That was apparently a typical presentation style for everything educational, at the time. Don't miss the 3 other examples about propaganda and the copious explanations in the video description.
Hmm..someone is doing a cover up it seems and taking care of it's weak links. 
www.yahoo.com
Second Boeing Whistleblower's Death From 'Infection' Raises Eyebrows As Netizens Express Worry
Joshua Dean, a former quality auditor at Spirit AeroSystems, has died. He raised concerns about defects in Boeing 737 Max parts
I own some shares of Boeing stock, and it was up $7+ today, so...no comment.
- Joined
- July 31, 2007
- Messages
- 6,453
She only served 10 months behind bars. Florida still slapped her with a $127,000 bill.
Under Florida's "pay-to-stay" law, inmates are charged $50 for every day of their sentence—including time they never spent incarcerated.
reason.com
Absolutely insane.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
- Messages
- 6,453
She should sue them.
As for the principle of prisons making pay the rent, I think it's only fair. I doubt many of them can pay, though.
- Joined
- July 31, 2007
- Messages
- 6,453
The main reason this is going on is because in the states the prisons are privatized. They also even have almost slave labour while people are in there.
It’s all down to making money. Fucked up system imo.
It’s all down to making money. Fucked up system imo.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
- Messages
- 6,453
Would you rather have citizens pay for it? I wouldn't, even though it's currently part of our taxes no matter what. It's perfectly logical they pay a part of their expenses, after all.
I seriously doubt slave labour is the norm, but I suppose it depends on the country and the prison. It's part of the sentence, and I suppose it pays another small part of their expenses.
- Joined
- July 31, 2007
- Messages
- 6,453
Yes, they paid when they paid their taxes before being incarcerated.
Otherwise, yes I want taxes to cover that. Just like I want taxes to cover healthcare. Without going into the morality of it, the whole point of this is pure practicality.
To lessen the risk on each individual, and distribute the load across everyone that's part of society.
That's if we want to have a society. If we don't, and we want true individuality, then we better also disband the army and the fire-department and the police. And have everyone truly be responsible for their own survival.
But no, when we think prison won't affect us (I'll never end up there; I'm a good person), it's very easy to not care about it. When it's something we could be affected by (fires/crime/etc), then we suddenly care and want societal level protection.
And all of this is without even going into the topic of how broken the justice system is. And how corrupt. How it all revolves around money and influence. And how many cases of wrongful incarceration. Or cases of incarceration for the most benign of "crimes". The one type of case I keep hearing about is incarceration for light-drugs, like weed. But even if it's serious drugs, the solution is not prison, but rehab.
All of this is to answer the question, how do we want to handle cases. As a society? Or as individuals? And most of the time it's funny how when it's something that might directly affect us, we want it solved systemically. But when we think it won't, we're happy to say that lone individual is solely responsible for his case.
When we'll have a perfect society on all other levels, then I'll be fine with pure individual responsibility when one person goes outside of the law.
As long as we don't have that, I'm not ok with blaming just the individual.
Yes, it depends on the country. And from what I've read the US is probably among the worst.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
- Messages
- 6,453
What taxes they've been paying before being incarcerated has nothing to do with it.
I don't know about you, but half of my salary goes to taxes, and more than a fifth of the goods I buy with what's left goes to taxes, too. I'm not even talking about what's ripped off successions when someone dies, what extra taxes employers have to pay out of salaries and sales, etc. So why would I pay for the burglars who stole things in my house and broke several windows? You can only stretch the system so far. And don't talk to me about morality when they don't even have the notion to start with.
I'm fine with healthcare and other charges for people who're in need and deserve it, but that's something else entirely. State prisons always have been a problem (at least here) because they don't have enough money, so there's not enough room for everyone and not enough guards to secure the criminals, who escape on a regular basis. After checking, I see that prisoners don't have to pay for the rent and the basics, but they have to pay for any extra (more food, TV, etc).
Of course, nobody wants to drown them financially if they have to be put back into the society one day, but as far as I know, the justice always takes everybody's situation into account when they give a sentence and charges are paid. I'm only saying the principle is fair and logical, not that the abuses are. I won't pretend to know how much it costs and how much they should be charged, either.
For example, here they have a salary that depends on their penitentiary job. So they can bloody well pay for a part of their expenses like anyone else.
Aren't you going a little hyperbolic, here?
I suppose you have statistics and references, then? But again, I'm talking about the principle, not occasional abuses. I made that clear in my first post.
- Joined
- July 31, 2007
- Messages
- 6,453
Yeah, the tax code is broken in most countries. And the tax money is corruptly spent. (most frequently in deals with "auctioned" contracts with private companies; that saying that the best business you can do as a private company is with a corrupt state; which when in need, you can corrupt yourself)
Some of the things I think should happen:
- Serious oversight on how that money is used. For this to happen we need serious involvement from the general population, and not have them too tired and broken to keep their elected officials in check. We also need a serious cultural change. We can't just go about our business, not be civically involved, and then be surprised when the "elected" officials are corrupt. But again, for this to happen we cannot have all our best/waking hours be spent at a job. I'd easily half all job hours from 8 to 4h. With the remaining time spent between civic duties and personal/familial development.
- progressive taxation that also lessens the chance private groups have more money and power than the state, which they then turn into political power. It's a question of who we want to hold the monopoly of power. Do we expect that if private individuals have more power than the state, it's all gonna work out fine? If they spent it just on yachts and other wasteful things, fine. Unfortunately they always build political power with that economic power.
- closing of all the tax loopholes and taxing capital gains way more than income. It's insane that regular income is taxed more than investments.
- housing should not be allowed as an investment
So, yeah, some serious changes which have no chance of happening without a general revolt from the population. Which is nicely kept fighting each other, so this'll never happen.
About the prison labor: https://www.aclu.org/news/human-rights/captive-labor-exploitation-of-incarcerated-workers
Anyway, it's obviously and endless discussion. I got tired just starting it up, so I might be done with it.
Some of the things I think should happen:
- Serious oversight on how that money is used. For this to happen we need serious involvement from the general population, and not have them too tired and broken to keep their elected officials in check. We also need a serious cultural change. We can't just go about our business, not be civically involved, and then be surprised when the "elected" officials are corrupt. But again, for this to happen we cannot have all our best/waking hours be spent at a job. I'd easily half all job hours from 8 to 4h. With the remaining time spent between civic duties and personal/familial development.
- progressive taxation that also lessens the chance private groups have more money and power than the state, which they then turn into political power. It's a question of who we want to hold the monopoly of power. Do we expect that if private individuals have more power than the state, it's all gonna work out fine? If they spent it just on yachts and other wasteful things, fine. Unfortunately they always build political power with that economic power.
- closing of all the tax loopholes and taxing capital gains way more than income. It's insane that regular income is taxed more than investments.
- housing should not be allowed as an investment
So, yeah, some serious changes which have no chance of happening without a general revolt from the population. Which is nicely kept fighting each other, so this'll never happen.
About the prison labor: https://www.aclu.org/news/human-rights/captive-labor-exploitation-of-incarcerated-workers
Anyway, it's obviously and endless discussion. I got tired just starting it up, so I might be done with it.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
- Messages
- 6,453
Yes, I suppose that in practice, it's not ideal - obviously not for everyone, from the link you gave.
You're right, though, we could go on forever. And even after all this time, nobody found the perfect formula.
You're right, though, we could go on forever. And even after all this time, nobody found the perfect formula.