Elon Musk said he'd end world hunger if that were something that could be done. The United Nations World Food Programme did the math: $6.6 billion per year. That's it! You can guess how much the world's richest man has donated toward this cause...
The U.N. World Food Programme feeds over 100 million people facing severe hunger in more than 120 countries and territories every year. In 2021, WFP did this with a budget of $9.6 billion dollars, which was still $5.2 billion dollars short of their total funding requirements. Clearly, ending world hunger will require more money.
Back in July of 2021, former U.N. World Food Programme Executive Director David Beasley mentioned it would take an estimated $40 billion each year to end world hunger by 2030.
Edit: I should add, that they should still do it. Split it between the billionaires. Fuck, Elon is worth a trillion dollars
They don’t have any money, except when they do. They have all kinds of money for stock buybacks and bribes to government officials but when it comes to paying taxes suddenly there’s no liquidity.
Just for perspective, a person who invested in the stock market recently and got a 5% return would be said to be investing poorly.
5% may not seem like much, but just for comparison, 5% of a trillion dollars is 50 billion dollars. I think you can see the point. Musk could solve world hunger, and it would be like chump change to him, even if he did fairly poorly with his investments. He wouldn't even have to touch his savings.
He's refusing to help people whose lives are being ruined without that help, or who are dying, even though the only penalty for Musk is that he would be getting inconceivably richer at a slightly slower rate.
Its not merely about money. Ending food scarcity in remote locations is big part of the problem. It's a transportation issue of goods economically. We need to centralize humanity and not try to deliver food to example tribes in deep Africa. We have the food production and waste a good portion of food that we throw out.
It’s likely a room in a boarding house, and food through a volunteer kitchen - so that $16K is still being subsidised through private charities and/or local + state Government grants.
Don’t mistake me, though - I’m all for these types of programs. They’re a hell of a lot better than a swathe of people being homeless on the streets, or incarcerated in an overcrowded prison.
if you take the capitalism out of the housing, and didn't have a dipshit fucking the global economy and cost to eat. in all but the expensive cities in the u.s., it's probably not that far off for communities of small flats or tiny homes and community-run kitchens.
You're right that only a minority of inmates are held in private facilities:
In fact, less than 9% of all incarcerated people are held in private prisons; the vast majority are in publicly-owned prisons and jails. Some states have more people in private prisons than others, of course, and the industry has lobbied to maintain high levels of incarceration, but private prisons are essentially a parasite on the massive publicly-owned system — not the root of it. Nevertheless, a range of private industries and even some public agencies continue to profit from mass incarceration. Many city and county jails rent space to other agencies, including state prison systems, the U.S. Marshals Service, and ICE. Private companies are frequently granted contracts to operate prison food and health services (often so bad they result in major lawsuits), and prison and jail telecom and commissary functions have spawned multi-billion dollar private industries. By privatizing services like phone calls, medical care, and commissary, prisons and jails are offloading the costs of incarceration onto incarcerated people and their families, trimming their budgets at an unconscionable social cost.
However, this does nothing to make the fact that private individuals profit from the incarceration of people any better. This practice could hardly be more unethical or counterproductive, as it creates a financial incentive to incarcerate as many people as possible—and it is obvious that this runs counter to the social purpose of prisons.
I completely agree with all of that. But I'd also like to point out that the prison system in the US isn't being run with rehabilitation in mind. Our system is much more about punishment. They'd rather have people stuck in the system because they can be used as slave labor.
It's one of the biggest failures of the US IMO and not a lot of people talk about it. Slavery needs to be illegal in all capacities. And prisoners shouldn't be allowed to be used as labor. In theory I don't have a problem with it, but in practice it just encourages abuse, as you have pointed out.
Absolutely, I just think that the fact that the U.S. system isn't designed for rehabilitation has a lot to do with the fact that billionaires make billions by putting people in prison.
However, I don't understand how you can have no problem with forced labor.
-$50,000, if the figures presented are to be believed. I guess that's what happens when your party is led by a certified business genius. They're just in it for the love of oppression.
actually GOP likely uses things like prison pop as part of the census for thier start, this likely another source too. another value to them, is that news never reports how they bus them to other blue states, so they can give sound bites to right wing media, to say "shithole liberal media cant control thier drug ridden state".
The tax-payer is out 66k in order to imprison the homeless
That 66k goes to a prison, the prison makes money
The imprisoned person is enslaved to prison labor, which the prison then leases out. The prison makes money.
The prison lobbies politicians to be "tough on crime" and pass laws that criminalize more and more things instead of helping people, that way the prison will make more and more money.
The people would be happier, healthier, and pay less in taxes if we just helped people, but we never will because helping people doesn't make prisons money. Same thing for policing. Police, as an institution, did not begin as law enforcement. They began as slave catchers. Their attitude and overall goal has remained the same. The police exist to ticket and fine people wherever possible in order to generate revenue, and, when able, arrest and charge people with the goal of filling prisons with slave labor.
If you eliminate the part of the 13th amendment that says 'except as punishment for convicted crime' and make slave labor illegal period, and in fact, make it illegal for any entity anywhere to profit off of incarcerated persons, you will eliminate a metric shit ton of problems in the U.S.
The lawsuit centered around the Marana prison, a 1,400-bed facility operated by MTC. The contract between MTC and Arizona included a provision guaranteeing 97% occupancy.
Oh, so there's a contract with the state that says that they'll keep it at max occupancy. That's fucked.
Here's how I would get around it: We enact the legislation that says that prisons cannot profit off of any labor by incarcerated individuals, nor may their labor be leased, for any reason. Take that revenue away.
We hold to the occupancy contract, and they can have a prison full of people they have to care for but can't profit from.
Then we let the contract end and refuse to sign another one.
One tiny note, with markdown formatting, you gotta put two spaces after a line for a newline. But that's only if you are absolutely absolutely sure, it's best to use two newlines for a new paragraph. OR make a list by adding the minus sign to the start of each line.
History shows the pendulum swings both ways. The fast and more violently the swing to the right, well, political physics has some incredible lessons to teach.
I recently visited family in Vietnam, the people there are reasonable secure, reasonable healthy and quiet educated... but nobody can convince me that this country is NOT very conservative and authoritarian...
Prison (hell #1) and homelessness (hell #2): the two whips of the capitalist state to lash us into wage labour slavery. "No underpaid job can be too bad to accept, or do you want to risk not be able paying your exorbitant rent, risk to become homeless? Sell your labour for the lowest price so some capitalist can make 2-3 times the profit of what you gain, which is bareley enough to pay another capitalist your rent." This is what the capitalist state enforces by holding up these two hells. We don't have a prison system by accident, homelessness is not a natural phenomenon. They exist by design. It's not about the money that prisons cost in comparison to what housing a homeless person costs. The money for prisons is a fair price to pay for a capitaliat state given the MUCH larger sum of money that its capitalist class can extract of us by making us obedient and doing the even shittest job for the shittest pay to suck the most possible surplus out of our work.
Become communist.
Sabotage.
Seize the means of production.
Be a grain of sand in this machine.
In the country with some of the most gruesome history of slavery in human history, it feels pretty disingenuous to call waged labour slavery. This feels like the stock standard yankee settler aspirational landholder bunkum to me
It is difficult for me to imagine what "personal liberty" is enjoyed by an unemployed person, who goes about hungry, and cannot find employment.
Real liberty can exist only where exploitation has been abolished, where there is no oppression of some by others, where there is no unemployment and poverty, where a man is not haunted by the fear of being tomorrow deprived of work, of home and of bread. Only in such a society is real, and not paper, personal and every other liberty possible.
The only difference as compared with the old, outspoken slavery is this, that the worker of today seems to be free because he is not sold once for all, but piecemeal by the day, the week, the year, and because no one owner sells him to another, but he is forced to sell himself in this way instead, being the slave of no particular person, but of the whole property-holding class. For him the matter is unchanged at bottom, and if this semblance of liberty necessarily gives him some real freedom on the one hand, it entails on the other the disadvantage that no one guarantees him a subsistence, he is in danger of being repudiated at any moment by his master, the bourgeoisie, and left to die of starvation, if the bourgeoisie ceases to have an interest in his employment
The slave is sold once and for all; the proletarian must sell himself daily and hourly.
The individual slave, property of one master, is assured an existence, however miserable it may be, because of the master’s interest. The individual proletarian, property as it were of the entire bourgeois class which buys his labor only when someone has need of it, has no secure existence. This existence is assured only to the class as a whole.
It's been known for 50+ years that incarcerating a person is the most criminogenic you could do to them. It increases crime. It solves none of the problems it uses to nominally justify its existence
Source is a college course from 20 years ago 😭 so I don't recall specifics, but the idea is that prisons don't so much as reduce crime as contain it, or shift it around.
I'm not sure you'd see that in reported crime stats in an area though
Important to note this isn't new or restricted to red parts of the country. Vagrancy laws, laws against loitering, etc are all ways of criminalizing the poor to ensure we are all loyal wage slaves, and to a lesser extent feeding the prison-industrial complex. Many Steinbeck novels touch on this so it was a prevalent cultural touchstone in the 30s
To be clear, those rules were all ways of criminalizing BLACKNESS in the immediate aftermath of emancipation because the freed people had nowhere to go and nowhere to sleep. And since racism is a system designed to get the working class to do the dirty work of the owning class, it makes sense that laws intended to enforce racism get used against all poor people in relatively short order.
a lot of systemic issues in the country have been around for a very long time. I always think of FDR's secretary or labor, Francis Perkins advocating for universal healthcare and 80-90 years later it's still an issue too few politicians take seriously.
Forced labor is not new. When the USA amended the constitution in the aftermath of the civil war they explicitly banned private ownership of slaves but made a specific carve out for prison slavery. Immediately after emancipation the states created laws that freed black folk couldn't avoid and in 10 years the prison population went from 90% white to 90% black. And those black prisoners were leased to plantation owners to work their fields.
Convict leasing lasted almost 50 years, but not before other modalities of prison slave labor had developed and matured.
I meant as a political talking point its relatively new, but I also havent been around forever so it might be a recurring topic.
I will say that in the 90s and 00s, the teaching was that we don't do slavery anymore. Very explicit that slavery is bad, but its in the past so no worries. This has led to a lot of people born in the 80s and 90s becoming aware of this reality much later into their adult lives.
My guess is most of them still think slavery is "solved" in America. Most people aren't going to look at most of the brands in their grocery store and think, "slave labor helped bring me this product."
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
I just wish President Grant had punished the South more during Reconstruction but it wasn’t that popular at the time unfortunately and his corrupt administration certainly did not help.
Louisiana State Penitentiary, aka Angola, was a state owned and operated plantation with over 600 slaves before the Civil War. It never stopped operation, only changed how the slave labor was acquired.
I don't think the acquisition process has really changed all that much. Capture a person against his will, and force him to work for free. The only thing that really changed is the label. Now it's "criminal" instead of "slave" and on the supply side they went from one skin tone to several...
Mass housing dorms, basic shared facilities and cheapest tasteless grub for a person for 16k yep would work. Also I doubt any of them would reject volunteer labor or learning vocational crafts so they can survive have roof and warm food.
I have a family member who chooses to live homeless and after many years of being around him and others in the homeless community I can tell you that many would reject this. On a positive note, some would welcome it.
$66,000 for how long? A year? Median across all sentences regardless of length?
If $16,000 houses AND feeds a homeless person permanently, how long exactly are we letting them live before euthanasia? There's no "permanent" when it comes to feeding or even housing, both include ongoing costs. 16 grand is a couple of years' food costs for me. More than 1, fewer than 10.
Note that I'm not arguing against housing the homeless obviously. Besides the obvious "what the fuck" factor of making homelessness a crime, incarceration by definition can't be cheaper because it involves housing, feeding AND guarding them. I just would prefer there to be more context when numbers are thrown around like that.
Based on FY 2023 data, the average annual COIF for a Federal inmate housed in a Bureau or non-Bureau facility in FY 2023 was $44,090 ($120.80 per day). The average annual COIF for a Federal inmate housed in a Residential Reentry Center for FY 2023 was $41,437 ($113.53 per day).
(Please note: There were 365 days in FY 2023.)
James Wills,
Assistant Director/General Counsel,
Federal Bureau of Prisons.
[FR Doc. 2024-28743 Filed: 12/5/2024 8:45 am; Publication Date: 12/6/2024]
And you may not trust the suit who wrote that but keep in mind if they were corrupt and under-report themselves they'll basically be robbing themselves on federal contract negotiations in the future but if they were on the straight and narrow then they're morally obligated to keep the number accurate and as low as possible.
And the low end is closer to $20,000 while the high end (higher security) was near $75,000 and most interesting of all is that the food and healthcare combined is less than $8,000 but the cost of the institution itself (beds and housing) varies wildly dependent on location as would the amount needed to house people outside of prison, and almost half the cost is paying wages to prison staff including records keeping, attorneys, management, and a metric butt-load of guards.
So, the system is broken and they're trying to abuse prison labor to the extreme, especially private sector and this specific administration, but in theory some federal prisons are already approaching the efficiency of the 16k number.
The post-Civil War south is why we have the prison labor system we have. Abraham Lincoln was too busy being dead to stop defacto slavery being implemented to the benefit of the loosing side.
Caveat to this. It looks like the number is actually closer to 45-50ish thousand. $66,000 seems to be closer to the cost of caring for the aging incarcerated population.
Louisiana was the only state that didn't secede because of the issue of slavery per se.
they were afraid that their human breeding programs and slave market/futures market would collapse
if you go to Walmart, Kroger, or Publix and look up the company that produces those big Dora balloons and other cartoon characters, that's all Louisiana slave labor.
the overton window in Louisiana is firmly in the territory of "well you gotta have slaves though" and probably will be like that forever
Permanently house and feed someone? $16,000 seems quite a bit too low. That might cover food alone I would imagine, depending on the person's age. More so if it's like a 30 year old less so if they are 60.
It’s more like it costs more money than that to allow someone to be homeless, since they’ll be more likely to use emergency services and such.
$16K is actually not too far off from what I spend yearly on feeding and housing myself in Seattle. Remember that most housing costs in this country are dramatically inflated by rent (aka landlord greed).
Remember that homeless/unemployed people are likely to qualify for Medicaid and other benefits
What good is sharing content from the platform owned by a trillionare nazi? "write it yourself" means that you can just write the same statement @fuckyouiquit made on X without having to share his tweet.
When I was in junior high I asked someone what the difference was between a republican and a democrat. They said republicans create jobs for the homeless, while democrats just want to give them money. It didn't make much sense until about 10 years later.
But now, the fight homelessness by just making it illegal...
Most homeless people just need help because they are victims of circumstance. Give them an apartment with a few months of rent paid up, a few months food and doctors visits/medical coverage, and a basic phone with a few months prepaid and they'll have enough breathing room to get back on their feet, find a job, and take over the rent on the apartment.. Assuming, of course, republican policies havent completely destroyed the job market 🙄
and that 3 months of help, and small investment, will turn them back into a working citizen paying back into the system and have them off the streets, out of shelters, and back out of the social safety net.
and its been proven multiple times that doing this is not just the morally right choice, its the financially smart choice.
But in America we don't care about doing the moral thing. We don't care about doing the financially wise thing. we don't care about doing whats right.
We care about punching down at the less fortunate and more vulnerable. Which is why systems like this will never come to fruition. Which is why homelessness which is wholly an artificially manufactured issue, will never be a solved issue.
Getting angry gets people mobilized, and it lets "the other side" know we're not happy with their decisions and won't take their shit. Telling people to "calm down and stop being emotional", especially over a resurgence of literal slavery, is asinine and unproductive.
well, mud-throwing certainly typically keeps me away from interacting. i suspect it has the same effect on a lot of other people. so i try to communicate without the mud-throwing in it.
idea: convince the food and necessities industries who would receive the $16k to lobby for this, against the prison companies who lobby for more prison time to increase their profits.
When you compare the largest stakeholders across the board it's the same people.
You would have to make >$150k a year for the food and necessities industries in order for them to try and change this. It's far more than the direct $60k because there is money made from the slave labor and an inherent cost savings in not having to oppress the people in another, more expensive way. And really, that second one may keep this from happening even at $150k
In California, the 2026 budget for homelessness programs is $1.7 billion. The homeless population is 181,000. This is an average of $9400 per person per year.
Note: some of these programs are for homelessness prevention meaning it helps far more people than just the 181 thousand, meaning the cost per person is actually much lower.
Can you tell me: What is the y-axis of that graph? How would a person use this graph to determine how much we spent per homless person per year?
A) The right-most column, upper value
B) The left-most column, upper value
C) The sum of all upper values
D) The sum of all lower values
E) This graph doesn't say anything about price, and anyone trying to draw a conclusion abiut price doesn't know how to read even the simplest type of chart.
And what happens when they get out? Without a safety net or plans? They go right back to using and being on the streets. It's not a solution, it just kicks the bucket down the road while extracting forced labor from them.
what a response from someone is probably white, grew up in at least middle class and were not affected by outside circumstances, family member dying, medical debt, coming back from war, being too dark for American tastes and just being abused constantly by everyone around them, including police.
sure we get angry at people when bad things happen to us, but to blame homeless?
i bet you call yourself a christian too eh? im fucking not, god is a hateful fuck, maybe you're taking the old testament instead of what jesus actually taught.
either way, it's not like they chose to be homeless. show a little empathy now and then instead of screaming at 11 year olds on whatever fifa or cod you're playing between jackin off.
still didn't post any evidence of your change getting stolen by a homeless person either.
Yes and no, while there is a chance of causing harm to others while on drugs more succinct and beneficial procedures exist. I also dont think its such an unpopular opinion as you think it is - as efforts in actually helping drug addicts is quite small worldwide.
FYI, this comment has been reported for "promoting violence". Ordinarily I'd remove it for the "kill yourself" comment, but this seems more of a shitpost than an actual instruction or a promotion of violence. It's a bit toxic but I'm going to leave it, and downvote & move on.
Anyone who disagrees, feel free to chime in with your take.
Right, well, I certainly think my comment is fitting. Original commenter called for violence against unsheltered and disabled people, so I find it kind of strange that my comment would be too far.
It's certainly a joke, not intended to convincs them to commit, but I am genuinely telling this person to consider the gravity of the morality they just advocated for. The problem with the violence they just committed is that it is always just to respond in kind, and I don't think this person seems to understand that. If they're the one that reported, even funnier. I guess I ought to stick to vague calls for genocide rather than meanness.
168 Comments
areakode@riskeratspizza.com · 119 pts · 6d
Elon Musk said he'd end world hunger if that were something that could be done. The United Nations World Food Programme did the math: $6.6 billion per year. That's it! You can guess how much the world's richest man has donated toward this cause...
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online · 82 pts · 6d
Last I heard he NEGATED $43.8 Billion dollars of aid by cutting USAID, causing the deaths of 4.5 Million Children around the world.
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works · 49 pts · 6d
How Much Would It Cost to End World Hunger?
Edit: I should add, that they should still do it. Split it between the billionaires. Fuck, Elon is worth a trillion dollars
kettuli@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 5d
But you see the billionaires don’t have any money, just a number they keep pumping up.
khornechips@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 5d
They don’t have any money, except when they do. They have all kinds of money for stock buybacks and bribes to government officials but when it comes to paying taxes suddenly there’s no liquidity.
Mirshe@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 5d
That's still only $360b. We could do that with only a portion of the wealth of ONE MAN.
BillyClark@piefed.social · 22 pts · 6d
Just for perspective, a person who invested in the stock market recently and got a 5% return would be said to be investing poorly.
5% may not seem like much, but just for comparison, 5% of a trillion dollars is 50 billion dollars. I think you can see the point. Musk could solve world hunger, and it would be like chump change to him, even if he did fairly poorly with his investments. He wouldn't even have to touch his savings.
He's refusing to help people whose lives are being ruined without that help, or who are dying, even though the only penalty for Musk is that he would be getting inconceivably richer at a slightly slower rate.
frunch@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 5d
It's like he's sitting on a mountain of life preservers amid an ocean of drowning people
OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 5d
Its not merely about money. Ending food scarcity in remote locations is big part of the problem. It's a transportation issue of goods economically. We need to centralize humanity and not try to deliver food to example tribes in deep Africa. We have the food production and waste a good portion of food that we throw out.
Aquila@sh.itjust.works · 62 pts · 6d
I would like to permenantly house and feed myself for $16k. I have cash. Tell me how
thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works · 33 pts · 5d
It’s likely a room in a boarding house, and food through a volunteer kitchen - so that $16K is still being subsidised through private charities and/or local + state Government grants.
Don’t mistake me, though - I’m all for these types of programs. They’re a hell of a lot better than a swathe of people being homeless on the streets, or incarcerated in an overcrowded prison.
grrgyle@slrpnk.net · 6 pts · 5d
But yeah even if it cost double to house them rather than imprison them it would still be the right and rational thing to do
adarza@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 5d
if you take the capitalism out of the housing, and didn't have a dipshit fucking the global economy and cost to eat. in all but the expensive cities in the u.s., it's probably not that far off for communities of small flats or tiny homes and community-run kitchens.
tyler@programming.dev · 6 pts · 5d
I’m pretty sure the actual cost is to permanently house and feed them until they can get a job that gets them self sufficient.
13igTyme@piefed.social · 3 pts · 5d
Yeah, those numbers don't make sense with the word "permanently".
Kanda@reddthat.com · 2 pts · 5d
Move to one of the poorest countries in the world, live in a hut and do nothing except eating. Don't get bit by wildlife or bugs.
HieroProtagonist@feddit.org · 1 pts · 5d
Move to Vietnam
Triumph@fedia.io · 38 pts · 6d
You're not counting the value of the slave labor.
DandomRude@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 6d
Nor is the fact mentioned that most prisons in the U.S. are run by and as for-profit private companies.
That is why so many people are incarcerated in the U.S., and unpaid slave labor is part of this multibillion-dollar business.
It is a business that, for entirely obvious reasons, no other democracy in the world allows in this absurd form—only the U.S., the "Land of the Free."
Alexstarfire@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 5d
Most? I'm gonna need a source for that cause unless that's changed recently, they've been mostly public prisons.
DandomRude@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 5d
You're right that only a minority of inmates are held in private facilities:
Source
However, this does nothing to make the fact that private individuals profit from the incarceration of people any better. This practice could hardly be more unethical or counterproductive, as it creates a financial incentive to incarcerate as many people as possible—and it is obvious that this runs counter to the social purpose of prisons.
Alexstarfire@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
I completely agree with all of that. But I'd also like to point out that the prison system in the US isn't being run with rehabilitation in mind. Our system is much more about punishment. They'd rather have people stuck in the system because they can be used as slave labor.
It's one of the biggest failures of the US IMO and not a lot of people talk about it. Slavery needs to be illegal in all capacities. And prisoners shouldn't be allowed to be used as labor. In theory I don't have a problem with it, but in practice it just encourages abuse, as you have pointed out.
DandomRude@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4d
Absolutely, I just think that the fact that the U.S. system isn't designed for rehabilitation has a lot to do with the fact that billionaires make billions by putting people in prison.
However, I don't understand how you can have no problem with forced labor.
CileTheSane@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 4d
Land of the free labour
edgemaster72@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 6d
-$50,000, if the figures presented are to be believed. I guess that's what happens when your party is led by a certified business genius. They're just in it for the love of oppression.
zane@infosec.pub · 4 pts · 6d
Hm its almost like slaves aren't quality labor or something. Weird.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 6d
they import them from South america.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 5 pts · 6d
actually GOP likely uses things like prison pop as part of the census for thier start, this likely another source too. another value to them, is that news never reports how they bus them to other blue states, so they can give sound bites to right wing media, to say "shithole liberal media cant control thier drug ridden state".
100_kg_90_de_belin@feddit.it · 3 pts · 5d
Tidesphere@lemmy.world · 34 pts · 5d
They don't care because the breakdown is:
The tax-payer is out 66k in order to imprison the homeless That 66k goes to a prison, the prison makes money The imprisoned person is enslaved to prison labor, which the prison then leases out. The prison makes money.
The prison lobbies politicians to be "tough on crime" and pass laws that criminalize more and more things instead of helping people, that way the prison will make more and more money.
The people would be happier, healthier, and pay less in taxes if we just helped people, but we never will because helping people doesn't make prisons money. Same thing for policing. Police, as an institution, did not begin as law enforcement. They began as slave catchers. Their attitude and overall goal has remained the same. The police exist to ticket and fine people wherever possible in order to generate revenue, and, when able, arrest and charge people with the goal of filling prisons with slave labor.
If you eliminate the part of the 13th amendment that says 'except as punishment for convicted crime' and make slave labor illegal period, and in fact, make it illegal for any entity anywhere to profit off of incarcerated persons, you will eliminate a metric shit ton of problems in the U.S.
Flower@sh.itjust.works · 12 pts · 5d
The prisons sue the states when not enough prisoners come in. That's the state of things.
Tidesphere@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 5d
What on earth could they possibly be suing for??
Not that I doubt you, mind, it just sounds incredulous!
Flower@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 5d
Tidesphere@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 5d
Oh, so there's a contract with the state that says that they'll keep it at max occupancy. That's fucked.
Here's how I would get around it: We enact the legislation that says that prisons cannot profit off of any labor by incarcerated individuals, nor may their labor be leased, for any reason. Take that revenue away.
We hold to the occupancy contract, and they can have a prison full of people they have to care for but can't profit from.
Then we let the contract end and refuse to sign another one.
Would that work?
Flower@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 5d
I'd say make the prison responsible for rehabilitation and job training.
Tidesphere@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 5d
Yeah that could be good. A prison's success rate is determined by how few reoffenders it has.
grrgyle@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 5d
Yeah make it a form of cheap housing you can leave any time you want rather a punishment nexus. Sack the sadists and hire social and support workers.
BillCheddar@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
Just confiscate their fucking property.
If they protest, arrest them and throw them in their own goddamn prisons.
In other words: use their own shitty laws against them. Only way to get those laws to change.
diaphragmwp@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 5d
One tiny note, with markdown formatting, you gotta put two spaces after a line for a newline. But that's only if you are absolutely absolutely sure, it's best to use two newlines for a new paragraph. OR make a list by adding the minus sign to the start of each line.
Sp00kyB00k@lemmy.world · 27 pts · 4d
That's called slave labour. Here you go again USA.
KulunkelBoom@lemmus.org · 27 pts · 5d
They've just re-instituted slavery.
lordkuri@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 5d
It never went away, they just eliminated private ownership.
bob_lemon@feddit.org · 9 pts · 4d
Prisons are privately owned, no?
kestrel7_7@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 4d
Only a small minority. Private prisons are no doubt a problem, but the vast majority of prisons in the USA are publicly owned
Formfiller@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 4d
They may be “public “ but they all funnel millions to the Epstein class and corrupt politicians through contracts on everything
muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 5d
History shows the pendulum swings both ways. The fast and more violently the swing to the right, well, political physics has some incredible lessons to teach.
nonentity@sh.itjust.works · 26 pts · 5d
A healthy, broadly educated population, which feels safe and secure, is incompatible with, and toxic to, conservative and authoritarian ideologies.
They need you to be sick, stupid, and scared.
HieroProtagonist@feddit.org · 1 pts · 5d
I recently visited family in Vietnam, the people there are reasonable secure, reasonable healthy and quiet educated... but nobody can convince me that this country is NOT very conservative and authoritarian...
baines@lemmy.cafe · 1 pts · 5d
religion
scared of death, scared of sin, scared of judgement
HieroProtagonist@feddit.org · 1 pts · 5d
Nah... this is a too christian view...
HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world · 26 pts · 6d
Republicans are a cancer to this world
T00l_shed@lemmy.world · 23 pts · 6d
Slavery with extra steps
ShotDonkey@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 5d
Prison (hell #1) and homelessness (hell #2): the two whips of the capitalist state to lash us into wage labour slavery. "No underpaid job can be too bad to accept, or do you want to risk not be able paying your exorbitant rent, risk to become homeless? Sell your labour for the lowest price so some capitalist can make 2-3 times the profit of what you gain, which is bareley enough to pay another capitalist your rent." This is what the capitalist state enforces by holding up these two hells. We don't have a prison system by accident, homelessness is not a natural phenomenon. They exist by design. It's not about the money that prisons cost in comparison to what housing a homeless person costs. The money for prisons is a fair price to pay for a capitaliat state given the MUCH larger sum of money that its capitalist class can extract of us by making us obedient and doing the even shittest job for the shittest pay to suck the most possible surplus out of our work. Become communist. Sabotage. Seize the means of production. Be a grain of sand in this machine.
manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml · -6 pts · 5d
In the country with some of the most gruesome history of slavery in human history, it feels pretty disingenuous to call waged labour slavery. This feels like the stock standard yankee settler aspirational landholder bunkum to me
Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 11 pts · 5d
You're quoting Stalin (banger quote, btw) and you've not heard of the idea of wage slavery?
weeeeum@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 5d
They do it so people like you think it's okay
DudleyMason@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 3d
-Engels
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/condition-working-class/ch05.htm
-Engels, again
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm
Unpigged@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 21 pts · 4d
If a person has a criminal conviction for homelessness, how likely they are to pass the background check with that conviction?
It feels like poor->homeless->convict->unemployable->indentured servant is the expected career transition.
grrgyle@slrpnk.net · 15 pts · 4d
It's been known for 50+ years that incarcerating a person is the most criminogenic you could do to them. It increases crime. It solves none of the problems it uses to nominally justify its existence
Unpigged@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 4d
What I wonder about is how long would it take the modern right wingers to embrace mass forced labor for people in distress?
LodeMike@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 4d
Can I have some sources? I believe what you just said but the studies might actually say something slightly different.
grrgyle@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 3d
Source is a college course from 20 years ago 😭 so I don't recall specifics, but the idea is that prisons don't so much as reduce crime as contain it, or shift it around.
I'm not sure you'd see that in reported crime stats in an area though
deaconblackhorse@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4d
Yea in this case it would only make things bad. But maybe murderers and rapists deserve to be locked away.
grrgyle@slrpnk.net · 1 pts · 4d
Some people need to be kept away from others for their safety yeah, but a high security medical facility is a better place for them.
btsax@reddthat.com · 20 pts · 5d
Important to note this isn't new or restricted to red parts of the country. Vagrancy laws, laws against loitering, etc are all ways of criminalizing the poor to ensure we are all loyal wage slaves, and to a lesser extent feeding the prison-industrial complex. Many Steinbeck novels touch on this so it was a prevalent cultural touchstone in the 30s
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 13 pts · 5d
To be clear, those rules were all ways of criminalizing BLACKNESS in the immediate aftermath of emancipation because the freed people had nowhere to go and nowhere to sleep. And since racism is a system designed to get the working class to do the dirty work of the owning class, it makes sense that laws intended to enforce racism get used against all poor people in relatively short order.
NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 5d
a lot of systemic issues in the country have been around for a very long time. I always think of FDR's secretary or labor, Francis Perkins advocating for universal healthcare and 80-90 years later it's still an issue too few politicians take seriously.
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works · -1 pts · 5d
The forced labour part is relatively new-ish. I think the average American has no idea about the slave labour involved in their daily lives.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 10 pts · 5d
Forced labor is not new. When the USA amended the constitution in the aftermath of the civil war they explicitly banned private ownership of slaves but made a specific carve out for prison slavery. Immediately after emancipation the states created laws that freed black folk couldn't avoid and in 10 years the prison population went from 90% white to 90% black. And those black prisoners were leased to plantation owners to work their fields.
Convict leasing lasted almost 50 years, but not before other modalities of prison slave labor had developed and matured.
It is in no way a relatively new-ish thing
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 5d
I meant as a political talking point its relatively new, but I also havent been around forever so it might be a recurring topic.
I will say that in the 90s and 00s, the teaching was that we don't do slavery anymore. Very explicit that slavery is bad, but its in the past so no worries. This has led to a lot of people born in the 80s and 90s becoming aware of this reality much later into their adult lives.
My guess is most of them still think slavery is "solved" in America. Most people aren't going to look at most of the brands in their grocery store and think, "slave labor helped bring me this product."
Nouvellalia@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 5d
I'm always glad when people come around, but it's also important to acknowledge this fact so we can correct it.
SmileyRiley@slrpnk.net · 5 pts · 5d
13th amendment of the united states:
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 5d
Yeah, they sorta gloss over that part in school when we learn about this stuff.
falynns@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 5d
The South loves slavery, more at 11. This is why the US should have punished the Confederacy as the treason it was instead of coddling them.
PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 5d
I just wish President Grant had punished the South more during Reconstruction but it wasn’t that popular at the time unfortunately and his corrupt administration certainly did not help.
FluorideMind@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 5d
Criminalize existing, to make slaves.
DudeImMacGyver@kbin.earth · 16 pts · 5d
Tax subsidized slavery for anyone who can't afford a home?
What a horrible state.
NerdyTimesOrWhatever@lemmy.today · 14 pts · 5d
You mean the crime is punished with enslavement.
Jspelts@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 5d
It is the deep south, they've been trying to find ways to get slavery back for 200 years now...
Cataath@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 5d
Louisiana State Penitentiary, aka Angola, was a state owned and operated plantation with over 600 slaves before the Civil War. It never stopped operation, only changed how the slave labor was acquired.
Jspelts@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 5d
I don't think the acquisition process has really changed all that much. Capture a person against his will, and force him to work for free. The only thing that really changed is the label. Now it's "criminal" instead of "slave" and on the supply side they went from one skin tone to several...
wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 5d
As the thirteenth amendment specifically allows.
Jiral@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 5d
Cool, state run slavery.
Lyrac@programming.dev · 13 pts · 4d
How does 16k permanently house and feed someone? Is that yearly cost? Where?
laz@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 10 pts · 4d
Mass housing dorms, basic shared facilities and cheapest tasteless grub for a person for 16k yep would work. Also I doubt any of them would reject volunteer labor or learning vocational crafts so they can survive have roof and warm food.
senorseco@lemmy.today · 8 pts · 4d
I have a family member who chooses to live homeless and after many years of being around him and others in the homeless community I can tell you that many would reject this. On a positive note, some would welcome it.
laz@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -1 pts · 4d
kamen@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 5d
Yeah, why don't these guys just stop being poor and homeless?
/s
betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 5d
Just sell some stock and buy a house, duh. Oh, hey, I've just been offered a Cabinet position. Why would a Head-Up Display need a secretary though?
BillCheddar@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 5d
All of America's laws are based on what puritanical, religious losers want.
Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone · -1 pts · 5d
Yeah, like the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act, or the right to remain silent, or title 9. Those are all what the religious losers want.
Formfiller@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4d
They’re literally teaching the Bible in schools now
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 10 pts · 5d
These numbers are going to need context.
$66,000 for how long? A year? Median across all sentences regardless of length?
If $16,000 houses AND feeds a homeless person permanently, how long exactly are we letting them live before euthanasia? There's no "permanent" when it comes to feeding or even housing, both include ongoing costs. 16 grand is a couple of years' food costs for me. More than 1, fewer than 10.
Note that I'm not arguing against housing the homeless obviously. Besides the obvious "what the fuck" factor of making homelessness a crime, incarceration by definition can't be cheaper because it involves housing, feeding AND guarding them. I just would prefer there to be more context when numbers are thrown around like that.
Nouvellalia@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 5d
Per year, per year. These are the yearly outlays for each.
buzz86us@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 4d
How do they even tell if you're homeless? It seems like a pretty fallible conviction to ruin someone's life.. Like what if your bus got delayed?
veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 4d
... have you not seen/been around homeless? It's pretty clear, hygiene has taken a nose dive is probably the biggest indicator.
zalgotext@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 4d
So you want cops to base things off of profiling?
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online · 9 pts · 6d
I vibe with it but let's be accurate here:
And you may not trust the suit who wrote that but keep in mind if they were corrupt and under-report themselves they'll basically be robbing themselves on federal contract negotiations in the future but if they were on the straight and narrow then they're morally obligated to keep the number accurate and as low as possible.
And the low end is closer to $20,000 while the high end (higher security) was near $75,000 and most interesting of all is that the food and healthcare combined is less than $8,000 but the cost of the institution itself (beds and housing) varies wildly dependent on location as would the amount needed to house people outside of prison, and almost half the cost is paying wages to prison staff including records keeping, attorneys, management, and a metric butt-load of guards.
So, the system is broken and they're trying to abuse prison labor to the extreme, especially private sector and this specific administration, but in theory some federal prisons are already approaching the efficiency of the 16k number.
rumschlumpel@feddit.org · 9 pts · 6d
You'd also have to put a number on the value of prison labor - it's unethical, but that never stopped the suits.
Etterra@discuss.online · 9 pts · 5d
The post-Civil War south is why we have the prison labor system we have. Abraham Lincoln was too busy being dead to stop defacto slavery being implemented to the benefit of the loosing side.
AVincentInSpace@pawb.social · 7 pts · 5d
Not disagreeing, but can I get a source for those figures?
TheLadyAugust@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 5d
https://www.vera.org/publications/the-price-of-jails-measuring-the-taxpayer-cost-of-local-incarceration
Caveat to this. It looks like the number is actually closer to 45-50ish thousand. $66,000 seems to be closer to the cost of caring for the aging incarcerated population.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8863642/
story@lemmy.zip · 7 pts · 5d
Louisiana was the only state that didn't secede because of the issue of slavery per se.
they were afraid that their human breeding programs and slave market/futures market would collapse
if you go to Walmart, Kroger, or Publix and look up the company that produces those big Dora balloons and other cartoon characters, that's all Louisiana slave labor.
the overton window in Louisiana is firmly in the territory of "well you gotta have slaves though" and probably will be like that forever
AI_toothbrush@lemmy.zip · 5 pts · 5d
Im sorry but i read that as "incinerate" and i was like wat
RFKJrsBrainworm@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 5d
Thats the next step
HieroProtagonist@feddit.org · 1 pts · 5d
Its a more final kind of solution...
Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 5d
Permanently house and feed someone? $16,000 seems quite a bit too low. That might cover food alone I would imagine, depending on the person's age. More so if it's like a 30 year old less so if they are 60.
doublenom@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 4d
Checked for France, cost goes between 12k€ to 17k€ per year. It includes housing, food, management.
Source here: https://www.senat.fr/rap/r20-632/r20-6326.html
Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 4d
Yes that is annually but post says "permanently" which I take to mean for multiple years not annually.
kestrel7_7@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 4d
It’s more like it costs more money than that to allow someone to be homeless, since they’ll be more likely to use emergency services and such.
$16K is actually not too far off from what I spend yearly on feeding and housing myself in Seattle. Remember that most housing costs in this country are dramatically inflated by rent (aka landlord greed).
Remember that homeless/unemployed people are likely to qualify for Medicaid and other benefits
Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 4d
Yeah $16k annually sounds about right. But they say "permanently" which I read as $16k total not annually.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 5d
I assume they mean in Louisiana
Gammelfisch@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 5d
The Government of Putin are masters of cheap labor. That's why the fucknuts rarely send ICE to rural red counties.
brachiosaurus@mander.xyz · 4 pts · 4d
Stop upvoting twitter/x posts you idiots, write the thing yourself
deaconblackhorse@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 4d
What do you mean write it yourself? What good is that?
brachiosaurus@mander.xyz · 1 pts · 3d
What good is sharing content from the platform owned by a trillionare nazi? "write it yourself" means that you can just write the same statement @fuckyouiquit made on X without having to share his tweet.
NoForwadSlashS@piefed.social · 3 pts · 5d
I think what they mean is $66,000 value to the shareholders
end_stage_ligma@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 5d
Kenshi vibes
Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 5d
When I was in junior high I asked someone what the difference was between a republican and a democrat. They said republicans create jobs for the homeless, while democrats just want to give them money. It didn't make much sense until about 10 years later.
But now, the fight homelessness by just making it illegal...
Professorozone@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 5d
Ummm $16k is barely above the US Federal poverty level.
Alberat@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 5d
no it's 1k for the house, 2k for food, and 13k to make up bullshit on the internet
A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 5d
Most homeless people just need help because they are victims of circumstance. Give them an apartment with a few months of rent paid up, a few months food and doctors visits/medical coverage, and a basic phone with a few months prepaid and they'll have enough breathing room to get back on their feet, find a job, and take over the rent on the apartment.. Assuming, of course, republican policies havent completely destroyed the job market 🙄
and that 3 months of help, and small investment, will turn them back into a working citizen paying back into the system and have them off the streets, out of shelters, and back out of the social safety net.
and its been proven multiple times that doing this is not just the morally right choice, its the financially smart choice.
But in America we don't care about doing the moral thing. We don't care about doing the financially wise thing. we don't care about doing whats right.
We care about punching down at the less fortunate and more vulnerable. Which is why systems like this will never come to fruition. Which is why homelessness which is wholly an artificially manufactured issue, will never be a solved issue.
NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 5d
A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
yes, thats what i just said.
NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 5d
I misread your post, it's already deleted.
Polisheocket@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 5d
Then you get the homeless person that throws their shit on the wall with major undiagnosed mental issues
manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 5d
I don't often see it raised, overshodowed by the revolution, but the brits sent a lot of convicts to the anglo colonies, you're living in a prison
LemmyPlaceDN@europe.pub · 2 pts · 5d
"They try to build a prison for you and me to live in"
System Of A Down - Prison Song (2001)
Bluedragon012@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 5d
12.50$ in total to my name. I'm getting real tired of evil. Really, freaking tired. The options are dwindling.
minorkeys@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 5d
They want all the resources of the world to serve their interests, with a little sadism on the side.
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · 1 pts · 4d
if we can get this picture with less group-think and bashing of the other side, i'll forward it to some friends of mine
zalgotext@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 4d
The "other side" is openly using slavery as a punishment for being poor, and you want to bash them less?
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · -1 pts · 4d
getting angry hurts you and helps noone- we need meaningful statements; emotional bashing was a mistake.
zalgotext@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 4d
Getting angry gets people mobilized, and it lets "the other side" know we're not happy with their decisions and won't take their shit. Telling people to "calm down and stop being emotional", especially over a resurgence of literal slavery, is asinine and unproductive.
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · 1 pts · 3d
well, mud-throwing certainly typically keeps me away from interacting. i suspect it has the same effect on a lot of other people. so i try to communicate without the mud-throwing in it.
zalgotext@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 3d
Good, I don't really want to interact with people that are pro-slavery
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · 1 pts · 3d
i don't get who you mean by that.
zalgotext@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 3d
"The other side". The ones being bashed by this post.
Unpigged@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 5d
For many people choice between publishing someone at higher cost, or help them at lower isn't really a choice.
LovableSidekick@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
idea: convince the food and necessities industries who would receive the $16k to lobby for this, against the prison companies who lobby for more prison time to increase their profits.
Nouvellalia@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
When you compare the largest stakeholders across the board it's the same people.
You would have to make >$150k a year for the food and necessities industries in order for them to try and change this. It's far more than the direct $60k because there is money made from the slave labor and an inherent cost savings in not having to oppress the people in another, more expensive way. And really, that second one may keep this from happening even at $150k
wrinkledoo@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 5d
They don't care about the cost saves because that money wasn't going to their pockets anyways.
This way it does.(via money going to their prison industry friends, who then give them kickbacks.)
krisevol@lemmus.org · -2 pts · 5d
California spends 66k per homeless, and they are still homeless. Go figure.
5318008@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 5d
In California, the 2026 budget for homelessness programs is $1.7 billion. The homeless population is 181,000. This is an average of $9400 per person per year.
Note: some of these programs are for homelessness prevention meaning it helps far more people than just the 181 thousand, meaning the cost per person is actually much lower.
krisevol@lemmus.org · 0 pts · 5d
This is how much we spent per homeless by year.
5318008@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 4d
Can you tell me: What is the y-axis of that graph? How would a person use this graph to determine how much we spent per homless person per year?
A) The right-most column, upper value
B) The left-most column, upper value
C) The sum of all upper values
D) The sum of all lower values
E) This graph doesn't say anything about price, and anyone trying to draw a conclusion abiut price doesn't know how to read even the simplest type of chart.
Karmanopoly@lemmy.world · -25 pts · 4d
Unpopular opinion but if you're using drugs on the streets you should be in jail
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 12 pts · 4d
Really? Jail?
Fuck treatment I guess?
And no, unfortunately, that's not an unpopular opinion.
orioler25@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
Literally state policy as represented by the article this dipshit is commenting under.
Karmanopoly@lemmy.world · -7 pts · 4d
Wouldn't jail be the treatments
deaconblackhorse@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 4d
Have you looked into what jail in the USA actually is at all?
Ashenlux@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 4d
And what happens when they get out? Without a safety net or plans? They go right back to using and being on the streets. It's not a solution, it just kicks the bucket down the road while extracting forced labor from them.
Karmanopoly@lemmy.world · -7 pts · 4d
At least it stops them from breaking into my car for loose change
thermal_shock@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 4d
Show us how often your car gets broken into and prove it's not some neighborhood kid and you left the door unlocked.
Karmanopoly@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 4d
Why is everyone on the side of the drug addict meth heads?
Fuck them and fuck you for supporting them
thermal_shock@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 4d
what a response from someone is probably white, grew up in at least middle class and were not affected by outside circumstances, family member dying, medical debt, coming back from war, being too dark for American tastes and just being abused constantly by everyone around them, including police.
sure we get angry at people when bad things happen to us, but to blame homeless?
i bet you call yourself a christian too eh? im fucking not, god is a hateful fuck, maybe you're taking the old testament instead of what jesus actually taught.
either way, it's not like they chose to be homeless. show a little empathy now and then instead of screaming at 11 year olds on whatever fifa or cod you're playing between jackin off.
still didn't post any evidence of your change getting stolen by a homeless person either.
veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 4d
I find the largest virtue signalers are the ones who've never lived in a neighborhood with them.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 3d
This can't possibly be a real question
thermal_shock@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 4d
Not get actual assistance? You blowing trumpers or something? You apathetic sack of shit.
Gaslov@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 4d
I've said far milder stuff than this and had my comment removed for incivility.
orioler25@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
Pretty simple explanation: It isn't uncivil to be mean to fascists.
thermal_shock@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 4d
ass hole mods, i've had similar.
Virtvirt588@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 4d
Yes and no, while there is a chance of causing harm to others while on drugs more succinct and beneficial procedures exist. I also dont think its such an unpopular opinion as you think it is - as efforts in actually helping drug addicts is quite small worldwide.
orioler25@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
Cool, kill yourself and go ask whatever god about it to be sure.
kat_angstrom@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
FYI, this comment has been reported for "promoting violence". Ordinarily I'd remove it for the "kill yourself" comment, but this seems more of a shitpost than an actual instruction or a promotion of violence. It's a bit toxic but I'm going to leave it, and downvote & move on.
Anyone who disagrees, feel free to chime in with your take.
orioler25@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d
Right, well, I certainly think my comment is fitting. Original commenter called for violence against unsheltered and disabled people, so I find it kind of strange that my comment would be too far.
It's certainly a joke, not intended to convincs them to commit, but I am genuinely telling this person to consider the gravity of the morality they just advocated for. The problem with the violence they just committed is that it is always just to respond in kind, and I don't think this person seems to understand that. If they're the one that reported, even funnier. I guess I ought to stick to vague calls for genocide rather than meanness.
kat_angstrom@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
Well phrased, and exactly why I didn't purge your comment based solely on a single report!
gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org · 1 pts · 4d
don't drink and drive, yeah