Just Sad, "Chicago sees deadliest Memorial Day weekend in four years"

[Ccwatercraft]

I don't know enough to comment on what's happening over there so all I can say is stay safe Bulls brothers and sisters. 2020 continues to get crazier it seems.

The only thing missing in 2020 so far is Godzilla.

Fingers crossed.

[dice]

additionally, nobody is suggesting that we just print more money to give to people! any responsible implementation of UBI would of course require it to be paid for with new revenue

Revenue can be hard to come by. That can't just raise tax rates and count on it happening. We already constantly inflate the money supply which discourages savings in a cancerous way IMO, and we already senselessly borrow 1/3 of the federal budget.

One of the biggest myths is that the money for UBI doesn't exist.

You say we can't just raise tax rates and count on it happening. Agreed.

This is why a new type of tax, a tax that has worked in other countries, in other words, a Value Added Tax, is really the key.

There's no reason that Amazon and Netflix and Starbucks and other huge companies should be paying less than you or me in taxes. They pay ZERO. A Value Added Tax would be a huge boon towards fixing this problem.

And to be clear, VAT isn't the only source of money to fund UBI. This graphic should be helpful.

i'm actually opposed to businesses being taxed at all (coupled with them not getting the same rights as humans). but payouts to shareholders should be taxed at the same rate as income

[dice]

for those who still don't get it:

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

[dice]

GILMORE GIRLS!

[dice]

Wealthy people pay lower taxes on a percentage basis than anyone else.

People say the poor get huge tax breaks, but they miss out on the fact that the property tax (even if not paid directly through home ownership, it still ends up in rent) and sales tax amount to a larger tax burden on them than the wealthy face even if they pay 0% in income tax.

"Wealthy people pay lower taxes on a percentage basis than anyone else." This is true, but what lots of people fail to comprehend is the The top 1%t of taxpayers pay more than than the bottom 90% The bottom 50% of people combined only pay 3.7% of the total money collected.

I'm not close to being rich, but am smart enough to see that the rich pay more than there share. If everything was charged by percentages, a rich guy would be charged $300 or more for a big mac.

The way numbers often get presented can make them seem much better or worse.

your position is that the "fair share" of rich people is the same tax rate as everybody else. we have a progressive tax rate because the strong majority of people do not believe that

[GetBuLLish]

Just 4 percent of all Catholic priests had complaints of sexual abuse against them.

Just 4 percent. The shocking thing isnt the number.

Its NEVER about the number. It's about the level of breach of trust.

Its TRIPE to talk about percentages. We need to talk about why this is happening. Period.

Why are minorities more likely to have a set of living conditions and socioeconomic variables which lead them down a road of crime and exposure to the criminal justice system?

This post is wrong on multiple levels. First, even if you concede that sexual abuse by priest and unjustified killings by police are comparable qualitatively, the number you posted shows that the two situations are universes apart quantitatively. There are over 800,000 police officers in America. If 4% of them killed black people, that would equate to 32,000 killings of black people by cops. That would be absolutely mind blowing and would damn near justify a civil war. In reality, if you look at last year's statistics, only 9 unarmed black people were killed by police, which would translate to 0.001% of the work force having killed an unarmed black person. That's 4000x less than the 4% you cited for Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse. You've unintentionally proven my point.

Second, the two situations are not similar. The duties of being a priest in no way should implicate or lead to sexual abuse. Law enforcement, on the other hand, by its very nature involves dangerous and oftentimes violent interactions between officers and citizens. Police shootings, to a certain extent, have to be expected, especially in a nation with the amount of violence and the size of ours. If what you're saying is that there will or should be mass riots every time a black person is unjustifiably killed by police, then we are screwed. The only remotely plausible way to do that is to simply stop policing black neighborhoods, which would prove disastrous for those communities.

[dice]

Just 4 percent of all Catholic priests had complaints of sexual abuse against them.

Just 4 percent. The shocking thing isnt the number.

Its NEVER about the number. It's about the level of breach of trust.

Its TRIPE to talk about percentages. We need to talk about why this is happening. Period.

Why are minorities more likely to have a set of living conditions and socioeconomic variables which lead them down a road of crime and exposure to the criminal justice system?

This post is wrong on multiple levels.

it's not. not a single thing he said is incorrect

First, even if you concede that sexual abuse by priest and unjustified killings by police are comparable qualitatively, the number you posted shows that the two situations are universes apart quantitatively. There are over 800,000 police officers in America. If 4% of them killed black people, that would equate to 32,000 killings of black people by cops. That would be absolutely mind blowing and would damn near justify a civil war. In reality, if you look at last year's statistics, only 9 unarmed black people were killed by police, which would translate to 0.001% of the work force having killed an unarmed black person. That's 4000x less than the 4% you cited for Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse. You've unintentionally proven my point.

he hasn't. because you completely ignored HIS point, which was, again:

Its NEVER about the number. It's about the level of breach of trust.

police murder of unarmed black men is only the tip of the iceberg here. i cannot for the life of me figure out how some people don't understand that. citing the low murder rates by cop of black people ignores the big picture

Second, the two situations are not similar. The duties of being a priest in no way should implicate or lead to sexual abuse. Law enforcement, on the other hand, by its very nature involves dangerous and oftentimes violent interactions between officers and citizens. Police shootings, to a certain extent, have to be expected, especially in a nation with the amount of violence and the size of ours. If what you're saying is that there will or should be mass riots every time a black person is unjustifiably killed by police, then we are screwed. The only remotely plausible way to do that is to simply stop policing black neighborhoods, which would prove disastrous for those communities.

not a single person has said there should be mass riots every time a black person is unjustifiably killed. in fact, not a single person has said there should now or EVER be mass riots

people should PROTEST whenever they goddamn feel like it

oh, and the duties of of a cop in no way should implicate or lead to murdering an innocent civilian who is not a threat

[Dominator83]

Just 4 percent of all Catholic priests had complaints of sexual abuse against them.

Just 4 percent. The shocking thing isnt the number.

Its NEVER about the number. It's about the level of breach of trust.

Its TRIPE to talk about percentages. We need to talk about why this is happening. Period.

Why are minorities more likely to have a set of living conditions and socioeconomic variables which lead them down a road of crime and exposure to the criminal justice system?

This post is wrong on multiple levels. First, even if you concede that sexual abuse by priest and unjustified killings by police are comparable qualitatively, the number you posted shows that the two situations are universes apart quantitatively. There are over 800,000 police officers in America. If 4% of them killed black people, that would equate to 32,000 killings of black people by cops. That would be absolutely mind blowing and would damn near justify a civil war. In reality, if you look at last year's statistics, only 9 unarmed black people were killed by police, which would translate to 0.001% of the work force having killed an unarmed black person. That's 4000x less than the 4% you cited for Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse. You've unintentionally proven my point.

Second, the two situations are not similar. The duties of being a priest in no way should implicate or lead to sexual abuse. Law enforcement, on the other hand, by its very nature involves dangerous and oftentimes violent interactions between officers and citizens. Police shootings, to a certain extent, have to be expected, especially in a nation with the amount of violence and the size of ours. If what you're saying is that there will or should be mass riots every time a black person is unjustifiably killed by police, then we are screwed. The only remotely plausible way to do that is to simply stop policing black neighborhoods, which would prove disastrous for those communities.

Yea I'm afraid that may be the only answer. Just pull all police out of black neighborhoods. That's what BLM wants anyway (literally a petition on their website to defund the police, which means get them out of here). The criminals obviously don't want them there, the non-criminal residents don't want them there (At least not publically they don't support them) , and the cops themselves don't wanna be there. Besides, has police presence ever made those neighborhoods any safer to walk around in? Sure don't seem like it. So I would just say give BLM their wish granted and say "ok were out". Also means they wouldn't have to hire any more police for a long time, and perhaps those tax dollars a can be reinvested into after school/mentorship programs.

[dice]

anybody seen the video of the swarm of bees smothering and killing a murder hornet that is about to go on a killing spree? well, nobody gets killed here, but...

Watch on YouTube

[MrSparkle]

Just 4 percent of all Catholic priests had complaints of sexual abuse against them.

Just 4 percent. The shocking thing isnt the number.

Its NEVER about the number. It's about the level of breach of trust.

Its TRIPE to talk about percentages. We need to talk about why this is happening. Period.

Why are minorities more likely to have a set of living conditions and socioeconomic variables which lead them down a road of crime and exposure to the criminal justice system?

This post is wrong on multiple levels. First, even if you concede that sexual abuse by priest and unjustified killings by police are comparable qualitatively, the number you posted shows that the two situations are universes apart quantitatively. There are over 800,000 police officers in America. If 4% of them killed black people, that would equate to 32,000 killings of black people by cops. That would be absolutely mind blowing and would damn near justify a civil war. In reality, if you look at last year's statistics, only 9 unarmed black people were killed by police, which would translate to 0.001% of the work force having killed an unarmed black person. That's 4000x less than the 4% you cited for Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse. You've unintentionally proven my point.

Second, the two situations are not similar. The duties of being a priest in no way should implicate or lead to sexual abuse. Law enforcement, on the other hand, by its very nature involves dangerous and oftentimes violent interactions between officers and citizens. Police shootings, to a certain extent, have to be expected, especially in a nation with the amount of violence and the size of ours. If what you're saying is that there will or should be mass riots every time a black person is unjustifiably killed by police, then we are screwed. The only remotely plausible way to do that is to simply stop policing black neighborhoods, which would prove disastrous for those communities.

There are other reforms that can be done. They can create a program to actually have a self-operated local police department. Receives oversight and funding from CPD, but operates independently within a district with local neighborhood hires, possibly even allowing gang members to apply so long they under-go training and follow the oversight. Just thinking out loud. It can be an idea to compromise or discuss.

One thing that definitely hasn't worked in big cities IMO... is having one policy, one department for an entire municipality. There hasn't really been "progress" in Chicago. There's just been gentrification and more poverty and crime in the suburbs like Harvey and Dolton.

I'm just listening to what my more radical black friends and colleagues are saying. They want their own police. It's drastic, but it really isn't at the same time, cause the system in place has been a disaster.

Again, I don't know if it would work, but I don't think it's crazy to propose trying to reform. To say there isn't a freaking mountain of room to reform CPD, that doesn't make sense. The police department was incredibly racist until about 5 years ago. They started a flood of new hires and reform after Laquan McDonald. And there are still problems.

Minneapolis was way behind the curve. That Minneapolis Police Union President sounds like a really classy fellow (not).

It's hard to think outside the box here, but at this point, it's not just about police. It's about the state of the black ghetto. White-owned big-business selling crap at the Dollar Store and Target, McDonalds and Taco Bell. Just saying, I think folks are ready for a commercial (and hopefully not a violent) and political reform revolution.

[musiqsoulchild]

I don't know enough to comment on what's happening over there so all I can say is stay safe Bulls brothers and sisters. 2020 continues to get crazier it seems.

The only thing missing in 2020 so far is Godzilla.

Fingers crossed.

Brah...why'd you have to send that out into the universe?

Lol

[musiqsoulchild]

Just 4 percent of all Catholic priests had complaints of sexual abuse against them.

Just 4 percent. The shocking thing isnt the number.

Its NEVER about the number. It's about the level of breach of trust.

Its TRIPE to talk about percentages. We need to talk about why this is happening. Period.

Why are minorities more likely to have a set of living conditions and socioeconomic variables which lead them down a road of crime and exposure to the criminal justice system?

This post is wrong on multiple levels. First, even if you concede that sexual abuse by priest and unjustified killings by police are comparable qualitatively, the number you posted shows that the two situations are universes apart quantitatively. There are over 800,000 police officers in America. If 4% of them killed black people, that would equate to 32,000 killings of black people by cops. That would be absolutely mind blowing and would damn near justify a civil war. In reality, if you look at last year's statistics, only 9 unarmed black people were killed by police, which would translate to 0.001% of the work force having killed an unarmed black person. That's 4000x less than the 4% you cited for Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse. You've unintentionally proven my point.

Second, the two situations are not similar. The duties of being a priest in no way should implicate or lead to sexual abuse. Law enforcement, on the other hand, by its very nature involves dangerous and oftentimes violent interactions between officers and citizens. Police shootings, to a certain extent, have to be expected, especially in a nation with the amount of violence and the size of ours. If what you're saying is that there will or should be mass riots every time a black person is unjustifiably killed by police, then we are screwed. The only remotely plausible way to do that is to simply stop policing black neighborhoods, which would prove disastrous for those communities.

The rate you gave is for murders of black people by cops.

Now add in false imprisonment, bad traffic stops, illegal searches, illegal entry....and you will now start looking at a much larger percentage.

The point is NOT about murders.

Its about the abuse of law by people who are supposed to uphold the law.

And we havent even started talking about the judicial system. Let's not even go down that route. The number of black men and brown men and poor white men that have gone to jail just because the Public Defender was overworked and took the plea...you will never see these numbers.

It's all systemic rot.

[musiqsoulchild]

Just 4 percent of all Catholic priests had complaints of sexual abuse against them.

Just 4 percent. The shocking thing isnt the number.

Its NEVER about the number. It's about the level of breach of trust.

Its TRIPE to talk about percentages. We need to talk about why this is happening. Period.

Why are minorities more likely to have a set of living conditions and socioeconomic variables which lead them down a road of crime and exposure to the criminal justice system?

This post is wrong on multiple levels. First, even if you concede that sexual abuse by priest and unjustified killings by police are comparable qualitatively, the number you posted shows that the two situations are universes apart quantitatively. There are over 800,000 police officers in America. If 4% of them killed black people, that would equate to 32,000 killings of black people by cops. That would be absolutely mind blowing and would damn near justify a civil war. In reality, if you look at last year's statistics, only 9 unarmed black people were killed by police, which would translate to 0.001% of the work force having killed an unarmed black person. That's 4000x less than the 4% you cited for Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse. You've unintentionally proven my point.

Second, the two situations are not similar. The duties of being a priest in no way should implicate or lead to sexual abuse. Law enforcement, on the other hand, by its very nature involves dangerous and oftentimes violent interactions between officers and citizens. Police shootings, to a certain extent, have to be expected, especially in a nation with the amount of violence and the size of ours. If what you're saying is that there will or should be mass riots every time a black person is unjustifiably killed by police, then we are screwed. The only remotely plausible way to do that is to simply stop policing black neighborhoods, which would prove disastrous for those communities.

There are other reforms that can be done. They can create a program to actually have a self-operated local police department. Receives oversight and funding from CPD, but operates independently within a district with local neighborhood hires, possibly even allowing gang members to apply so long they under-go training and follow the oversight. Just thinking out loud. It can be an idea to compromise or discuss.

One thing that definitely hasn't worked in big cities IMO... is having one policy, one department for an entire municipality. There hasn't really been "progress" in Chicago. There's just been gentrification and more poverty and crime in the suburbs like Harvey and Dolton.

I'm just listening to what my more radical black friends and colleagues are saying. They want their own police. It's drastic, but it really isn't at the same time, cause the system in place has been a disaster.

Again, I don't know if it would work, but I don't think it's crazy to propose trying to reform. To say there isn't a freaking mountain of room to reform CPD, that doesn't make sense. The police department was incredibly racist until about 5 years ago. They started a flood of new hires and reform after Laquan McDonald. And there are still problems.

Minneapolis was way behind the curve. That Minneapolis Police Union President sounds like a really classy fellow (not).

It's hard to think outside the box here, but at this point, it's not just about police. It's about the state of the black ghetto. White-owned big-business selling crap at the Dollar Store and Target, McDonalds and Taco Bell. Just saying, I think folks are ready for a commercial (and hopefully not a violent) and political reform revolution.

Well written Sparkle.

I beleive this kind of community policing has worked really well in Brazilian ghettos ( favelas).

As with anything, there will be problems with any solution. But at least once you empower that community....that's a first step.

[League Circles]

Revenue can be hard to come by. That can't just raise tax rates and count on it happening. We already constantly inflate the money supply which discourages savings in a cancerous way IMO, and we already senselessly borrow 1/3 of the federal budget.

One of the biggest myths is that the money for UBI doesn't exist.

You say we can't just raise tax rates and count on it happening. Agreed.

This is why a new type of tax, a tax that has worked in other countries, in other words, a Value Added Tax, is really the key.

There's no reason that Amazon and Netflix and Starbucks and other huge companies should be paying less than you or me in taxes. They pay ZERO. A Value Added Tax would be a huge boon towards fixing this problem.

And to be clear, VAT isn't the only source of money to fund UBI. This graphic should be helpful.

i'm actually opposed to businesses being taxed at all (coupled with them not getting the same rights as humans). but payouts to shareholders should be taxed at the same rate as income

I agree, though ordinary stock dividends are already taxed as regular income I'm pretty certain.

[dice]

apparently the only time chauvin was disciplined was when he for some reason pulled a woman from her car after stopping her for going 10 mph over

he also worked overlapping shifts doing security at a nightclub with...george floyd. "we all worked together and they would have crossed paths" - former owner of club

[dice]

after trump's "when the looting starts, the shooting starts" tweet, posted to facebook and echoing segregationists in the '60s, facebook employees walked off the job when zuckerberg refused to act on it. he had previously said that he would draw the line at posts calling for violence

[Dresden]

I also wonder how much good data we have on excessive force. Obviously this case was extreme, caught on tape, and gives a visceral reaction. Is it symptomatic of 1,000s of cases? 10,000s of cases? 100,000s of cases? How big is the problem you are trying to solve? What is the impact if you solve it? How much will it cost to solve it? What is the opportunity cost of solving it vs a different problem?

Those are all important questions. If your goal is to improve quality of life for as many people as possible (or in this case, let's say just black people) then is addressing this issue something that will make a meaningful improvement relative to the alternatives? If this is an "easy win", then yeah, it absolutely makes sense to resolve it. If it isn't an easy win, then I think the impact of solving it is probably much less than other things (but this is basing my opinion on what I suspect the underlying data would say without seeing it, which is a super dangerous way to make any opinion).

This post is precisely correct. Police use of deadly force against unarmed black people is extremely rare from whichever angle you look at it. It represents about 0.1% of the number of black people killed. It represents, at maximum, less than 0.0001% of police interactions with black people. There's also no racial disparity.

So in reality, it's just a really, really rare occurrence. Yet it attracts an almost inconceivable amount of attention (much of which ends up doing great, great harm). And it's almost entirely because the media has convinced so many people that police killings of innocent black people is rampant and that black people in this country should fear for their lives because of it. Just completely irrational and takes away so much energy and attention from way more pressing issues.

Here's a perfect example of media intentionally stoking racial hatred:

Read on Twitter

?s=11

You know what this tweet leaves out? That the person killed his neighbor (a black person) just 15 minutes earlier, had a gun on him and was threatening police with it, and had made a social media post that day about killing people and then getting killed to avoid prison.

But none of that information is presented in NBC's tweet, which is explicitly designed to incite hatred. And by the way, this tweet was posted after the Floyd murder, when people were already upset.

The protests are not just about the killing. It's about the daily humiliation so many minorities have faced from police across the country. You don't think that's a common occurrence? You think it's just a media driven problem? Listen to some of the interviews that are being broadcast- there are a lot of them on the air. Reporters talking to black folks from all walks of life- some well to do, living in nice areas, some working class, living in tough areas- and they're all telling stories of unfair treatment at the hands of the police, of being treated differently than white people, of being afraid of the police and what they may do to them, and being sick and tired of it. You really think all these people are just making this stuff up? Or that it's all being fabricated by the media?

[dice]

I also wonder how much good data we have on excessive force. Obviously this case was extreme, caught on tape, and gives a visceral reaction. Is it symptomatic of 1,000s of cases? 10,000s of cases? 100,000s of cases? How big is the problem you are trying to solve? What is the impact if you solve it? How much will it cost to solve it? What is the opportunity cost of solving it vs a different problem?

Those are all important questions. If your goal is to improve quality of life for as many people as possible (or in this case, let's say just black people) then is addressing this issue something that will make a meaningful improvement relative to the alternatives? If this is an "easy win", then yeah, it absolutely makes sense to resolve it. If it isn't an easy win, then I think the impact of solving it is probably much less than other things (but this is basing my opinion on what I suspect the underlying data would say without seeing it, which is a super dangerous way to make any opinion).

This post is precisely correct. Police use of deadly force against unarmed black people is extremely rare from whichever angle you look at it. It represents about 0.1% of the number of black people killed. It represents, at maximum, less than 0.0001% of police interactions with black people. There's also no racial disparity.

So in reality, it's just a really, really rare occurrence. Yet it attracts an almost inconceivable amount of attention (much of which ends up doing great, great harm). And it's almost entirely because the media has convinced so many people that police killings of innocent black people is rampant and that black people in this country should fear for their lives because of it. Just completely irrational and takes away so much energy and attention from way more pressing issues.

Here's a perfect example of media intentionally stoking racial hatred:

Read on Twitter

?s=11

You know what this tweet leaves out? That the person killed his neighbor (a black person) just 15 minutes earlier, had a gun on him and was threatening police with it, and had made a social media post that day about killing people and then getting killed to avoid prison.

But none of that information is presented in NBC's tweet, which is explicitly designed to incite hatred. And by the way, this tweet was posted after the Floyd murder, when people were already upset.

The protests are not just about the killing. It's about the daily humiliation so many minorities have faced from police across the country. You don't think that's a common occurrence? You think it's just a media driven problem? Listen to some of the interviews that are being broadcast- there are a lot of them on the air. Reporters talking to black folks from all walks of life- some well to do, living in nice areas, some working class, living in tough areas- and they're all telling stories of unfair treatment at the hands of the police, of being treated differently than white people, of being afraid of the police and what they may do to them, and being sick and tired of it. You really think all these people are just making this stuff up? Or that it's all being fabricated by the media?

i'm 43, white, and i've been pulled over a handful of times in my life, all for speeding except for blowing a stop sign, all justified. got out of a couple of them. only weird encounter i've ever had with a cop was when a friend and i were walking home from our high school at night and an undercover cop confronted us about smoking in the park we had just exited. neither of us were smokers and he let us go. slow night for him, i guess

[dice]

How many people have heard of Tony Timpa? Not many. Since the media barely covered his murder, it simply never happened to most people.

just saw some divisive right wing blogger on twitter circulating the same 2 videos that you posted. "you've never heard his name because he's white"

as it turns out, the body cam footage of the arrest didn't get released until 3 years after his death. well after the cases against the officers had been dropped because it was determined they had not acted recklessly. certainly not maliciously. the officers made a number of mistakes, but it was hardly a "murder", as you call it. and he had a toxic level of cocaine in his system. stories by NYT, wapo and cnn come up on google before the dallas ft. worth coverage. usa today, the major networks, huffpost, us news, slate, daily beast, yahoo, vice, newsweek and even the guardian, independent and daily mail all covered it

[SHO'NUFF]

after trump's "when the looting starts, the shooting starts" tweet, posted to facebook and echoing segregationists in the '60s, facebook employees walked off the job when zuckerberg refused to act on it. he had previously said that he would draw the line at posts calling for violence

What on gods earth did that statement have to do with segregationists in the 60s? The looters were white, black, brown, etc.

Didn’t the shooting start after the looting? People were shot and killed and police were shot at and killed. Some store owners were protecting their store with guns possibly shooting at looters if they were attacked. What was so bad about that statement?

LA Riots same thing...people started looting and plenty of shooting afterwards. Roof Koreans. Looters shooting back, etc. Zero cops were around for those riots during the prime moments.

I’m trying to figure out what was so wrong with that factual statement?