Northstar1989 t1_jedngkm wrote

>Clever to use federal prisons for the offense breakdown.

>That doesn't make a graph that makes drugs look like the driver though. Gotta exclude state prisons if you want to present it that way.


State prisons, and jails, have huge numbers of drug offenders in them too: which you conveniently leave out of your add-up...

When you add federal, state, and local together; drug charges are still the #1 cause of internment.


Northstar1989 t1_ja65ujg wrote

> all comes down to this: you are not entitled to other people's work. Capitalism is in big part the recognition of this hard to swallow but true and ethical principle,

That's utter BS.

Capitalism is literally about the owners of Capital reaping returns for investments without doing any work.

It is the very opposite of what you are saying.

Leave it to a Neoliberal to try and turn reality on its head. You are answering in bad faith, and being blocked.


Northstar1989 t1_ja2fye0 wrote

>As always, it will come down to individuals to choose for themselves - or not.

That's a laugh.

Do you think people actually have CHOICES in today's society?

The crushing competitive pressures of Neoliberal Capitalism have forced firms to cut every possible expense, and pay their workers as little as possible, all in order to maximize profits (which, even more sickeningly, is actually encoded into law for publicly-traded corporations in the US).

Why is all this relevant to this discussion? Let's see...

First, the pressures on firms will force companies to do away with human-created products and services wherever AI-provided ones can possibly substitute for them.

Second, the crushing pressure of ever-falling wages relative to the Cost of Living (while wages are technically going up, until very recently with the post-Covid labor shortages they weren't outpacing the Cost of Living- and thus real wages were actually falling in many countries...) will force most people to buy AI-msde goods and services just to have a prayer of making ends meet. This isn't a choice- not unless you consider it a real "choice" between spiraling debt leading to homelessness, and making bills...

Third and finally, the growing power of the rich relative to everyone else, accelerated by AI putting an even greater premium on Capital (by improving returns), will enable them to do even more to corrupt politicians and push through legal changes accentuating their wealth and power: putting the gas on the steady transformation of the US, Japan, and Western Europe into a bunch of Oligarchies where most people have ZERO say in the political process (in the US, at least, this is already the case). This will lead to problems like EVEN MORE consolidation of housing markets under an increasingly-tiny number of private equity companies, putting further economic pressures on ordinary people. Again, forcing people to buy AI products if they don't want to end up homeless.

I've said this before, will say it again: AI and Capitalism are NOT compatible. If we stick with Capitalism, emerging AI technologies like this will eventually completely ruin the Working Class within 100 years or so...


Northstar1989 t1_j9xnpm2 wrote

Because conservatives hate Socialism (even though they don't actually know what it is, having never read a page of Socialist theory in their lives...) and will bury any comment that mentions it, just so others don't get the chance to read it...

I guess I just refuse to be deterred by such people. I have a right to respectfully speak my mind. At least this sub doesn't have abusive moderators who go around censoring anything they disagree with... (and making up bogus reasons for bans)


Northstar1989 t1_j9xg8bu wrote

Touching story...

There's a GoFundMe for him someone linked. Can anyone confirm that's legit? (EDIT: IT IS LEGIT. See the link to it below, also added here)

Also, I hate that it's necessary to use stories like this to make it clear, but this is what Capitalism and a For-Profit Healthcare system does to people.

This is why we need, at a bare minimum, free government housing for the homeless and socialized medicine (Medicare For All and laws heavily restricting for-profit companies buying hospitals... And probably new, federally-funded hospitals in rural areas where there are gaps in hospital coverage...)

Anyways, I hope Cashman continues to receive help! I'd really appreciate it if anyone could confirm the validity of the GoFundMe (re-posted link below), as I'd like to donate if it's legit...

GoFundMe for Cashman:

EDIT: Confirmed myself this was the correct, legit, GoFundMe, by checking it matched with the link in this Claremont Courier article. It's rather disappointing I had to do this myself, and nobody cared enough to step in and confirm the link (which would have, besides saving me time, been a way to get someone else invested in this story and maybe willing to help Cashman as well...) Am donating to the GoFundMe, and I hope others will do the same... If I can donate it in a currently very distressed economic situation (due to having Long Covid and being too sick to work, plus piles of Student Loans), so can you...


Northstar1989 t1_j9wbvc7 wrote

Fair enough...

He might have been a Socialist though. We don't know. There's a tendency to "sanitize" legends of anything that rubs against the power of elites...

After all, how many people know Albert Einstein was a lifelong Socialist? Here's an essay he wrote in 1949...


Northstar1989 t1_j9w2jpy wrote

One wonders what could have happened if someone pointed this absolute unit of a man towards Socialism...

Gentrification is obviously a problem of Capitalism- and its unequal distribution of wealth and power. It sounds like this legend had rad levels of Class Consciousness even if he didn't know it or call it that...

If Albert friggin' Einstein could see the impacts of Capitalism on his work in physics and teaching grad students, and write a famous essay "Why Socislism?" (read it here), then surely a restaurateur who's worked to sustain himself by the sweat of his brow his whole life could have seen how it applied to his life as well...


Northstar1989 t1_j9iiuw4 wrote

>My NUMBER ONE ADVICE is go get tested when cheating is the issue.

It's always good advice.

>when did i mention those things on my comment??? Please point it out.

You didn't explicitly mention it.

I'm speaking to some of the subconscious assumptions people hold, that causes them to immediately jump to getting tested in this situation.

>Whoever got cheated on SHOULD GET TESTED.

I agree. Fully.

But the fact a much, much higher percentage of comments mention this with a bisexual cheater hints at internalized biases that Bisexuals are "dirty" and "unclean."

I should know- I hold some of these biases myself, due to religious teachings as a child (and an abusive, homophobic father), and am Bisexual. Obviously, this contradiction is a problem for my self-image: but I'm aware of the problem.

Most people hold biases like this, but aren't consciously aware of them.


Northstar1989 t1_j9ihvt3 wrote

You need to get out of the habit of treating people you heard cheated (which, might not even be true: this story sounds real, but people definitely make up false claims. For instance, my father, who cheated on my mother, made up false claims she cheated on him so people would hate her instead...) as inhuman.

This is really no different than how some people treat the homeless, drug addicts, etc. Or how people used to treat men and women, simply for being gay.

These people are all still human. Maybe one hurt you in the past: but that's no excuse to treat an entire group of people who made one mistake as inhuman monsters.

And, again, I've seen how people can abuse this tendency by spreading false rumors about someone cheating.


Northstar1989 t1_j9ihhf1 wrote

>think it happened was that his friend came out during this time that they were apart and realized he had feelings towards your boyfriend back in their military days and he unfortunately did this.

This is my instinct too.

Those who serve together in the military develop a very close bond, and unfortunately that likely made it harder for the bf to resist the temptation to cheat.

He still screwed up, BAD, but cheating with someone you were in literal life-and-death situations with is at least a little understandable.

>Since you two have this intimacy of using each others phones, just be honest with him: tell him exactly what you told here about you trying to take a picture of your cat, that the message popped up and you couldn't help feeling uneasy... it is an extraordinary thing to happen to anyone and I think he'll understand why you read their conversation.

Honesty is indeed always the best policy.

A lot of people here saying "fuck it, he's a cheater" need to realize cheaters are still human- and there's no reason to make things worse with them than necessary.

It reminds me far too much of how people treat drug addiction, the homeless, etc. I.E. dehumanizing others. Sadly, most of us could have been in their shoes were our upbringing and circumstances different.

Also, this kind of dehumanization becomes so toxic that people can ruin someone's reputation merely by spreading falsely rumors of past drug use, sexual deviance, etc.

I know my father spread such completely false rumors about my mother after her divorcing him, for instance (in reality, he cheated on her).

So, don't get in the habit of dehumanizing others.


Northstar1989 t1_j9igiso wrote

>My first thought would be don't stay with a cheater.


>One thing you need for sure is to get tested. Being cheated on always brings the risk of STDs.

This is always good advice- but, having seen many posts exactly like this before, but not involving another man, I will say this: it's telling that far more people jump to STI's in this case.

Yes, gay sex is definitely more risky than straight sex if unprotected.

But homosexual and bisexual men AREN'T inherently any more promiscuous than their straight counterparts, despite a lot of biased claims to the contrary (I will also acknowledge: those fully in "gay culture" in the 70's were more promiscuous, but HIV but an end to that...)

The fact that everyone immediately jumps to STI's with a bisexual cheater, while they wouldn't with a straight cheater, does say something about internalized bias: even if STI testing is always a good idea regardless.


Northstar1989 t1_j5s8rjq wrote

>The amount water air can "hold" has absolutely nothing to do with its temperature

This is patently false:

Please, anyone who reads this, report this troll/bot for spreading blatant misinformation.


Northstar1989 t1_j59erlj wrote

Totalitarian states almost universally favor Heavy Industry over Light Industry, Agriculture and dense tenements over suburban sprawl, and care very little for complaints the streets aren't lit well enough when they'd rather invest in their military instead.

There are systematic differences in the types of growth found in Democratic vs. Totalitarian regimes. I am not saying Totalitarian regimes don't lie (they most certainly do), but this (levels of light pollution as seen from space) is an absolutely nonsense measure of economic growth that has been used by the West for decades now to claim that countries with more Totalitarian governments are poorer than they really are (the reality is much worse: they are better off than portrayed, but the ruling class of Totalitarian regimes often steal immense amounts for themselves such that the economic growth doesn't benefit ordinary people...)


Northstar1989 t1_j59efdr wrote

You never considered that there are different types of economic growth that generate different amounts of light, did you?

Dictatorships and Totalitarian regimes famously favor Heavy Industry over Light Industry, for instance. A boom in the steel industry does NOT lead to as much expansion in lighting as a boom in home construction and shopping malls to sell an expanded supply of consumer appliances.

This whole argument by the Economist is just plain nonsense, designed to advantage the types of economic growth favored in Western countries.


Northstar1989 t1_j4svkl5 wrote

>work down to -20 for the latest models.

Models that are are incredibly expensive.

It's going to take some subsidies to get off home heating oil. That was my entire thesis, and anyone who thinks it will naturally happen quickly enough through Capitalism and technological progress to save the (already very much screwed) planet without them is delusional...