If it helps, you can think of it as an enhancement to keep people in prison longer or paying more fines, but when the result is poor people are in prison when rich people would not be for the same offense, not having debtors’ prisons is a semantic distinction without a meaningful difference.
NPR found that in the vast majority of America, defendants can be charged for a public defender, for their own parole and probation, the cost of a jury trial, and their stay in a jail cell. Some jurisdictions have even found ways to charge people “booking fees” after an arrest, even if the arrest never results in a criminal charge, a policy recently upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. My favorite example of this nonsense, though it isn’t in the NPR report, is crime labs. Believe it or not, in some jurisdictions, crime labs are paid fees only if their analysis leads to a conviction. (The fees are then assessed to defendants.) Think about the incentives at work there.
Failure to pay these fines results in — you guessed it — more fines, plus interest. If the debt is sent to a collection agency, those fees get tacked on, too. Ultimately, inability to pay the fines can land you in a jail cell. Which is why we’re now seeing what are effectively debtors’ prisons, even though the concept is technically illegal.
I think you’re missing the forest for a very specific tree here. Did you skip past the part where there’s literally debtor’s prisons, they just call them something else? Those people would not be in jail if they did not have debt.
Whether that debt was incurred as a fine they couldn’t pay because of law enforcement or a civil debt, judges can and do issue warrants for their arrest, with which they imprison people.
Like I don’t want to fear-monger here, but when you think about just how many people are a paycheck away from having debts they can’t pay, this is a very real possibility for a large portion of America. I assume less so in countries that aren’t quite so backward.
I’m okay with losing the parts of the audience who didn’t read the whole page:
The criminalization of private debt happens when judges, at the request of collection agencies, issue arrest warrants for people who failed to appear in court to deal with unpaid civil debt judgments. In many cases, the debtors were unaware they were sued or had not received notice to show up in court. Tens of thousands of these warrants are issued annually.
Like I get that the ACLU could have capitalized that, bolded it, and stuck it at the top of the page, but you only have to make it to like the second paragraph to read it.
Edited to add – thanks for this. I haven’t had a pointless argument on the internet with someone who already mostly agrees on the important points but can’t quite get past pointless minutiae in awhile.
Oh I read that too, and again you’re making an additional logical leap with your idea that isn’t always true.
Weird, because I feel like you’re jumping past the point because it isn’t technically spelled out in the USC that someone will arrest you if you don’t make enough money.
If someone sues you civilly, you receive no notice of it, and then they arrest you and put you in prison, I get that there are intervening steps, but it’s literally the same result.
I understand that sometimes people get notice and might have the ability to show up in court and they do, but the OP’s point isn’t that every poor person is in jail. The point is that they’re put there when rich people aren’t.
That the OP can’t cite a PL that says being poor is illegal doesn’t exculpate society from putting them in prison because they’re poor. I’m sorry that it’s insidious and underhanded, but it is literally happening.
I also don’t think the OP is trying to change anyone’s mind. I’m not either. I don’t think the people who criminalize being poor are worth the effort. The point of these types of posts isn’t to change minds. It’s to overcome the apathy of the majority of people who already know it’s wrong to do this and use that majority to forcibly remove power from those people whose minds you want to change.
I think its very weird you’re willing to jump past the fact its not illegal to call it illegal when the OP post is putting in context with two other things which are unequivocally illegal. Putting all three together is creating a false equivalency.
Is this some new definition of unequivocal I was previously unaware of?
The OP mentioned being homeless, being a drug addict, and being poor. It’s not illegal to be a drug addict, either. Oddly enough you’ll find a lot of people put in prison for it, if they buy drugs illegally and if they’re caught and if it’s worth enough to the prosecutor and if they’re convicted or if they accept a plea bargain. You’re okay with those ‘ifs’ in your definition, but not the chain below…why?
Thats A LOT of “if” to make your statement true, but you’re passing it off as it’s always the case.
I mean, yeah, that’s kinda how it works. Not all bank robbers go to prison either, you know? The point is that this only happens to poor people and it only happens because they’re poor and it’s wrong that it happens. The point is not every poor person goes to prison.
Being in debt doesn’t put you in jail which is what your statement should mean happens. We have literally tens of millions of people in debt and millions of them are poor that are walking the streets without warrants against them.
Maybe this is where you’re confused. No one is saying that everyone with debt is being put in prison. Or maybe someone is, but they aren’t in this conversation. I’m saying that this set of circumstances should not be criminal, and it only happens to poor people. Apparently, according to the ACLU, it happens to tens of thousands of them. I’m pretty sure the OP is saying that, too.
Hmm, okay you’re not interested in changing minds of others. Nothing wrong with that I suppose, but does that mean this just food for an echo chamber then?
I’d classify it more as a call to action for likeminded people. I generally read things like this and think I should do something about it, so I do what I can think of. If that’s an echo chamber for you, knock yourself out, I guess.
So you want to change the mind of someone that is neutral on the subject to being supporting of different policy? How is that not changing someone’s mind? Are we now arguing what the definition of “changing a mind” means now?
I mean, no; you’re arguing against something no one said (again), but I guess I can address that now, too.
I don’t care about changing the minds of someone neutral on the subject, either. If someone manages to read something like this, find out what’s happening, and somehow not think that’s wrong, I don’t think any words are going to change their mind.
It’s doesn’t matter, though, because the majority already know it’s wrong. They either know it’s wrong and didn’t realize it was a thing, or they know it’s a thing but they think they’re powerless to change it.
I (and, I assume, the OP) want those who aren’t currently doing something to realize they aren’t alone in thinking what they’re thinking, so they’ll be more inclined to do things about it. They already want to do those things; their minds don’t need to be changed.
Google is coming in for sharp criticism after video went viral of the Google Nest assistant refusing to answer basic questions about the Holocaust — but having no problem answer questions about the Nakba.
…I would like to know more. Is it like cultural similarities between seafaring peoples in different locations or have there just always been black people in Viking locations and some of them were also Vikings?
This has been my only experience as well. Some company I have to work with uses it so I have to use it for their stuff for some reason, unless I can force them to do anything else.
This makes more sense to me. The only things I’ve ever made that have to worry about multiple web browsers are basic, static HTML pages that just need CSS and maybe a tiny bit of JS. My biggest annoyance was that it didn’t have a grid view like Firefox did.
What does the web use Bluetooth for? That sounds like a nightmare regardless of whether the browser will let it or not, lol
Caring only about their personal comfort and feeling smugly superior to anyone on a “side” is the essence of the modern moderate. They’ll miss society crumbling around them because their heads are too far up their own asses.
In case you’re like me and are interested in the topic but aren’t interested in watching someone talk forever:
00:00:00 In this section, the narrator discusses how food conglomerates like Kraft and Kellogg’s have manipulated food science and public perception to make ultra-processed foods a necessity rather than a want, leading to health issues such as heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. The food industry’s goal is to keep the public confused about what to eat, and they have attempted to sabotage the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee’s process of giving nutrition advice to the American public. Ultra-processed foods, which include many breakfast cereals, frozen dinners, sauces, and yogurt, are industrially produced and designed to be irresistibly delicious. Companies use large amounts of salt, sugar, and fat to mask the off-notes of the manufacturing process and extend shelf life. Kraft, for example, marketed their singles as a health food in 2015, despite the fact that they cannot legally be called cheese. The food industry’s tactics are reminiscent of Big Tobacco’s lies, and the evidence linking ultra-processed foods to disease is grim.
00:05:00 In this section, the speaker discusses how food companies partner with health organizations to create the illusion of endorsement for their ultra-processed foods. As research reveals the negative effects of such foods on health, food industries use various tactics to undermine the research and researchers. They cast doubt on the studies, discredit researchers, and even fund their own studies to show favorable results. The speaker also mentions the similarities between the food and tobacco industries, with food companies owned by tobacco companies until the mid-2000s and using similar misinformation playbooks. The speaker, Tera Fazzino, a psychology professor at the University of Kansas, shares her research on hyper-palatable foods, which are often produced by tobacco-owned food companies and are more likely to be addictive due to their nutrient combinations. The speaker’s perspective on the addictive nature of these foods changed during her research, as she discovered that foods produced by tobacco-owned companies were 29% more likely to be classified as hyper-palatable.
00:10:00 In this section, Michael Pollan recounts a conversation with a former Philip Morris lawyer who revealed that the heads of these companies don’t consume their own addictive products. Pollan explains that tobacco companies got out of the food business in the 2000s, but other non-tobacco-owned food companies took note of their successes and reformulated their products to maximize profits. The food industry now accounts for nearly 70% of the food supply, and Pollan argues that the narrative that individuals are solely responsible for overeating is a way for food companies to avoid accountability. The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee is currently considering the health effects of ultra-processed foods, and the Food and Beverage Issue Alliance, a trade group representing various food industries, has urged the committee to stop using the term “ultra-processed” until there is a consensus on a definition. Pollan emphasizes the importance of access to good scientific information and evidence-based dietary guidelines, as it took decades for the link between tobacco and cancer to be acknowledged and addressed.
I hadn’t considered the connection, but now that you mention it I use Spotlight pretty much exclusively on my Mac too. Hopefully they don’t mess that feature up in the future or I’m going to have to learn how to manually organize things.
Ambition once came with a promise: a home, a salary, progress and fulfilment. What happens when that promise is broken? Meet the women who are turning their backs on consumerism, materialism and burnout
It’s annoying sometimes, but it’s also pretty easy to recognize and ignore. Usually some variation of “you can’t even XYZ in OSX and that’s been a feature of whatever-I-use forever.”
Vague? Check. Outdated Nomenclature? Check. Circlejerk Popular Opinion on Lemmy? Oh that’s a big check.
I’m getting good enough at it now that I usually don’t even need to read half the comment before knowing it’s going to be worthless, downvote it, and move on.
Here’s hoping for better mod tools and a more diverse set of users as time passes. I’d love to get back to arguing that making all the ports on the MacBook Pro Thunderbolt ports was a way better idea than kowtowing to photographers who can’t be arsed to update their habits is (spoiler, I lose and get downvoted but still think I’m right), but I can wait.
Decriminalize Life (lemmy.world)
Google blasted for AI that refuses to say how many Jews were killed by the Nazis (nypost.com)
Google is coming in for sharp criticism after video went viral of the Google Nest assistant refusing to answer basic questions about the Holocaust — but having no problem answer questions about the Nakba.
they hurt you, didn't they (lemmy.world)
Gotta use all those brain cells (sh.itjust.works)
Anon doesn't like any web browsers (lemmy.world)
Hyundai pauses X ads over pro-Nazi content on the platform (www.nbcnews.com)
The Lie That Made Food Conglomerates Rich...And Is Slowly Poisoning Us (yt.artemislena.eu)
Canonical YouTube link
Bug: Default post sort order not saved
Sorry, can’t quite remember if you’d mentioned this already, but it resets to Hot if you force quit and restart the app.
Just a few attention-grabbing retro game ads that would land studios in hot water today. (more in post body) (lemmy.world)
I know they’re insensitive and tacky, but I have to admit that a part of me misses when games ads were off the walls like this....
was this not allowed before? (slrpnk.net)
The soft life: why millennials are quitting the rat race (www.theguardian.com)
Ambition once came with a promise: a home, a salary, progress and fulfilment. What happens when that promise is broken? Meet the women who are turning their backs on consumerism, materialism and burnout
CSS Humor
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/899e92cd-9299-4067-9ccb-534fe8be4d01.jpeg
Meta: Can we talk about non "Apple Enthusiasts" dominating the threads on c/apple_enthusiasts?
Since a lot of folks sort by “all” on Lemmy, popular posts get overwhelmed by people who don’t daily drive operating systems like iOS or MacOS....