone else paying the taxes for the collective moral responsibility. And since the government at all levels already spends far more than is collected in taxes, we have a way to go to add new items. As a priority, I think homelessness and mental health services should be a lot higher than a lot of other government spending, so maybe something else could be cut.
For sure America is rich enough to give everyone shelter, food, healthcare, and clothing (you left that one out.) It seems you think the downside to doing this is that there will be freeloaders. The problem is actually going to accrue to the generations of people who accept this lifestyle. Those who can’t function, or need temporary help, will benefit from a more complete safety net, but those who permanently rely on it rather than contributing productively will suffer. If I were trying to get the most people to voluntarily live as long as possible as a dependent underclass, I think I would need to implement full “no questions asked” life support.
"...and can absorb the certainty that some will freeload..." is a very important point in your comments on the homeless. There seems to be a trend in thinking that we should avoid doing good if even the tiniest minority will freeload. No! If we really think we are a Christian society (I'm looking at you, right wingers) then we need to help those less fortunate, even if some will take undue advantage of us.
So does your recent snarky response to the person who asked how to unsubscribe mean that by hitting “unsubscribe” I can also stop my paid subscription? Because what I thought might be a serious forum for discussion and debate has turned into the usual “social media” mutual insult contest, and I no longer wish to support such juvenilia. Serious question.
We have the Russians dropping ordinance close to nuclear plants and you are worried about who Pat Sajak takes pictures with? How about some perspective here!
Republicans are just sad.
Does the “euphemism treadmill” work? I don’t have a disability (no slur intended) so I can’t personally judge the relief it provides. Of course, the underlying urge to use differences and stereotypes as insults keeps the treadmill turning. But sometimes, for example with “deaf” there isn’t any slur. How does switching from “Are you deaf?” to “are you hearing-impaired?” change anything?
“ Call me a socialist, but I think everyone should have a clean, safe, climate controlled indoor space to sleep as well as enough food to eat and access to basic health care, which obviously includes mental health care. I believe human decency demands it and that a nation as rich as ours can afford it and can absorb the certainty that some people will freeload off taxpayers.”
This is why I follow you. And though I can be a callous smartass, I agree with you on this 100%.
The visual Tweets were quite good this time. I had a hard time choosing the best one.
I would like to imagine that the drone scenario would work, and it is probably worth a try. But the Police1 scenario had two magical moments. The sudden appearance of cars that can block in the driver without the driver being aware or able to avoid it. And ignoring the likelihood that the occupants of the car would simply bale out and run, knowing the police cannot chase them on foot. But drones are far cheaper than helicopters and the ability to launch and guide a drone from the pursuing police car could be a plus. Another idea which I like, is the ability to tag a car with a tracking device launched from a police car. https://www.cbsnews.com/video/police-in-minnesota-can-launch-tracking-device-from-their-vehicles-onto-stolen-cars/
Another idea is to allow the police to access the GPS system built into the car, as when an owner can activate ONStar.
For many conservatives, the premier adage is that we should each pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps. I happen to agree with that - IF people have the resources to do that. But John F Kennedy once observed that we, as a people, have to disabuse ourselves of the notion that life is fair. (If you care enough, you can look it up - start with "Cuban Missile Crisis.") My brother was a college professor who ended up homeless due to childhood diabetes that became so chronic he could not continue his career. He ended up on the streets, spent some time in shelters, and died in his car - too far gone to ask his family for help. I defy anyone to say that this was his fault. Homelessness has many faces, and it is just so sad that we expect everyone to be able to go it alone.
With reference to "fake newspapers", Mr. Zorn commented, "the fact that most recipients either don't subscribe or don't have access to a conventionally trustworthy area newspaper makes them ripe targets for ... downright false journalism". In my neck of the woods, GOP candidates for the mid-term elections are creating lengthy tv commercials blaming the Biden administration for the high price of gas and food, as well as the immigration crisis. People who aren't knowledgeable about economics and favor the red stance will believe these falsehoods.
It has often been my experience, among many friends in the often-homeless zone, that they are occasionally happy enough to find shelter and sustenance in housing communities of various degrees of severity in rules they must follow to remain there, but usually in fairly short order they are back out on the streets, sleeping in park shrubbery, makeshift tents, stairwells or open doorways, over air shafts or under bridges, telling me they need their “freedom” or “independence” or “autonomy” or “agency” or whatever word is circulating around them and their social workers to try to describe the persistent, nagging need they have (sometimes drug- or alcohol-inspired) to live their lives the way they want to, undisturbed by our world’s more common social norms — like showing up for work on time, paying rent, maintaining a civil level of sobriety or cleanliness, attending to the needs, wants, concerns, fears of others — even our concerns and fears for their own health and well-being. For, after all, that’s only OUR sense of well-being, not necessarily theirs. They will often be quick and sharp to remind me.
Very good comment regarding Helen Lewis and Chaédria LaBouvier. I have some sympathy for any public figure that would like to have control over what is written about them and are suspicious or hostile towards writers that they do not like or cannot control. But that is not possible in a free speech society. The interesting new spin is the anti-racist notion that only 'legitimate' black writers or speakers have the right to tell a story or voice an opinion about a racial issue. Ms LaBouvier certainly seems to believe that the Oxford educated, white, Englishwoman Helen Lewis does not have that right.
I tend to agree with Eric regarding public responsibility for caring for people that are unable to care for themselves, even at the risk of a small number of freeloaders. But when someone says 'a nation as rich as ours ...' they really mean that we should all be willing to pay higher taxes to pay for something. Or maybe they imagine someone else paying the taxes for the collective moral responsibility. And since the government at all levels already spends far more than is collected in taxes, we have a way to go to add new items. As a priority, I think homelessness and mental health services should be a lot higher than a lot of other government spending, so maybe something else could be cut.
For sure America is rich enough to give everyone shelter, food, healthcare, and clothing (you left that one out.) It seems you think the downside to doing this is that there will be freeloaders. The problem is actually going to accrue to the generations of people who accept this lifestyle. Those who can’t function, or need temporary help, will benefit from a more complete safety net, but those who permanently rely on it rather than contributing productively will suffer. If I were trying to get the most people to voluntarily live as long as possible as a dependent underclass, I think I would need to implement full “no questions asked” life support.