|
pentyne posted:Come on Irish Joe, please explain how this process would only affect someone who's irresponsible with their money and a general law breaker. Let me get the story straight: 1. Guy is arrested and it turns out he has an outstanding warrant over an unpaid fine. 2. He goes to court and shows that the fine was erroneous. 3. All the charges were dropped and he pays nothing. I mean, not be a dick or anything, but it sounds like a perfect example of the system working as intended.
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2015 11:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 08:49 |
|
|
GutBomb posted:You forgot where he spent a weekend in jail and had to sue to get them to stop trying to collect their fees. I didn't forget anything. I'm just pointing out how the checks and balances built into our system to prevent injustice successfully prevented injustice in this instance. As tantalizing and sensational as it is, the idea that "I almost had to pay a fine because the system is broken!" doesn't supplant the reality of "I didn't have to pay a fine because the system isn't broken!" Irish Joe fucked around with this message at 14:02 on Mar 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2015 13:53
|
|
|
xcore posted:What's the deal here? Do you have to go to court for every ticket/fine you get? Can't you just get the ticket and jump on Paypal and pay the fine? Depends on the offense and the locality, but where I'm from you can plead guild by signing the ticket and paying the fine. If you want to contest the ticket (plead innocent), you can take it before the magistrate. Race check: I'm white, so I actually 1) listen when a police officer talks to me and 2) read what's written on the ticket.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2015 11:22
|
|
|
TurboFlamingChicken posted:I actually challenged my last speeding ticket just to see what happens. What happens is the officer actually shows up and presents so much evidence you basically look stupid. Now I understand why everyone takes the plea deal and no one fights them. On a good note, the only thing I got charged more for was the points, they had me pay the same fine as if I had plead guilty. You don't challenge tickets to win (which will only really happen if the cop doesn't show), you challenge them to apologize to the judge, say you understand what you did was wrong and promise that it'll never happen again so he'll give you a reduced fine/fewer points. Race check: I'm white, so I'm able to accept blame for my actions.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2015 10:57
|
|
|
PassTheRemote posted:But we will consider him the bad guy because we cannot bear to face the tough questions and harsh truths of life. Its telling how spineless the left has become when they're not willing to take Obama to task for this poo poo because it might hurt the Democrats in the next election (too late).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
EatinCake posted:I really hope the Obama Admin does something before they're out of office.  Promised fulfilled.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
"The government has a record of everything you've done online, a copy of every e-mail and text you've ever sent or received, and a recording of every cell phone conversation you've ever had" needs context?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
xcore posted:WTF is this? Did Irish Joe change his username? No, but I thought it was common knowledge that TED Talks were nothing more than a scam to rip off billionaires by presenting the inane blatherings of vapid douchebags as "inspirational" and "forward looking."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2015 11:56
|
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:poo poo, I'm STILL waiting for the Our Friend Israel episode. Do what most anti-semites do and reread Mein Kampf while you wait.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
Solvent posted:I absolutely love this show for it's pure entertainment value, but I'm often left troubled at the end of every episode. Remember, this is an entertainment show that has to keep fueling the outrage machine to keep people watching. In reality, John oversimplifies and glosses over both the nuance and the counterarguments of a lot of the issues he covers. John also fails to propose any alternatives to the "issues" he creates. Its easy to rile people up over the injustice of a single aspect of a particular issue, its much, MUCH harder to come up with a change that doesn't eliminate the injustice without also eliminating the benefit of a thing. Sometimes an imperfect thing is better than no thing at all, which is a nuance that John never delves into (because its not sensational and won't get idiots like you riled up on social media).
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 09:34
|
|
|
Solvent posted:I'd really like to hear your take on the benefits of police seizures, or to be even more topical, the obfuscation of the practices of the company that provides standardized tests for a vast majority of America's youth. Civil forfeiture has many benefits, including, as you mentioned, funneling money back into the precinct/local government. It also has the benefit of discouraging criminal activity by taking away some of the financial incentive of crimes (and not allowing criminal to ultimately "profit" from their wrongdoing) and also provides the retribution society demands of people who break the law. I haven't seen the standardized test segment yet, but the very definition of "standardized" implies the existence of a single test/rubric produced by a single company. quote:I also scrolled up and saw you also referred to people looking forward to a criticism of Israel as anti-Semites. Classy.  I was making a joke (this is a thread about a comedy show posted on a comedy forum, after all) about a poster's bizarre eagerness to see John take down Israel. You see, no one in their right mind would call someone an antisemite over such innocuous behavior*, thus doing so is unexpected and therefore "funny" under the Expectation Theory of comedy.*I know tumblr has erased the line between normal behavior and racism to the point where everything is racism, but this isn't tumblr.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 10:24
|
|
|
Solvent posted:If a single company makes a standardized test for an entire nation, that is not able to be discussed, I can see no way that the standard is at all linked to reality. States and school boards choose to adopt the test and could conceivably demand "oversight" in exchange for the contract. Again, I haven't seen the segment so... quote:I'm not sure if you've noticed this everywhere, but people have strong feelings about Israel's history of treatment regarding the people who inhabit the lands surrounding their walled nation. Yeah, I couldn't care less about the "plight" of the Palestinians or whoever's bitching about Israel this week. We won the war and gave the land to Israel. Israel expanded its borders by winning subsequent wars. Acquiring land and property through conquest has been a standard practice since forever. That said, Israel should be commended for showing remarkable restraint, because if I were in charge and a group of people were shooting at my citizens or sending suicide bombers to blow up buses and cafe on my land, I would have bombed them into oblivion and drove whoever survived into the loving sea. In other words, gently caress the Palestinians.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 11:12
|
|
|
Phoon posted:Since nixon/reagan the raison d'etre of the american government in public spending has been to transfer public wealth/assets/tax money to private companies (who lobby government heavily and finance political campaigns) with as little oversight as possible, this can give a short term boost to GDP/growth/etc but over time it results in public services becoming monopolised (usually in local monopolies but sometime nationwide) and run as cheaply as possible to maximise profit rather than quality of service/results. Why do you care if you're not from America?
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
Katana Gomai posted:Yes, and that "company" should be the government (that is, if you must resort to standardized testing at all, which I am strongly against). Privatized education is dumb as hell for a number of reasons. Education isn't privatized, though. States still have the province and the choice to come up with their own curriculum and tests, but, again, that's impractical because then you'd have 50 tests for 50 states and no way to ensure consistency between them. Now, the solution you're proposing--federal control of education--is no solution at all because it will NEVER happen. Period, end of the story. So what are you left with? Well, you're left with the same system that gave us the UCC or the model penal code: groups of dedicated Americans getting together and coming up with a universal resource that it isn't possible for the state or federal governments to come up with on their own. Yeah, the system isn't perfect, but the solution--not buying a defective product--is a whole lot easier, immediate and practical than spending fifty years waiting for the states to ratify a Constitutional amendment ceding education to the federal government. Phoon posted:Are you saying that US corporations do not affect the rest of the world? Have you heard of globalism? Nixon wasn't the president of whatever shithole country you're from.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
Solvent posted:loving troll. Go away. Is there a reason you responded twice to the same reply? Also, for what its worth, the Palestinians could vastly improve their lot in life if they stopped associating with Hamas and other terrorists. I get it, life sucks, but when you poke the beehive, don't come crying to me when you get stung.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
Google probably outsources recruitment to a company that spams job listings on dozens of websites. Its not loving rocket science.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
The pineapple thing seems like an overreaction to claims that standardized tests were racist because black people don't know what a regatta is. "What do you mean they don't know the term for a boat race? Fine, just make it about bunny rabbits or some poo poo."
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
Do these tests affect grades, though? I thought they were purely an exercise in data gathering.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:If they want to use tests as a metric to judge overall literacy rates, that's fine, but don't link them to funding and pay incentives for teachers. Use them to identify students that need extra attention because they're struggling with the material. Negative reinforcement is a terrible tactic to use when it comes to education. I'm sorry, but if teachers aren't identifying students who need extra attention because they're struggling with the material, then what the heck are they doing? A teacher is, after all, in a much better position to assess the needs of her students than a standardized test. Furthermore, why are we blaming the tests for teachers and schools putting pressure on kids to do well on them? It just seems like when you remove all the politics and emotional arguments from this issue, the problem isn't bad tests, but bad teachers.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2015 10:31
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:We're blaming tests because teachers are paid jack and poo poo, and the system is directly designed in such a manner that results reflect on teacher pay. So yes, in an ideal world a teacher's only concern is to tend to the needs of his students, the fact is that the government imposed a system that forces the teacher to pressure his students so he can stay above the poverty line. Clearly, money is a powerful motivator. No Child Left Behind was introduced and passed to address the problem of declining literacy and math proficiency in our school. The government believes that, by tying federal money to performance, it would motivate schools and teachers to invest in their student's performance. As you pointed out, it worked, insofar as it motivated teachers to push their students towards higher academic achievement. The problem is that academic achievement is measured by tests which some believe is suspect. The question, then, is how do you ensure that the test is the right standard of academic achievement for students? The answer boils back down to states and school districts holding the test makers accountable through the choice to use or not use their product, which was my original point three pages ago.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2015 11:20
|
|
|
You could, theoretically, open it to the same bidding process as all other govt contracts
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
The search shouldn't be for the perfect system, but a working one. Politics, like life, is a series of compromises. You can't always get what you want, let alone everything you want. A flawed system that actually works is much better than an untested, theoretically perfect system that might not.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
Family Values posted:So we don't really need to reform the entire education system, we just need to find a way to improve our worst schools. (Giant clue: find a way to fix wealth disparity and you'll go a long way to fixing educational disparity) So if we make the top 1% poorer, without changing anything about bottom 20%, the bottom 20% will become magically smarter? Makes sense.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:Do you honestly think major government contracting is remotely useful for anything beyond padding the political Masters donors pocket books? Not at all, but the problem is that if we work under the assumption that the government is irredeemably corrupt and seeking solutions through corrupt organizations is futile, then there is no possible solution. At that point we might as well just maintain the status quo. Any change, even a 100% government run testing system, has to be run through a corrupt and damaged system. But as long as we get the solution we want, that shouldn't ultimately matter.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
Veskit posted:That we could like, not assume that the government is irredeemably corrupt and then come up with a solution not using that assumption? Well, it takes two to tango. Removing corporate interests from the equation doesn't do anything about the politician who is ready, willing and able to compromise his office for a little payola. You can't eliminate corruption in government (hence, the constitution) and, even if you could, we're butting up against the practicality issue again. Solutions to the problem of school testing standard can't involve reforming the government from top to bottom because that's just not realistic.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Veskit posted:To add something to the conversation, I hope the UK elections are in this week next week and or Bernie sanders. The elections because I don't know what the gently caress any of that is about because i don't follow it, and I just like Bernie and he's neat. Though given the time of year has there been a real weather expose? poo poo is crazy everywhere. I know there was one on climate control but weather would be cool. I hope John takes on airplane peanuts next. That poo poo's nuts.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:Any one of those would be better than exposing the evils of... tobacco, lone sharks, and the fashion industry. I'd love to hear the premise for a segment about elections that doesn't come off as sour grapes. "Elections are evil because... the wrong parties win!" "People are tricked into voting for the candidates whose policies... they agree with!" "When people are unhappy with the economy, inner city violence and racial tensions flamed by the party in power, they stupidly... vote for change."
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:Two houses, lower house representational districts with preferential (instant-runoff) voting, upper house proportional voting. American supremacy affirmed.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2015 11:29
|
|
|
Who are we supposed to be angry at this week?
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2015 11:59
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:Actually it's "parental leave", because fathers can take it too, if they wish (one parent at a time, though). Only one parent at a time? I'm sorry you're forced to live in such a backwards shithole.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2015 14:17
|
|
|
There always going to be a divide between those who think people should be responsible for their own lives and decisions and those who think the government should provide cradle-to-grave welfare. And insulting the former while providing no supporting arguments for the latter isn't going to do anything to bridge that divide. Unless you think yelling "DON'T YOU CARE ABOUT MOTHERS??" over and over again is an intelligent, thought-provoking argument capable of swaying people who disagree with you. In that case, 
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
Katana Gomai posted:Your obvious trolling aside, you make it sound like there is a way to sway these people. There probably isn't, but the point is that he doesn't even understand what he's arguing or why people disagree with him. His principles aren't well-reasoned. They don't have a deep philosophical basis. His line of reasoning is, basically, "Moms are good. Anything that's good for moms is therefore also good. Ergo, we should do anything that's good for moms regardless of the cost or possible consequences." Even if you agree with his proposed policies, no reasonable person would associate with a man whose thinking is so childishly simplistic.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:Are you just too lazy to read posts in this thread or if not, why don't you address the following three simple points? Because the "points" don't address the core of the issue? Its easy, for example, to come up with a list of situations where free speech is more detrimental than limited speech (hate speech, bullying speech, etc), but the fact of the matter is that people support a blanket freedom of speech because they don't want the government dictating capriciously what's good speech and what's bad speech. Here we have a case where you're asking the government to step in and say it'll pay women not to work. What triggers that benefit, what's the extent of that right, what will prevent abuse, how will the system support the cost, what will stop the government from adding similar benefits to other groups in the future, etc, etc, etc. Isn't it simpler, safer and a lot more fair to everybody to say, simply, "you make the choice not to work, you don't get paid. Period." ?
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:This is not loving rocket science. In order for a country not to head for a demographic collapse, you need people to make babies so that you have future workers and taxpayers. You use whatever means at your disposal to make sure no one postpones having children for financial reasons. Jesus Christ, that sounds like some next level nazi poo poo. "Ve must insure ze birt ut ze next generation of pure German shtock."
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:Which one is, then? It can't be both... because that would be moronic. There's nothing moronic about having different counterarguments to different arguments. quote:Let me put it in another way. Why do you think every other civilized country in the world provides some form of paid maternal leave apart from the United States? By civilized countries, you mean predominantly white countries, right?
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
Neeksy posted:Maybe using an economic standard of argument is a distraction from the fact that just being a humanitarian society should be enough to argue in favor of this. It depends on how you define humanitarian. Many would argue that freedom and independence (as opposed to dependence on government assistance) is more humanitarian because it better supports the innate dignity of man. The government needing to step in and pay for somebody's care presupposes that they're both helpless and incapable of caring for themselves, like children. Do you really think its better to live in a society where you, as an adult, are perceived as being like a child your entire life?
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2015 13:07
|
|
|
"gently caress the rich!" is appealing to children and losers on the internet, but it starts to lose its appeal when you actually work and make your own living.hallebarrysoetoro posted:We're trying to get some help toward sensible policy toward work and parenthood and we can't even get the people who poo poo out several pounds of human to have any paid leave. While it'd sure be nice to include maternity and paternity leave you have to start somewhere. A ditch isn't going to get dug by handwringing. Most people with careers do have some paid leave through normal sick leave that they accrue at their jobs.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
How are u posted:Who would have thought that the most controversial LWT segment on a forum full of single white men would be about women's maternity leave. Single white men and women so repugnant that they'll never keep a dick hard long enough to get pregnant. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
Fans posted:Look all I'm saying is having Children is a privilege that should only be enjoyed by the rich. The genes of the poor should be allowed to die out naturally. Lack of extraordinary benefits hasn't stopped the poor from breeding like rabbits. Quite the opposite, actually (its almost like poor people make bad decisions hmmmm).
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 08:49 |
|
|
If there's anything recent events have taught us, its that the poor do a pretty good job of thinning out their own ranks, so, really, your proposal is a tad superfluous.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2015 23:54
|
|