rainynight65 @ rainynight65 @feddit.org

Migrated from rainynight65@feddit.de, which now appears to be dead. Sadly l

---

Read more

Posts

4

Comments

118

Joined

1 yr. ago

Because he has no plan to address the causes of crime, only a plan for harsher punishments. So he has no realistic way of reducing victim numbers.

No surprises here.

It still means that fewer young people commit crimes than what used to be the case. It's not like people stopped having children. And if the youths who used to commit crimes are now adults who commit crimes, they no longer class as youth crimes.

If the Libs win, I hope they go full Newman again and get kicked out after one term. I'm not exactly enamoured with QLD Labor but bloody hell anything is better than the toxic Libs in this state.

If only you could see the 'newspapers' in Queensland, every other front page has 'young crims' scaremongering and they make it sound like Townsville and such are hellholes where people are terrorised by young criminals day and night without reprieve.

Weird how the LNP's only answer to this is 'adult crime, adult time'. Like, literally, zero policies on how to prevent youth crime, how to help children with better education and more perspectives for their future. Nothing. Just harsher punishments.

If a woman seeks abortion at that stage, it is almost guaranteed to be due to a condition that would seriously endanger her, the baby, or both, if the pregnancy was carried to term. Nobody just decides after 27 weeks that they simply don't want the baby. In these cases, inducing to deliver the baby will likely not help the baby and it could still seriously harm the mother.

What this guy proposes would be, in most cases, indistinguishable from an abortion, but way more harmful for everyone involved. It's telling that it is usually men who try to push these kinds of law.

Thing is, I am actually Gen X. Early even. And I look at the Boomers and see the generation who kept pulling up the ladder. They got free education and privatised it to make it expensive for us. They got free healthcare and privatised it to make it expensive. They got into the housing market for cheap and started using it as an investment and speculation vehicle, making it harder for each subsequent generation to get into it. They were pretty much the last generation in which it was possible to raise a family on a single income. Climate change is front and center of mind in my generation, we've known for over 30 years what's coming. When you look at those who most fervently oppose climate change action - all old fogeys, and I say that being very conscious of the fact that I am approaching 'old fogey' status from the perspective of Gen Z and Gen Alpha.

I can only imagine how todays teenagers and young adults feel...

Teenagers today were born in the aftermath of a global financial crisis, are seeing war after war after war, grow up with the knowledge that the world is going to shit and the older generations aren't willing to do anything about it. They see everyone pull up the ladder behind them, the 'fuck you I got mine' mentality is everywhere.

And TikTok is to blame for their mental health?

Specific to subway surfing: I'm 46, and I know this stuff happened when I was a kid. There were no social media back then to show you, but somehow kids still these got stupid ideas. It seems like social media is just the new video games are the new comic books are the new heavy metal is the new whatever scapegoat society wants to use to blame for its own deliberate shortcomings in bringing up the next generation.

A decade ago 1TB SSDs were rare and, like all new things in tech, expensive.

I don't necessarily have a problem with it being an interest-free loan, if it serves to keep a business over water and saves jobs. To me that's an appropriate use of taxpayer funds. I'm all for taxpayer subsidies if they are balance-positive to the taxpayer, i.e. jobs are preserved and the subsidies result in meaningful economic activity.

What's bad is when otherwise profitable businesses use threats of job cuts and closures to obtain taxpayer bailouts so they can keep paying big bonuses and shareholder dividends. A lot of that happened through COVID, and the taxpayer threw billions at big business for very little in return. So maybe restrictions on layoffs and such would need to be written into a system like that. The punitive aspects need to incentivise the intended behaviour and strongly disincentivise the wrong behaviour.

Isn't that pretty much the short version of what I said?

Big corporations begging taxpayer bailouts and then using them on bonuses and dividends. It's a humongous waste of money that does nothing but enrich the wealthy. Most of the time it doesn't even save jobs.

If, as a large corporate, you want a bailout from the taxpayer, then the government/state will take a portion of your shares in escrow, equivalent in value to the amount of money you're asking for or getting. Those shares (in case of publicly traded companies) are withdrawn from the stock market, become non-voting shares and are frozen at their price at that time. Within a to-be-determined time period (five years maybe) the corporation, if it gets profitable again, can buy back all or part of the shares from the government at that price per share - thus returning money to the taxpayer. Anything that's left after five years, the government can do with as it sees fit - sell them at market price (thus recovering the spent money), or keep them use them to vote/control the company.

There probably is a lot wrong with this proposal. But something needs to be done to discourage big business from hoovering up taxpayer money like it's going out of fashion. Most of the time the taxpayer is getting absolutely no value from that spend.

Ask that question again when it's a site that you need to use.

SSDs were relatively new in 2010, and priced accordingly. Now it's just about increasing sizes and (hopefully) reliability. I just don't think that all of a sudden we'll have huge cheap SSDs - people are used to a certain price point and manufacturers will take advantage of that.

I watched the first one and know a lot of people who did. I even know people who went to see the second one.

No conspiracy detected here.

It would be more compelling if some US states weren't also openly and unabashedly engaged in active voter suppression.

Both can be true. He can be an idiot who got paid to destroy Twitter.

The prices will stay the same. Manufacturers will just make more profit.

The fact that this is the new (liberal) governments first priority speaks volumes. Their approach to crime is all about punishment and retaliation, not about prevention and mitigation.

Treating ten year old children like adults when they mess up is going to do them a world of harm.

Not quite. The middle e is longer than the other two.