7 ms·

The opposite, libertarian answer (and the way we seem to be going right now) would be to let those who can't capitalize on the bounty simply suffer. Cut social

The opposite, libertarian answer (and the way we seem to be going right now) would be to let those who can't capitalize on the bounty simply suffer. Cut social services along with their jobs, and hope they fade into the distance. Reminds me of this quote from Jello Biafra: Some day, even the experts will figure out, that crime is not caused by rap music...or even my music, but by a power structure of self-absorbed property owners so brain dead and stupid they won't even see that if you're too goddamn greedy to pay taxes for schools and services, they're not going to be any good any more! And that uneducated time bombs are a very poor investment as a future work force. And if you go on teaching people that life is cheap, and leave them to rot in ghettos and jails, they may one day feel justified in coming back to rob and kill you. Duh! (Source: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jello_Biafra http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jello_Biafra)

bdhe 15y ago
Excellent quote. I cannot unfortunately pull up citations but there was this great New Yorker piece on the prison system which talked about how ever since privatization of prisons began, vocational rehabilitation programs were severely cut and with the vast increase in non-violent offenders being subject to terrible living conditions it is no surprise that recidivism is so high. There is definitely something primal and emotional about a strong deterrent to crimes (violent or otherwise) but in the vast majority of cases, it is society and circumstance that turns people criminal, something that can be corrected in the long term with a healthier outlook on what it means to punish someone for a crime and reform the prison system.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
dreamdu5t 15y ago
I think what Jello implies is wrong. People have the inherent ability to do bad things and treat eachother differently, regardless of whatever property system you have in place. Unemployment and undereducation will not be eliminated by the removal of private property. You don't have to be a property owner to be a self-absorbed dick that doesn't care about other people. If people want to make sure everybody has a living stipend (which is the logical conclusion of the goal of zero unemployment), they can pass a law creating that while still maintaining a system of property owners and private property.
- silverbax88 15y ago
  The quote, which is incredibly apt, does not blame crime on property law, but rather, short-sightedness and greed.
  - dreamdu5t 15y ago
    "power structure of self-absorbed property owners" implies that people who don't own property aren't self-absorbed, or that the power structure of property owners is responsible for greed, unemployment, and undereducation. Otherwise, why mention a power structure of property owners?
    - silverbax88 15y ago
      Mentioning the existence of a power structure of property owners does not automatically include all property owners.
      - dreamdu5t 15y ago
        Okay... then what does the power structure of private property have to do with it? Unemployment is not necessitated by private property. Removing the power structure of property owners will not eliminate unemployment or cause people to become educated. This is what Jello implies, and it's naively incorrect. Come on, Jello openly professes these politics/ideas, I am not reading anything into the quote that isn't there. He mentions power structure of property owners for a reason.
        deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
        CWuestefeld 15y ago
        Public schools in the USA are paid for by property taxes. Yes, but the property owners don't get to decide how much they're going to pay. The citizenry at large either votes directly on a school budget referendum, or votes for representatives to decide the same. Either way, the decision on school funding is made by a much broader set of people than the property owners. Indeed, I own a cabin in upstate New York, but I am not a resident there, and thus am not allowed to vote there. I am entirely at the mercy of others as to how much I much pay for the school taxes there, as I do not have even a whisper of a voice.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
derBaumstamm 15y ago
Wonderful quote. I happen to be listening to the Insight cover on virus 100 as I read your post :)
johngalt 15y ago
We spend more per student than we ever have in history. Why wasn't the country in chaos when there weren't public schools at all? Teaching the kids that they are owed something merely because they have less than someone else? Seems to justify theft to me.
- jbooth 15y ago
  Healthcare. It's a healthcare problem in education, healthcare costs are going up by 15% a year and that money isn't there. That's why you hear about teacher layoffs while your property taxes go up and think it's bullshit. And hang out in a ghetto sometime if you want to see what's teaching kids that crime is ok.
  - jerf 15y ago
    Healthcare may explain why we can't spend yet more than the more-we've-ever-spent-before we're currently spending, but it can't explain why we spend so much more and seem to be getting less and less. Really, very few of the problems we're facing can be explained by not spending enough; rather more can be explained by spending too much with no regard for what we get for our money, then letting people say "well, we just need more money to solve that problem". If only we used an economic system whereby we actually accepted and utilized feedback about how our money was being spent, instead of spending our time demonizing the very idea that one should be permitted to examine the question of what one is getting for one's taxes, and simply being told to shut up and fork more over. Alas.
    - jbooth 15y ago
      It precisely explains why we're spending more and more and getting less and less. Compound 15% out over 15 years. Educational reform is a broad subject and there's lots of room for experimentation. I'm fine with properly implemented charter schools, especially for the "thousand laboratories" effect. I don't think that chanting "markets" like a religious incantation is particularly effective. But most importantly, don't underestimate the effect of that healthcare cost.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
jquery 15y ago
> The opposite, libertarian answer (and the way we seem to be going right now) would be to let those who can't capitalize on the bounty simply suffer. Cut social services along with their jobs, and hope they fade into the distance. This is a gross mischaracterization of the libertarian answer. But it's easier to make powerful-sounding arguments when you first set up strawmen to burn.

bdhe 15y ago

Excellent quote. I cannot unfortunately pull up citations but there was this great New Yorker piece on the prison system which talked about how ever since privatization of prisons began, vocational rehabilitation programs were severely cut and with the vast increase in non-violent offenders being subject to terrible living conditions it is no surprise that recidivism is so high. There is definitely something primal and emotional about a strong deterrent to crimes (violent or otherwise) but in the vast majority of cases, it is society and circumstance that turns people criminal, something that can be corrected in the long term with a healthier outlook on what it means to punish someone for a crime and reform the prison system.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

dreamdu5t 15y ago

I think what Jello implies is wrong. People have the inherent ability to do bad things and treat eachother differently, regardless of whatever property system you have in place. Unemployment and undereducation will not be eliminated by the removal of private property. You don't have to be a property owner to be a self-absorbed dick that doesn't care about other people. If people want to make sure everybody has a living stipend (which is the logical conclusion of the goal of zero unemployment), they can pass a law creating that while still maintaining a system of property owners and private property.

silverbax88 15y ago
The quote, which is incredibly apt, does not blame crime on property law, but rather, short-sightedness and greed.
- dreamdu5t 15y ago
  "power structure of self-absorbed property owners" implies that people who don't own property aren't self-absorbed, or that the power structure of property owners is responsible for greed, unemployment, and undereducation. Otherwise, why mention a power structure of property owners?
  - silverbax88 15y ago
    Mentioning the existence of a power structure of property owners does not automatically include all property owners.
    - dreamdu5t 15y ago
      Okay... then what does the power structure of private property have to do with it? Unemployment is not necessitated by private property. Removing the power structure of property owners will not eliminate unemployment or cause people to become educated. This is what Jello implies, and it's naively incorrect. Come on, Jello openly professes these politics/ideas, I am not reading anything into the quote that isn't there. He mentions power structure of property owners for a reason.
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
        CWuestefeld 15y ago
        Public schools in the USA are paid for by property taxes. Yes, but the property owners don't get to decide how much they're going to pay. The citizenry at large either votes directly on a school budget referendum, or votes for representatives to decide the same. Either way, the decision on school funding is made by a much broader set of people than the property owners. Indeed, I own a cabin in upstate New York, but I am not a resident there, and thus am not allowed to vote there. I am entirely at the mercy of others as to how much I much pay for the school taxes there, as I do not have even a whisper of a voice.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

derBaumstamm 15y ago

Wonderful quote. I happen to be listening to the Insight cover on virus 100 as I read your post :)

johngalt 15y ago

We spend more per student than we ever have in history. Why wasn't the country in chaos when there weren't public schools at all? Teaching the kids that they are owed something merely because they have less than someone else? Seems to justify theft to me.

jbooth 15y ago
Healthcare. It's a healthcare problem in education, healthcare costs are going up by 15% a year and that money isn't there. That's why you hear about teacher layoffs while your property taxes go up and think it's bullshit. And hang out in a ghetto sometime if you want to see what's teaching kids that crime is ok.
- jerf 15y ago
  Healthcare may explain why we can't spend yet more than the more-we've-ever-spent-before we're currently spending, but it can't explain why we spend so much more and seem to be getting less and less. Really, very few of the problems we're facing can be explained by not spending enough; rather more can be explained by spending too much with no regard for what we get for our money, then letting people say "well, we just need more money to solve that problem". If only we used an economic system whereby we actually accepted and utilized feedback about how our money was being spent, instead of spending our time demonizing the very idea that one should be permitted to examine the question of what one is getting for one's taxes, and simply being told to shut up and fork more over. Alas.
  - jbooth 15y ago
    It precisely explains why we're spending more and more and getting less and less. Compound 15% out over 15 years. Educational reform is a broad subject and there's lots of room for experimentation. I'm fine with properly implemented charter schools, especially for the "thousand laboratories" effect. I don't think that chanting "markets" like a religious incantation is particularly effective. But most importantly, don't underestimate the effect of that healthcare cost.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

jquery 15y ago

> The opposite, libertarian answer (and the way we seem to be going right now) would be to let those who can't capitalize on the bounty simply suffer. Cut social services along with their jobs, and hope they fade into the distance. This is a gross mischaracterization of the libertarian answer. But it's easier to make powerful-sounding arguments when you first set up strawmen to burn.