[quote name='bmulligan']Strike one. People convicted for crack posession are sentenced with the same guidelines as others convicted of crack posession. According to your 'logic', a jaywalker should get the same sentence as a crack dealer? That's a good one.[/quote]
Yes, indeed, people given sentences for crack do, in fact, get the same sentences as those who are sentenced for crack. Heck of a job sorting that social malady out.
I'm not certain if you even read my statement, but it was inregards to the differentiation between crack and powder cocaine - that is, possession of 5 grams of crack will net you the same mandatory sentence (10 years) that you will get if you had over 500 grams of powder cocaine. Do you see the 100-to-1 ratio there? Do you understand how the crack sentence targets users and the powder sentence targets distributors? Do you understand the racial disparity in who uses powder and who uses crack? I hope so; if you don't mind, I'm curious where "jaywalking" comes into play in your response. Did you forget to stop at Peet's this morning?
What I hate is when people like you automatically demand a claim on everyone else's achievements. Becuase we live in an inter-dependent world, you conclude that everyones success is a result of your generosity. That's mighty boastful of you to claim credit for the effort of others. But it doesn't fly.
When you buy a ticket for the public transit, there's no contract that says: you owe us a portion of all your future success becuase we got you to work on time every day. When you buy your government taxed gasoline there's no obligation to repay the common good for the privlidge of buying that gasoline. You've already paid that debt with your purchase. This is why you know your argument is a fallacy and you need something else to shore up it's foundation. At last, you've found the answer - government assistance. Since it's not possible can succeed by their own merit, a special government assistance program can provide everyone with the means to be productive and they will be indebtted to you for all their potential future gain. That's your system. It doesn't exist yet in toto, but you're working to make it a reality.
What you've described is precisely how the IMF operates their loans to third world nations; it is precisely how white plantation owners treated the newly released ex-slaves who were looking for employment. I'm not that person. I don't expect people with physical or psychological problems to be able to contribute to society, and I don't believe they should suffer as a result of their inability to (either in the presence or absence of drugs). Your mind is calculating this as a cost/benefit ratio, when in reality, your mind could never rationalize altruism at any point in time, because there is no payoff, and this is not an investment.
Your furor over these people who suck the system dry is made to look misguided and foolish by your similar embracement of those corporations who have a vested interest in our nation going to war, and our nation housing more prisoners. You can't reconcile the fact that you want government to be efficient and you want businesses to profit; when the two meet, one of those two beliefs must capitulate to the other. Instead, you successfully ignore it altogether, instead focusing your anger at those who can not and will not fight back. If you were just as angry that your taxes are high to keep KBR balls deep in profit as you were that your taxes are high to keep the poor balls deep in food, then I don't think I'd mind your nauseating selfishness so much. You inconsistency is what's most bothersome.
What you hate is profit. What you hate even more is individual profit. You blank out all of the factors that go into making that profit, the jobs it creates, the families it provides for. Think of all the millions of people employed by capitalism who can buy their house, ccar, food, and provide for their families. You hate that system becuase there are no guarantees and it's all based on risk, and those who risk the most profit the most.
Did you happen to see the report that discusses the increases in executive pay over the past 7 years? That the top five execs at the top 1500 public firms have increased their stake in net net profit from 5% to 9.8%. I think we had this discussion; profit does not bother me, but excessive profit does. Before you come in and point out that excessive profit is an arbitrary measure, shut up. I know it's a highly messy concept. However, using that 9.8% measure, consider Exxon. Their annual net profit is just under $40 billion for the year, so five people will be splitting $4 billion. On the other hand, how well are the wage workers faring? If you look at mean wage data from the Census, it has remained constant, just around $44-$46K per year, since the early 1990's. Taking inflation into account, that $44K doesn't go as far as it did 16 years ago, and while we can be glad that wages aren't falling, the reality is that the numbers are constant, but the spending power of that same number is decreased. I know you don't seem to have a problem with this, as profit is king. I'll fill up the tank if you want to go full speed ahead into the brave new world of plutocracy. We can all be slaves there.
Typical zero sum gain argument. Or, as I like to call it, the "conservation argument". Just as the conservation of matter and energy states that matter can never be created or destroyed, only changed in state, you think wealth is a fixed commodity and if companies make money, they locically have to be taking it from the poor. It's another falsehood you can't reconcile.
Don't be condescending, I'm aware how economics works. What I'm arguing is that tax cuts don't pay for themselves. One look at CBO budget deficits from the Reagan years on will prove that almost instantaneously. Increased taxation on the poor (tobacco taxes, for instance, or the "stupid tax," a/k/a the lottery) is a way of life; before you pull out your rational actor card, allow me to ask you that, if you fully support taxing people for doing dumb things, even if they are poor - why don't we legalize crack and tax the shit out of it?
Since we are all equal, shouldn't we all receive an equal share? Or do you now come to the realization that we are not all the same ?
I'm fine with poor people existing. You are the one who is miserable and needs to help them with other peoples' wallets. Apparently, I've made a bullseye on the mark since you are speechless.
You've completely ignored the fact that one gains wealth to the extent that they exploit others. Your money was not earned in a vacuum, it was earned by negotiating it out of your boss, or by not paying people a fair wage, or by overcharging people for a product or service. Our wallets are made at the expense of others. To ignore that is to ignore the basic tenet of Adam Smith's philosophy.
Myke, you're all about armchair assumptions and snake oil for society. You assume that people are inherently uncaring and unconcerned with their fellow man. You assume that people are incapable of providing for themselves and must be compelled to provide assistance. You assume a poor black child can't make it by his own merit. You must be a truly vacuous human being to believe such things. Your zealotry can be compared to imams who want strict obedience to islam in order to please allah. "Society" and the "common good" are your religion, and you want government to force people into compliance, relieving them of their free will to worship as they please.
Really? I didn't know that the research I read was all armchair statistics. I didn't know that people were making shit up when they tell me how much more discrimination people face seeking employment, or how merely being black can get you arrested. I didn't know it was all a lie when I read about women's earnings compared to men in equal positions. I don't assume a poor black child can't make it, but I do know, for a fact, that that child will have a hell of a harder time than you or I.
Here's an assumption, however. You are one of those people mentioned in the psychological analyses of political discursants the other week. You can't take on the fact that you want everyone to be entitled to everything they've earned, but you can't reconcile that with the fact that not everybody has the same shot at those resources. Instead of tackling that issue head on, and saying "I don't care if blacks are discriminated against, because I got mine," you ignore the problem away. Just like budget deficits.
I can't decide if you are truly evil or not. Truly evil men desire power over others while you want a proxy to wield power over everyone. You may not be truly evil yet, but I'm sure it would blossom were you to be given the chance.
I have a Dickies jacket with "Lucifer" embrodiered on it. Does that help at all?
ing break.
