And my local grocery store sponsors Indycar racing and has a track they sponsor. They also throw away produce that looks bad, although it is perfectly edible.
I am not going to cry because the CEO cannot afford a yacht payment next month.
Ah yea, the famously successful political approach of “discard half the people, they don’t matter, then throw away half of the ones left over”. Works very well.
This isn't about individuals. The Republican Party is completely complicit and as long as members of that party hold office they will continue. I would love to have multiple qualified candidates to choose from across the spectrum but right now the system has been co-opted and a hard reset is the appropriate response.
And the marvelous book Code. He explains how a digital computer works. Not sophisticated ones, not how it works on silicon, but how you turn relays into computation.
His freeform, not-too-serious libertarianism can easily be mocked, but PJ O’Rourke did have a very good point about well-intentioned but counterproductive environmental legislation like the laws governing wetlands: imagine that, should an Old Master painting be discovered on your property, you were required immediately to cease all other use of the property and protect that Old Master painting against damage or theft, under penalty of law, but without any compensation for the expenses this might incur. You can imagine that any new ones found would simply be burned immediately, not protected. And wetlands laws work a bit like that.
Regardless of specific political ideology it only takes a room temperature IQ to realize that copy pasting the concept of Royal Forests from Norman England to today is probably gonna cause all the same perverse incentives and hardship and stunt wealth accumulation/progress in the affected areas and so on. What did we spend the last few decades of the 20th century doing? Basically that.
The other real fucked up thing is that most of it is state/local implementations of federal rules but that's insane because California has a completely different relationship with swamps and water than the Carolinas.
The worst of it will probably get unwound when the courts adopt a "no you idiots, a fractional taking is still a taking pay the F up" doctrine but that might be a century from now. There's sooooo much money tied up in it though.
The only realistic way to get someone back from ventricular fibrillation is cardioversion.
That's why automatic external defibrillators are in so many public spaces these days. If someone drops in your presence, you find that thing and get the pads on them ASAP. It won't shock if not indicated; it will tell you to resume CPR.
A former high school classmate of mine, who had played football with me from fifth grade on, dropped dead walking around in a bookstore at age 23. Almost certainly WPW.
My in-laws had a Chihuahua as the alert dog and a Doberman as the guard dog. Yip yip yip WOOF WOOF WOOF. Took the Dobie on a lot of walks in natural areas where sketchy people were around. Funny enough, nobody tries anything when you have an 85-lb/40 kg dog. They saw me put her on a leash when I saw them and they knew I could just drop it.
Fwiw venison leans heavily on ground because it’s so lean that it’s nearly impossible to cook it to be tender and cooked; even sous vide methods require lower temps. Grinding it with cheap pork fat allows it not to be basically jerky.
Win95 OSR2 and Windows 98 Second Edition were actually pretty reliable, unlike early 95, but the first person I knew to own a CD burner called NT his 100-megabyte CD burning software, because 95 and 98 just weren't stable enough (and blanks still expensive enough to care) at I/O.
Whatever other issues they may have, they are overwhelmingly mentally ill, largely schizophrenic, and the surrender in the US happened just outside your fifty-year window when the Supreme Court decided that it should be much harder to institutionalize someone against their will. The timing was similar in the UK, from what I have read. Don’t know about the EU.
The problem with severe schizophrenics is that they don’t like and won’t take their meds if left to their own devices [EDIT: regardless of how much social support you provide, even though we certainly didn’t provide enough]. Institutions are in no way perfect, but One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is not a documentary.
The causation arrow isn't unidirectional, though. Mental illness causes some homelessness, particularly often because in the US healthcare system medications are expensive and can lead to bankruptcy. (And it is certainly not the only path to bankruptcy in the US either.) But more and more studies are showing that the biggest problem with homelessness in the US is that it causes mental illness. (Same thing is being found with drug addictions: some cause bankruptcy and then homelessness, but to cope with homelessness many find new addictions after becoming homeless.)
Most homeless shelters are run by religious charities. The majority of them treat homelessness as a sin, either by intentional policy or accidents of attitude. These "charities" often require a lot of work to keep being allowed to use their housing at their shelter from regular job hunting to regularly attending worship sessions to "zero tolerance" policies on everything from curse words to keeping private possessions to having pets to sometimes taking/keeping necessary medication. It's hard to keep your mental health in good shape when the groups that are housing you in the worst weather are berating you for being terrible sinners and treating you like prisoners.
Outside of shelters the most common interactions between homeless people and the cities around them are interactions with cops, who very rarely have mental health training or social work experience, and treat homeless people like criminals because their job is sometimes to treat everybody as would be criminals.
You ever really talk to a homeless person? The ones that really survive become very organized. They have a list of shelters memorized, which months they prefer to be at each one, what things they need to fake about themselves they need to do to survive in that shelter for a few weeks, how much "rent" they need to raise before they get there (some shelters often cost pennies per day just to show that the homeless person is "working" somehow; some homeless panhandle just to afford shelters), and exactly how long they can stay before they inevitably get kicked out (most shelters are "short term", intentionally). Just listening to all the rules and regulations and requirements makes me think I would go schizophrenic dealing with that world. It sounds like being stuck in a middle school that never ends, if that middle school's "classrooms" were all in entirely different parts of a city and all had deeply different rules. I can easily see why homelessness often causes mental illness in the US.
Institutions are close to the right answer, but for an entirely different reason than you assert. We do need better secular institutions (in the endowed place of learning sense, not the mental hospital sense) with mental health as one goal among several such as long-term support in charge of dealing with the homeless. The numbers keep showing that the greatest fix we've found for homelessness is making sure that everyone has a home where they feel safe and private and don't have to do anything to "earn" much less keep that home.
Right, so, what do you do about the guy who smears feces on the walls and won't take his meds? Because that guy is the one who makes public spaces unlivable. Including places like SRO hotels that actually could provide people with affordable living spaces.
Yeah, except that because the Warren Court was so incredibly arrogant, it's almost impossible to institutionalize anyone against their will in the US unless you go through all the process of setting up guardianship.
This (straw) man scenario feels like a proximate cause versus root cause situation to me. You've managed to establish a relatively strong proximate cause (or so it seems) as "won't take his meds". Where did he get the meds he was supposed to take? How is he paying for them? Was he given the meds in a place of safety and security enough to have reason to trust the meds might help?
If you were given strange meds that you don't understand anything about by someone who wasn't your personal doctor in a situation that feels like a prison out of your control, would you take them?
That's equally a straw man question, but a useful one to maybe establish empathy for the situation that homeless "guy" might have found himself in.
That's also assuming that is the correct proximate cause. As far as I know science has not yet found exactly a "don't use excrement as spray paint" drug. There are people that will do that which don't need meds and there are people that will do that even on most anti-psychotic meds.
But let's talk about some of the root cause of it all: If you find yourself in a world that you cannot control, that won't let you use any bathroom without buying a coffee/being a customer, that doesn't want you to exist, that says you are only as valuable as the property that you own but then won't allow you any longer to own any property due to some bad luck or misfortune, at that point "the only spray paint I have to send a message about how much this world sucks" might seem pretty clear.
I find it easy to have sympathy with that sort of (straw) man, because there is a logic to it. It's not necessarily a psychotic break. At least, not necessarily at first a psychotic break.
What would I personally do to prevent that? I'd try to prevent people from being homeless in the first place. I'd try to get people mental health resources sooner ahead of crises rather than trying it do it in the middle of a different one (bankruptcy/homelessness). Which is the same as I suggested statistically seems to be the only thing that works: give people private houses with locks and keys and help them feel safe and secure in them, with a sense of ownership and privacy, and with no need to "earn" it or "rent" to keep it. Maybe it doesn't stop the person from covering "their own" walls in feces until they feel safe and secure enough (and that's still a public health problem in the meantime) to try an antipsychotic med that they need to take. But as far as I'm aware no one wants to take or trust an antipsychotic medication if they don't at first feel like they live in a safe enough or secure enough place.
Which again also circles back to "institutions are almost the correct approach, but for the wrong reasons" I mentioned before. A place with mental health resources seems to be an important part of that, still, but I don't think you can address mental health problems in a prison, especially in a society that values private property and private spaces, without first addressing the problems around homeless not having access to private property and private spaces.
But yeah, that's mostly just my opinion on the subject based on statistics and studies that I've read. You don't have to take my word on it. One archived secondary source (with additional links): https://academicweb.nd.edu/~rwilliam/ndonly/readings/SocProb...
lol suuure it does. I totally believe that becoming homeless causes people to stand on sidewalks jabbering obscenities and smearing shit all over the place.
Why the fuck are we so soft on these gutter trash in this country.
reply