111–120 of 393 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
thanks for pointing something out that is in the article?!
He's pointing out that people in the neighbourhood are politically influent, that's why they are treated that way, not because they are rich. Which I did not get even after reading it. I'm thankful he pointed it out
What's actually disturbing is that more than 90% of the time this would be a "no knock" raid with paramiliterized police smashinng down the door, tossing in flash-bang grenades - the works. No knock should be reserved for extreme situations, not the norm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So why not use the same tactics for both, rich and poor? Or is violence reserved for poorer people?
Usually some rich old guy won't shoot at cops, when they come knocking at the door. Those people use lawyers, not guns.
I'm not sure I could confidently say that a rich person is less likely to draw a gun when someone kicks their door down in the middle of the night.
Maybe they are more likely to have a panic room, or just long corridors that provide enough time for the situation to become clear before they have a gun held in their face by someone claiming to be the FBI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So why not use the same tactics for both, rich and poor? Or is violence reserved for poorer people?
Usually some rich old guy won't shoot at cops, when they come knocking at the door. Those people use lawyers, not guns.
> "I can tell you that is not protocol. The problem is there are two justice systems: 1 for poor people and minorities and 1 for rich people and generally white people. You see it when you are one of the few black agents. Everyone is not equal." Was " Tarek Abou-Khatwa " not a minority? [The surname " Abou " appears to be most commonly associated with either Niger or Egypt]( https://forebears.io/surnames/abou ), whil…
Quoted post unavailable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, when there is reimbursement (via lawsuits) it is the city that pays for it. The police should be self-insured, backed by their pension fund. They are granted incredible power with no real accountability.
They should be at risk of losing their jobs for poor behaviour like this (and if they senior figures within the police forces don't deal with it, then they should be at risk of losing their jobs).
People with money and power have it better. Yes, clear, thanks for yet another confirmation. This is why I could never enjoy NYC. As a normal middle class dude you always feel everywhere that you are a nothing: no fame/no power/no money = people are rude, aggressive, hostile to you. I never felt that in London, which is a quite comparable city to NYC. I felt welcome in most places despite not being rich or famous.
NYC as assertive, that's just the way it is. And most rich and famous people are not identifiable as such. This is a non-story. If you don't have gang relations, no criminal record, no violence, no gun ownership ... there's no reason for the cops to bang down the door. That said, I think cops are too aggressive in general about this. That also said - the cops do have a policy of 'bang down the door' because I think i…
We could start by prohibiting IQ caps enforced by police departments.
No, really, they went to court to ensure they could continue to refuse candidates who exceed their own intelligence or any other arbitrary intelligence limit they want to enforce.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/st...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's obviously not how property rights work. Sam Walton was entitled to bequeath his wealth to his heirs however he saw fit, subject to any applicable estate and inheritance taxes.
The claim is that in capitalism "you become rich by providing value to other people." John T. Walton became rich through inheritance. Ergo, there are ways of getting rich other than providing value. Ergo, looking at someone who is rich doesn't tell you that they provided value.
Just the facts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A mere change in market equilibrium doesn’t constitute a market distortion.
You can label anything "a mere change in market equilibrium", apparently even someone inheriting more money than the GDP of an average sized country ...
This provides a definition of a market distortions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_distortion
This may help understand why it is defined this particular way and why it excludes inheritance and other wealth transfers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_theorems_of_welfar...