Not sure where you get the statistics, but a lot of gun death reports from the US include suicide, which while significant on its own, doesn't really factor into the "gun violence" discussion IMO. 60% of total gun deaths are from suicide.
The second side of the story is that many of the death are gang related. This is by far and wide a social issue, which (IMO) is mostly caused by bad family life... many of the kids involved in gangs are from single parent homes: being poor and not having good male role models makes a gang very tempting.
The third thing is the fluff around the NRA in the US. As a lobby group a lot of people talk about how much they donate. ~3 million a year! That's a crazy amount of money and power, right? Well...no. https://www.opensecrets.org/lo...
Are most shootings in the US a crack team of crazies with enough training to go after people with weapons first? Are most shootings in the US showdowns like in the movies? Of course not. Most are suicides and gangbangers. Knowing this is key to solving some of the issues of gun violence, and most people who are against guns are missing it.
Of course we still have these places-- lots of them. They're just not called "sanitoriums". They're called nursing homes, or IMD's (Institutions for Mental Disease), or ICF's (Intermediate Care Facilities), or other things.
At least in terms of nursing homes and IMDs there are age requirements for a lot of services, so I'm not sure how friendly they are to the 23 - 63 year old crowd. Though if part of the additional funds they raise go into these facilities that'll be a net positive.
You pay taxes for the niceties that you have; roads, police, welfare, educated populace. I understand you want some feedback on how that is spent and want to see where that money goes.
At the same time... congratulations on doing next to nothing to maintain the minimum of civility! You really "earned" that one, right? The reason why it was a bigger issue during those times were that the taxes were being collected by a essentially a foreign government to oppress the local population. Don't get me wrong, there are some libertarians that basically believe that of current taxation, and they are right in a way, but you have to choose what level of community that you want. Just like you are happy for "representation" to mean voting for people who are basically hand picked by a two party system.
The Starship Troopers model has that, but you have to go through a program to be able to have the vote. Anyone can not go through the program and live a perfectly fine life, they just can't vote or hold office. Anyone, ANYONE, can go through this program to earn the right to vote and hold office... but they make the program hell so that you are forced to earn it (in the books and movies it is high militaristic, but that's because it is following a soldier; there are other paths to citizenship). It is highly liberal and in fact much more individual than our system with a de-emphasis on party lines.
Maybe a compromise is to make anyone who wants to hold government positions go through some training. If every politician is locked up for 6 months in prison they might appreciate the same rights that they seemingly want to erode for the rest of us.
"If something looks to good to be true, it probably is"
It looks like Tony Evers has it for Wisconsin (by 1.2% points) so we will see what will happen with this. It's like being in the middle of an ocean on a boat; do you keep going in the direction you are pointed or turn around.
Either way, this turned out to be a waste. Not that any of it will stick to FOXCONN, I doubt people will stop using iPhones in solidarity with Wisconsin. I just hope Tony goes a bit hardball and tries to hammer out a better deal then abandoning it entirely. Time will tell.
Given that many homeless have serious mental illnesses and health issues state funded sanatoriums would be the thing. But... NIMBY and the social implications would turn that down in a heartbeat.
I REALLY respect the Republican Tea Party. They made changes in a matter of years. Because they mobilized and went for their goals.
I don't know if it is just my perspective, but it seemed that the religious right lost a lot of steam since the Tea Party popped up. I think it is the focus on economics and liberalism. Granted, the Tea Party still has a religious tinge to them which further split in Libertarians. It was probably the best thing to happen to the party in recent memory. Granted, I'm still not crazy on hyper conservative liberal polices... I still think there needs to be government controlled regulation and safety nets if for nothing else than to prevent people becoming so desperate as to commit.crime.
It is probably also why I've become more critical of the left and the Democratic party. The left has embraced a Marxist viewpoint, only replace class with race/sex/etc. When growing up the left was more about liberty and making sure we had the same starting opportunity. Nothing points to this more than Hilary talking about "deplorable" people, and the Kavanaugh hearings which focused on "listen and believe" more than any of his shitty support of NSA surveillance! Come the on!
This is just bad news all around. There is a reason that ballot selfies are illegal. I mean... look at the vitriol Kanye got from other members of the black community on CNN for merely talking to Trump.
Voting is... too easy to do on party lines. This squeezes out third parties. Like... maybe make it so you have to write the name of the person you are voting for legibly with no spelling mistakes. With allowances for people with disabilities.
Maybe Heinlein had a good system after all. Earn the right to vote, earn the right to serve, and take personal responsibility.
First of all, thanks for using the correct term Person of Shit and not the racist Shit Person.
Second of all, I've read what you wrote as something sarcastic. "I grew up near XYZ and I'm fine, I must be a statistical outlier or something?" can be read as ridiculing the premise. My apologies.
When read as intended I would have ignored it because it is banal and doesn't add to the conversion. Sorry for the derail.
Yeah, I grew up less than a quarter mile from one of the major city highways and about a half a mile from the other major freeway (both feeding a city pop around 200k). When I started college I was 5'9" and 115 pounds (male, so more than a little skinny), since I left home I'm a more healthy weight but far from any overweight category in my late 30s. So am I just an outlier in this study (yeah I know, one data point out of 7.5 billion and all that...)?
I'm guessing you didn't take any sociological or statistics classes in college? Bell curves, how do they work!?
Exactly. Everyone know how you get fat, this looks at why
It could be Chemical X inhibits vitamin intake, causing people to eat more to compensate. Chemical X might cause depression, which in a population can lead to overeating as a mechanism to cope. Chemical X might inhibit the ability to feel full. Chemical X could make people less inclined to exercise.
Heck, it could be "cars produce Chemical X, more cars more Chemical X, more cars the less parents let their kids out to play, less play time early in life could lead to obesity later in life.
Having evidence of correlation and handwaving it away as calorie consumption doesn't do anybody any favors.
Except the memo (and most laws) consider sex and gender to be the same thing.
If Trump was putting out a memo recognizing they were different you would have a point. He isn't. He's putting out a memo that considers sex and gender to be the same thing, and only recognizing sex.
I would disagree with you. The government has no bearing on gender. A biological man cannot be arrested for wearing a dress as a result of anything Trump does, regardless if that man is doing it for drag or because they are transitioned. This still seems like the NYT is creating a mountain out of a mole hill to generate clicks.
What, exactly, is making light of it?
The far left kinda treats it as a feeling based thing that would be full of sunshine and rainbows. The far right treats it as a made up thing that is nothing but a mental disorder. The truth is somewhere in between.
It's kinda like the abortion thing. Far right: murder. Far left: let's make a song and dance about getting our abortions!
And their suicide rate goes way down post-transition.....unless you start demanding they be treated as their birth sex.
This shows that the rate is NOT significant influenced post-transition (going from 60% to 40% is a factor, but is still too damn high to call it "way down").
http://williamsinstitute.law.u...
Though it shows that people who "pass" as the gender have the lowest rates, but it is still 1/3.
Interestingly enough, male-to-female suicide rates are higher, mirroring the higher rate of mens suicide compared to women. Makes sense if the hormonal development (testosterone) is responsible... but then you would think that hormone therapy would be better at preventing suicide attempts than counseling which doesn't seem to be the case.
They may or they may not be. Which is why the normal treatment is to block puberty until they are older and able to figure it out for sure. In the meantime, you gender them as they want to be.
Yeah, I guess I worded that one poorly. At the same time, kids can go through phases and want to please their parents. It is a tricky thing to be sure.
I can see the government still recognizing legal marriages, and any legal marriage should only be valid between consenting individuals. This allows for recognition outside of religious terms to guarantee equal rights. Mostly to provide legal boundaries that protect individuals if they come from different religious backgrounds.
The second thing it helps is to define families as being 2 parents. This provides quite a bit of a leg up for any children (either natural or adopted) as there is good evidence that single parenthood is bad for the child. Granted, certain communities do this better than others in the US (with results that you can correlate with economic success).
There is a difference between sex (genetic and physical characteristics) and gender (social norms attached to such differences). The fact that the NYT of all places are conflating the two is to drum up clicks by angry leftists and to look 'woke'. Even the Department of Health and Human Services memo mentioned sex specifically!
I guess you could argue that there should be 3 entries for sex: male, female, and other to handle certain very rare genetic and physical disorders.
When a doctor asks you if you are male or female they mean if you got a dick and more testosterone or a vagina and more estrogen. This whole debate is stupid. It is not erasing trans people.
Having body dysphoria is traumatic, and the fact that the left makes such light of it is almost as sickening (though not as much as those that abuse trans people). Not every person who transitions ends up happy with the decision. The suicide rates of such people are high, and I imagine that actual bullying is less of an issue there than not feeling like your body is your own. They need help.
Also, your pre-pubescent kid is probably not trans and we shouldn't hold a parade for them.
It's not inherent "blackness" that is the big problem. It is single families that are the big problem. You might argue that race has something to do with where you fall on the r/K selection spectrum, but I suspect that it is a downward spiral (have a single parent and you will be more likely to end up as a single parent yourself).
This obviously creates educational issues, there is no family structure so wealth isn't accumulated as easily, and since the children generally live with the mother they have no male role models making them susceptible to joining gangs.
It is the religious right denying sex ed/contraceptives/abortions. It is the radical left saying men are worthless and trying to get rid of traditional (2 parent) families and having a laissez faire view of sex.
Men and women come from very different life experiences. Likewise for non whites from whites. Is it really such a stretch of the imagination that it would be good to have more variety in who directs in such a culturally dominate medium such as cinema?
Potentially very true. However you get the situation where we want to push diversity so we get black author X to write black character Y whose main characteristic is being Black, which is pretty boring.
It happened in comics to certain characters (the Iceman run was fairly bad because it is pretty much just about him being gay, we get it now show some actual character development).
That led to a series of studies that found that (a) women generally don't negotiate as aggressively as their male counterparts, and (b) women who do negotiate aggressively are more effective at it than their male counterparts. Further studies delved into why women negotiated less aggressively and decided it's probably due to the cultural expectations of "niceness" and non-confrontationalism that women are raised with... and maybe even due to some inherent genetic bias in those directions.
I'm sure the women who did negotiate were SUPER HAPPY with getting paid less as a result of this.
Patter recognition. We humans can do it if we try...
Except for when crime statistics are concerned. Apparently because that's racist!
The interesting thing is that... it really isn't about race. It's more about single family homes. ~70% of Black children come from single parent homes. The race that is doing the best in the US (Asian) are ~15% from single families. Coming from a single parent home tends the child towards lower economic status while growing up, higher chance of committing a crime, lower education, etc... they are basically behind at nearly all points of their life.
Granted, try talking about family values to the people who blame racism on everything and see how far that gets you. I'm not even talking about "traditional" values... I have no problem with a married gay couple adopting (since last I looked they tended toward stable relationships and higher economic strength than straight married couples). Just, you know... condoms are fucking cheap.
we think he's a proto-Hitler. He's not competent enough (or brutal enough) to be the next Hitler. What we're afraid of is that he's eroding the institutions that are supposed to stop the next (real) fascist. He's also probably going to tank the economy (between the Walstreet deregulation, massive debt for tax cuts and general graft and incompetence). And nothing helps a fascist rise to power better than an economic crash..
And the left are trying to erode free speech in a way that can be used by the next dictator as well... look at the UK almost sending a man to jail for a Nazi joke. I view Trump as the lesser evil here.
The alt right haven't been as big in the news lately now that antifa are being negatively viewed in the media as well... and it's still social death to be actually racist (as opposed to the fake racist that social Marxists like to throw around). I personally think we are doing better, except for the fighters in the courts trading free speech for feelings.
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure where you get the statistics, but a lot of gun death reports from the US include suicide, which while significant on its own, doesn't really factor into the "gun violence" discussion IMO. 60% of total gun deaths are from suicide. The second side of the story is that many of the death are gang related. This is by far and wide a social issue, which (IMO) is mostly caused by bad family life... many of the kids involved in gangs are from single parent homes: being poor and not having good male role models makes a gang very tempting. The third thing is the fluff around the NRA in the US. As a lobby group a lot of people talk about how much they donate. ~3 million a year! That's a crazy amount of money and power, right? Well...no. https://www.opensecrets.org/lo... Are most shootings in the US a crack team of crazies with enough training to go after people with weapons first? Are most shootings in the US showdowns like in the movies? Of course not. Most are suicides and gangbangers. Knowing this is key to solving some of the issues of gun violence, and most people who are against guns are missing it.
That episode on gender and sexuality was the most cringe inducing thing I've ever watched. It wasn't even scientific!
Is PUBG some sort of Minecraft mod?
Of course we still have these places-- lots of them. They're just not called "sanitoriums". They're called nursing homes, or IMD's (Institutions for Mental Disease), or ICF's (Intermediate Care Facilities), or other things.
At least in terms of nursing homes and IMDs there are age requirements for a lot of services, so I'm not sure how friendly they are to the 23 - 63 year old crowd. Though if part of the additional funds they raise go into these facilities that'll be a net positive.
The Count Dankula kerfuffle certainly shows what side the UK stands for. What a fucking waste of taxpayer money that was.
Fair point, and yet... not really IMO.
You pay taxes for the niceties that you have; roads, police, welfare, educated populace. I understand you want some feedback on how that is spent and want to see where that money goes.
At the same time... congratulations on doing next to nothing to maintain the minimum of civility! You really "earned" that one, right? The reason why it was a bigger issue during those times were that the taxes were being collected by a essentially a foreign government to oppress the local population. Don't get me wrong, there are some libertarians that basically believe that of current taxation, and they are right in a way, but you have to choose what level of community that you want. Just like you are happy for "representation" to mean voting for people who are basically hand picked by a two party system.
The Starship Troopers model has that, but you have to go through a program to be able to have the vote. Anyone can not go through the program and live a perfectly fine life, they just can't vote or hold office. Anyone, ANYONE, can go through this program to earn the right to vote and hold office... but they make the program hell so that you are forced to earn it (in the books and movies it is high militaristic, but that's because it is following a soldier; there are other paths to citizenship). It is highly liberal and in fact much more individual than our system with a de-emphasis on party lines.
Maybe a compromise is to make anyone who wants to hold government positions go through some training. If every politician is locked up for 6 months in prison they might appreciate the same rights that they seemingly want to erode for the rest of us.
"If something looks to good to be true, it probably is"
It looks like Tony Evers has it for Wisconsin (by 1.2% points) so we will see what will happen with this. It's like being in the middle of an ocean on a boat; do you keep going in the direction you are pointed or turn around.
Either way, this turned out to be a waste. Not that any of it will stick to FOXCONN, I doubt people will stop using iPhones in solidarity with Wisconsin. I just hope Tony goes a bit hardball and tries to hammer out a better deal then abandoning it entirely. Time will tell.
Given that many homeless have serious mental illnesses and health issues state funded sanatoriums would be the thing. But... NIMBY and the social implications would turn that down in a heartbeat.
I REALLY respect the Republican Tea Party. They made changes in a matter of years. Because they mobilized and went for their goals.
I don't know if it is just my perspective, but it seemed that the religious right lost a lot of steam since the Tea Party popped up. I think it is the focus on economics and liberalism. Granted, the Tea Party still has a religious tinge to them which further split in Libertarians. It was probably the best thing to happen to the party in recent memory. Granted, I'm still not crazy on hyper conservative liberal polices... I still think there needs to be government controlled regulation and safety nets if for nothing else than to prevent people becoming so desperate as to commit.crime.
It is probably also why I've become more critical of the left and the Democratic party. The left has embraced a Marxist viewpoint, only replace class with race/sex/etc. When growing up the left was more about liberty and making sure we had the same starting opportunity. Nothing points to this more than Hilary talking about "deplorable" people, and the Kavanaugh hearings which focused on "listen and believe" more than any of his shitty support of NSA surveillance! Come the on!
This is just bad news all around. There is a reason that ballot selfies are illegal. I mean... look at the vitriol Kanye got from other members of the black community on CNN for merely talking to Trump. Voting is... too easy to do on party lines. This squeezes out third parties. Like... maybe make it so you have to write the name of the person you are voting for legibly with no spelling mistakes. With allowances for people with disabilities. Maybe Heinlein had a good system after all. Earn the right to vote, earn the right to serve, and take personal responsibility.
First of all, thanks for using the correct term Person of Shit and not the racist Shit Person.
Second of all, I've read what you wrote as something sarcastic. "I grew up near XYZ and I'm fine, I must be a statistical outlier or something?" can be read as ridiculing the premise. My apologies.
When read as intended I would have ignored it because it is banal and doesn't add to the conversion. Sorry for the derail.
Yeah, I grew up less than a quarter mile from one of the major city highways and about a half a mile from the other major freeway (both feeding a city pop around 200k). When I started college I was 5'9" and 115 pounds (male, so more than a little skinny), since I left home I'm a more healthy weight but far from any overweight category in my late 30s. So am I just an outlier in this study (yeah I know, one data point out of 7.5 billion and all that...)?
I'm guessing you didn't take any sociological or statistics classes in college? Bell curves, how do they work!?
Exactly. Everyone know how you get fat, this looks at why
It could be Chemical X inhibits vitamin intake, causing people to eat more to compensate. Chemical X might cause depression, which in a population can lead to overeating as a mechanism to cope. Chemical X might inhibit the ability to feel full. Chemical X could make people less inclined to exercise.
Heck, it could be "cars produce Chemical X, more cars more Chemical X, more cars the less parents let their kids out to play, less play time early in life could lead to obesity later in life.
Having evidence of correlation and handwaving it away as calorie consumption doesn't do anybody any favors.
Thanks for the response!
Except the memo (and most laws) consider sex and gender to be the same thing.
If Trump was putting out a memo recognizing they were different you would have a point. He isn't. He's putting out a memo that considers sex and gender to be the same thing, and only recognizing sex.
I would disagree with you. The government has no bearing on gender. A biological man cannot be arrested for wearing a dress as a result of anything Trump does, regardless if that man is doing it for drag or because they are transitioned. This still seems like the NYT is creating a mountain out of a mole hill to generate clicks.
What, exactly, is making light of it?
The far left kinda treats it as a feeling based thing that would be full of sunshine and rainbows. The far right treats it as a made up thing that is nothing but a mental disorder. The truth is somewhere in between.
It's kinda like the abortion thing. Far right: murder. Far left: let's make a song and dance about getting our abortions!
And their suicide rate goes way down post-transition.....unless you start demanding they be treated as their birth sex.
Do you have a source for this?
Hmm, most of the sources I've looked over doesn't mention the pre/post transition rates, but show that even while transitioned they have higher than usual rates. http://theconversation.com/fac... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
This shows that the rate is NOT significant influenced post-transition (going from 60% to 40% is a factor, but is still too damn high to call it "way down"). http://williamsinstitute.law.u...
Though it shows that people who "pass" as the gender have the lowest rates, but it is still 1/3. Interestingly enough, male-to-female suicide rates are higher, mirroring the higher rate of mens suicide compared to women. Makes sense if the hormonal development (testosterone) is responsible... but then you would think that hormone therapy would be better at preventing suicide attempts than counseling which doesn't seem to be the case.
They may or they may not be. Which is why the normal treatment is to block puberty until they are older and able to figure it out for sure. In the meantime, you gender them as they want to be.
Yeah, I guess I worded that one poorly. At the same time, kids can go through phases and want to please their parents. It is a tricky thing to be sure.
I can see the government still recognizing legal marriages, and any legal marriage should only be valid between consenting individuals. This allows for recognition outside of religious terms to guarantee equal rights. Mostly to provide legal boundaries that protect individuals if they come from different religious backgrounds. The second thing it helps is to define families as being 2 parents. This provides quite a bit of a leg up for any children (either natural or adopted) as there is good evidence that single parenthood is bad for the child. Granted, certain communities do this better than others in the US (with results that you can correlate with economic success).
There is a difference between sex (genetic and physical characteristics) and gender (social norms attached to such differences). The fact that the NYT of all places are conflating the two is to drum up clicks by angry leftists and to look 'woke'. Even the Department of Health and Human Services memo mentioned sex specifically! I guess you could argue that there should be 3 entries for sex: male, female, and other to handle certain very rare genetic and physical disorders. When a doctor asks you if you are male or female they mean if you got a dick and more testosterone or a vagina and more estrogen. This whole debate is stupid. It is not erasing trans people. Having body dysphoria is traumatic, and the fact that the left makes such light of it is almost as sickening (though not as much as those that abuse trans people). Not every person who transitions ends up happy with the decision. The suicide rates of such people are high, and I imagine that actual bullying is less of an issue there than not feeling like your body is your own. They need help. Also, your pre-pubescent kid is probably not trans and we shouldn't hold a parade for them.
This obviously creates educational issues, there is no family structure so wealth isn't accumulated as easily, and since the children generally live with the mother they have no male role models making them susceptible to joining gangs.
It is the religious right denying sex ed/contraceptives/abortions. It is the radical left saying men are worthless and trying to get rid of traditional (2 parent) families and having a laissez faire view of sex.
Yeah. God forbid he shuts up and mentors a promising young black woman or something that might actually make a difference.
Men and women come from very different life experiences. Likewise for non whites from whites. Is it really such a stretch of the imagination that it would be good to have more variety in who directs in such a culturally dominate medium such as cinema?
Potentially very true. However you get the situation where we want to push diversity so we get black author X to write black character Y whose main characteristic is being Black, which is pretty boring. It happened in comics to certain characters (the Iceman run was fairly bad because it is pretty much just about him being gay, we get it now show some actual character development).
That led to a series of studies that found that (a) women generally don't negotiate as aggressively as their male counterparts, and (b) women who do negotiate aggressively are more effective at it than their male counterparts. Further studies delved into why women negotiated less aggressively and decided it's probably due to the cultural expectations of "niceness" and non-confrontationalism that women are raised with... and maybe even due to some inherent genetic bias in those directions.
I'm sure the women who did negotiate were SUPER HAPPY with getting paid less as a result of this.
Except for when crime statistics are concerned. Apparently because that's racist!
The interesting thing is that... it really isn't about race. It's more about single family homes. ~70% of Black children come from single parent homes. The race that is doing the best in the US (Asian) are ~15% from single families. Coming from a single parent home tends the child towards lower economic status while growing up, higher chance of committing a crime, lower education, etc... they are basically behind at nearly all points of their life.
Granted, try talking about family values to the people who blame racism on everything and see how far that gets you. I'm not even talking about "traditional" values... I have no problem with a married gay couple adopting (since last I looked they tended toward stable relationships and higher economic strength than straight married couples). Just, you know... condoms are fucking cheap.
we think he's a proto-Hitler. He's not competent enough (or brutal enough) to be the next Hitler. What we're afraid of is that he's eroding the institutions that are supposed to stop the next (real) fascist. He's also probably going to tank the economy (between the Walstreet deregulation, massive debt for tax cuts and general graft and incompetence). And nothing helps a fascist rise to power better than an economic crash. .
And the left are trying to erode free speech in a way that can be used by the next dictator as well... look at the UK almost sending a man to jail for a Nazi joke. I view Trump as the lesser evil here. The alt right haven't been as big in the news lately now that antifa are being negatively viewed in the media as well... and it's still social death to be actually racist (as opposed to the fake racist that social Marxists like to throw around). I personally think we are doing better, except for the fighters in the courts trading free speech for feelings.
I'm a vegan cannibal, so I'm not sure how to feel about this. Hopefully it goes well!
You want "I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream"? Cause this is how you get it.