Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVII: The Snark Enlightenment

[Novus America]

Dio "Pan o Palo" Polis.

That reminds me of the proposal I’ve been meaning to post- basically, the government should distribute land to migrant workers and other poor farming folks. Government owned land- that which isn’t worthless desert or tundra- and a voluntary buyback of CRP lands can provide the land.

And many big cities have literally thousands of vacant lots and buildings, usually owned by the city government. We could make a program where say immigrants from Russia and the PRC with skilled jobs in the military, aerospace, electronics, shipbuilding, aluminum and steel industries get a modest house or condo in exchange for living there say a minimum of 5 years.

Use that to destroy industries in Russia and the PRC to rebuild ours.

[Diopolis]

That reminds me of the proposal I’ve been meaning to post- basically, the government should distribute land to migrant workers and other poor farming folks. Government owned land- that which isn’t worthless desert or tundra- and a voluntary buyback of CRP lands can provide the land.

And many big cities have literally thousands of vacant lots and buildings, usually owned by the city government. We could make a program where say immigrants from Russia and the PRC with skilled jobs in the military, aerospace, electronics, shipbuilding, aluminum and steel industries get a modest house or condo in exchange for living there say a minimum of 5 years.

Use that to destroy industries in Russia and the PRC to rebuild ours.

I’m generally not a fan of putting Americans out of work.

[Novus America]

Fair point. Most of the cost comes from the appeals process which has a necessary function.
The death penalty is cheap for the PRC because they do not have any real protections for defendants.

I think one issue though is the appeals process is too rigid and one size fits all.
We do the same mandatory appeals for all cases.

In cases where guilt is not contested there could be fewer appeals than in cases where it is contested.

Though in general the cost is less concerning as I would mostly limit the death penalty to cases where the person proved to dangerous to incarcerate (escapes, continues to commit crimes in jail, attacks guards and such) and cases where guilt is not in dispute.

I would also use it against those who order hits in prison as well. Other than that, I don't see much practical use for it, except for retribution.

Well yes, the real good use is to permanently incapacitate those who cannot be imprisoned safely.
Otherwise it is not necessary or even helpful.

[VoVoDoCo]

Yeah as far as I can tell, the overwhelming opinion on his research is it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. It was respectable, but not reliable.

Two reviews is not overwhelming and honestly the harsh reviews to it were pretty baseless; their essential critique centered on him making the assumption that everything else, bar the execution rate, remained unchanged in the scenario. That is the essence of methodological review and they never really gave a very compelling reason why this assumption was wrong.

Two reviews > One study
I said at least two different groups. Tomislav V. Kovandzic, Lynne M. Vieraitis, and Denise Paquette boots from the University of Texas at Dallas did research from 1977 to 2006.

Not only did they provide their own research, they provided summaries of past criticisms of Isaac Ehrlich. Baldus and Cole, 1975; Blumstein, Cohen, and Nagin, 1978; Bowers and Pierce, 1975, among others were cited. Here's the link if you're interested.

As for why they criticized his use of unchanged variables, there's a reason they did this. Research has to be repeatable, and to gain insights it's not uncommon for procedures to be tweaked.

There was nothing wrong with the way he did specifically. In fact, my source actually specified: "Passell and Taylor concluded that whatever the other virtues of Ehrlich's work, no valid inference about deterrence could be drawn from it." The last source I gave the authors said, "Ehrlich’s application of more sophisticated econometric techniques to examine the deterrent effects of the DP was a clear advancement over previous work." It is a respected piece of research. The criticism isn't on the static nature of some of his variable themselves, but that the static nature of these variable didn't reflect reality, and the attempts to repeat his research by others (again repeatability being necessary for an experiment's results to be considered valid) have found this to be the case.

[VoVoDoCo]

And, again, that is a cherry pick unless you can provide evidence that the death penalty only was practiced in those 10 years.

Only practiced in what 10 year period? Only practiced in the ten years before the research? It couldn't have been practiced 11 years before? What are you saying?

Actually let's just drop it. I have a feeling this part of the debate will be very fruitlesss.
______________________________________________

Sure, research doesn't have to include all of the relevant data....unless it wants to be effective, reliable data valid for use in an academic context.

An academic paper doesn't HAVE to provide a complete history of past data. It can. Can you provide a source that encapsulates the entirety of US history with regards to capital punishment and deterrence? Perhaps one that hasn't been peer reviewed to death?

Actually, scratch that. Another method. Let's say I give that to you. Yes, these researchers should have included all available data of history into their research (despite the fact it's not unreasonable for this to happen since it happens all the time), why don't you complete their data? Provide the data that would've rendered their findings invalid. And let's avoid data from Ehrlich, since despite you saying there was only 2 groups of criticisms (false) and their (correct) assertion that the specific static variables that Ehrlich used don't reflect reality, It's also important to have multiple sources. Like I've provided. And links too would helpful.
________________________________________________

Strawman.

That's literally not what a strawman is. I said:

You've brought up multiple times how data after the 90's is inaccurate due to a decrease in capital punishment. 3 things:

This is true. You said:

Generally speaking the overwhelming conclusion of most studies on the matter prior to the 1990s agreed it was effective in general. The Modern research says it isn't but that ignores how very rarely the death penalty is applied today.

In order to be a strawman, I would have to intentionally misrepresent your view. How did I do that?

[Napkizemlja]

Wat.

Severe crackdowns on a substance does not magically make it go away.

Nobody seriously thinks that it does, it's meant to make it harder for it to get on the street and more costly for the criminals who sell it. Crackdowns also don't really make OCG's more powerful, its the lack of enforcement that does that. There is a reason the Mafia hasn't recaptured its hold on society that it once held and that's because the Feds finally decided to seriously tackle organized crime in the 70's and 80's.

That ain't a difficult thing to understand, as we tried it before with alcohol.

Prohibition wasn't even enforced consistently or intensely, that's what allowed a lot of criminal organizations to operate relatively easily. Consistent and intense crackdowns on criminal organizations actually do quite a bit to control them to more acceptable levels.

[Napkizemlja]

Generally speaking the overwhelming conclusion of most studies on the matter prior to the 1990s agreed it was effective in general. The Modern research says it isn't but that ignores how very rarely the death penalty is applied today.

Plenty of research is available today to argue that the death penalty doesn't deter.

A study of countries in Europe found that of the 11 countries that met the criteria for the case study, 10 of them had a decline in their murder rate.

This research agrees with the results found in the US. Of the 25 states with the highest murder rates, 20 of them have the death penalty. The gap has gotten bigger with time. And hell, 88.2% of criminology experts assert that the death penalty deterrence hypothesis is a myth.

If timing is an issue for you to accept the latest data, there's actually a study that takes that into account. They divided states into 3 categories: Death States (that have the death penalty), transitional states (recently abolished the death penalty), and no death states (states that have long abolished the death penalty.) Worth a read.

That doesn't mean abolishing it leads to lower crime rates, necessarily, either.

[Napkizemlja]

You're ignoring the looming Sword of Damocles swinging over Washington's head: the National Debt. By 2025, the Federal Government will be spending a quarter of its budget servicing the national debt (making the interest payments). Long term, America may be able to continue picking on small little countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, or Iran; but it won't be able to keep up with Russia and China; whilst balancing its other internal expenses; not with the retired population rising and the working population shrinking. Of course, these problems won't really begin to fully manifest for another 10-15 years. But eventually, it'll catch up to Uncle Sam. America may have all the watches, but Her Enemies have all the Time.

The PRC and Russia have worse demographics than we do.
So there time is on our side. The PRC has a much worse aging crisis than we do.

Also the US debt is denominated in USD.
We can play lots of games with it as a result.

Sure we need to raise revenue, and cut waste.
It is something we can and should address. Cutting the military would do little though, high healthcare costs are the biggest problem that can be fixed.

Also we can expand our working population at will via immigration.

We can and should give PRC and Russian electronic, steel, aluminum, shipbuilding, defense and aerospace workers green cards if they want to defect. We can steal their laborers.

They cannot compete with our wages.
That alone can give us victory.

Yes, I'm sure the PRC and Russia totally wont use that opportunity to take advantage of the United States defense industry.

[VoVoDoCo]

Plenty of research is available today to argue that the death penalty doesn't deter.

A study of countries in Europe found that of the 11 countries that met the criteria for the case study, 10 of them had a decline in their murder rate.

This research agrees with the results found in the US. Of the 25 states with the highest murder rates, 20 of them have the death penalty. The gap has gotten bigger with time. And hell, 88.2% of criminology experts assert that the death penalty deterrence hypothesis is a myth.

If timing is an issue for you to accept the latest data, there's actually a study that takes that into account. They divided states into 3 categories: Death States (that have the death penalty), transitional states (recently abolished the death penalty), and no death states (states that have long abolished the death penalty.) Worth a read.

That doesn't mean abolishing it leads to lower crime rates, necessarily, either.

Well:

A. I never said it does.

B. The idea that is does is a theory by some. It's called the Brutalization Effect. "This hypothesis proposes this relationship occurs because executions diminish the public's respect for life." I'm not necessarily on board with it.

C. Even if it doesn't, there are many other reasons to be against it. One doesn't need to prove the crime rate will drop if Capital Punishment were ended. One need only prove that Capital Punishment doesn't affect crime at all. If one can, which I feel I've provided enough data to do so, then the argument that State Executions lead to a net decline in homicide is no longer a valid argument.

If CP doesn't lead to less crime, why are we killing people? How is that a deterrent?

If 1/25 people on death row are innocent, why are we risking killing them? How is that just?

Prevention and justice. Those are the two main objectives of CP. And it either fails spectacularly, or becomes the problem.

[Novus America]

The PRC and Russia have worse demographics than we do.
So there time is on our side. The PRC has a much worse aging crisis than we do.

Also the US debt is denominated in USD.
We can play lots of games with it as a result.

Sure we need to raise revenue, and cut waste.
It is something we can and should address. Cutting the military would do little though, high healthcare costs are the biggest problem that can be fixed.

Also we can expand our working population at will via immigration.

We can and should give PRC and Russian electronic, steel, aluminum, shipbuilding, defense and aerospace workers green cards if they want to defect. We can steal their laborers.

They cannot compete with our wages.
That alone can give us victory.

Yes, I'm sure the PRC and Russia totally wont use that opportunity to take advantage of the United States defense industry.

They would try, but most would be not working directly in defense and we would still have background checks. But the risk is worth it. Both have major demographic problems, stealing their skilled labor is a way to help us and hurt them. And they would be spilling the beans on their defense secrets. Steal the people who designed and built the S-400 then we need not fear it.

[Napkizemlja]

That doesn't mean abolishing it leads to lower crime rates, necessarily, either.

Well:

A. I never said it does.

B. The idea that is does is a theory by some. It's called the Brutalization Effect. "This hypothesis proposes this relationship occurs because executions diminish the public's respect for life." I'm not necessarily on board with it.

C. Even if it doesn't, there are many other reasons to be against it. One doesn't need to prove the crime rate will drop if Capital Punishment were ended. One need only prove that Capital Punishment doesn't affect crime at all. If one can, which I feel I've provided enough data to do so, then the argument that State Executions lead to a net decline in homicide is no longer a valid argument.

If CP doesn't lead to less crime, why are we killing people? How is that a deterrent?

If 1/25 people on death row are innocent, why are we risking killing them? How is that just?

Prevention and justice. Those are the two main objectives of CP. And it either fails spectacularly, or becomes the problem.

You know a few pages back I expressed my opposition to capital punishment.

[Napkizemlja]

Yes, I'm sure the PRC and Russia totally wont use that opportunity to take advantage of the United States defense industry.

They would try, but most would be not working directly in defense and we would still have background checks. But the risk is worth it. Both have major demographic problems, stealing their skilled labor is a way to help us and hurt them. And they would be spilling the beans on their defense secrets. Steal the people who designed and built the S-400 then we need not fear it.

The risk is absolutely not worth it. You are dealing with two nations who are better at the US when it comes to intelligence gathering and have run rings around the US on more than one occasion. It would almost inevitably blow up in America's face.

[Novus America]

They would try, but most would be not working directly in defense and we would still have background checks. But the risk is worth it. Both have major demographic problems, stealing their skilled labor is a way to help us and hurt them. And they would be spilling the beans on their defense secrets. Steal the people who designed and built the S-400 then we need not fear it.

The risk is absolutely not worth it. You are dealing with two nations who are better at the US when it comes to intelligence gathering and have run rings around the US on more than one occasion. It would almost inevitably blow up in America's face.

They already do it, it changes nothing. Where we can beat them is wages.
Given they chance their defense workers would gladly come here, and tell us everything we need to know.

We have the advantage in terms of higher wages. We should use it.

[Napkizemlja]

The risk is absolutely not worth it. You are dealing with two nations who are better at the US when it comes to intelligence gathering and have run rings around the US on more than one occasion. It would almost inevitably blow up in America's face.

They already do it, it changes nothing. Where we can beat them is wages.
Given they chance their defense workers would gladly come here, and tell us everything we need to know.

We have the advantage in terms of higher wages. We should use it.

If that were true then their defense workers would already be sending messages to American embassies and consulates en mass already if they were so giddy to move to America. China is an even worse country to try it over, considering that it's very unlikely that the US will be able to get family members over in time and the Chinese have used threats against family to coerce overseas Chinese residents to do their bidding.

[Novus America]

They already do it, it changes nothing. Where we can beat them is wages.
Given they chance their defense workers would gladly come here, and tell us everything we need to know.

We have the advantage in terms of higher wages. We should use it.

If that were true then their defense workers would already be sending messages to American embassies and consulates en mass already if they were so giddy to move to America. China is an even worse country to try it over, considering that it's very unlikely that the US will be able to get family members over in time and the Chinese have used threats against family to coerce overseas Chinese residents to do their bidding.

Large numbers of people in those countries do want to move to the US.
And if they take draconian action against it, it will just discourage people from working in those industries.

[Napkizemlja]

If that were true then their defense workers would already be sending messages to American embassies and consulates en mass already if they were so giddy to move to America. China is an even worse country to try it over, considering that it's very unlikely that the US will be able to get family members over in time and the Chinese have used threats against family to coerce overseas Chinese residents to do their bidding.

Large numbers of people in those countries do want to move to the US.
And if they take draconian action against it, it will just discourage people from working in those industries.

Not as many as you'd think. These countries are generally speaking quite anti-American.
No it wouldn't, because tons of Chinese people still conduct business overseas despite knowing what can be asked of them and the ramifications if they refuse.
These cultures are not Western; they hold different norms, values, worldviews, etc. You need to stop treating them like how you'd like people from these places to believe and behave and start treating them like they do behave and what they believe.

Not to mention that China is able to secure a pretty good standard of living for its intellectual and STEM elite.

[Novus America]

Large numbers of people in those countries do want to move to the US.
And if they take draconian action against it, it will just discourage people from working in those industries.

Not as many as you'd think. These countries are generally speaking quite anti-American.
No it wouldn't, because tons of Chinese people still conduct business overseas despite knowing what can be asked of them and the ramifications if they refuse.
These cultures are not Western; they hold different norms, values, worldviews, etc. You need to stop treating them like how you'd like people from these places to believe and behave and start treating them like they do behave and what they believe.

Not to mention that China is able to secure a pretty good standard of living for its intellectual and STEM elite.

If that is the case why are so many working here already? If you go into any tech job you will find plenty. Not all smoke the government propaganda even if some do.

And those really committed to staying will not come. Enough will though.

Even though they offer a much better standard of living for the educated STEM compared to the factory slaves of course, they cannot compete with the US in wages or housing.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Not as many as you'd think. These countries are generally speaking quite anti-American.
No it wouldn't, because tons of Chinese people still conduct business overseas despite knowing what can be asked of them and the ramifications if they refuse.
These cultures are not Western; they hold different norms, values, worldviews, etc. You need to stop treating them like how you'd like people from these places to believe and behave and start treating them like they do behave and what they believe.

Not to mention that China is able to secure a pretty good standard of living for its intellectual and STEM elite.

If that is the case why are so many working here already? If you go into any tech job you will find plenty. Not all smoke the government propaganda even if some do.

And those really committed to staying will not come. Enough will though.

Even though they offer a much better standard of living for the educated STEM compared to the factory slaves of course, they cannot compete with the US in wages or housing.

Lol, yes they can, there are large provinces in China with higher average wages than any state in the US.

[Napkizemlja]

Not as many as you'd think. These countries are generally speaking quite anti-American.
No it wouldn't, because tons of Chinese people still conduct business overseas despite knowing what can be asked of them and the ramifications if they refuse.
These cultures are not Western; they hold different norms, values, worldviews, etc. You need to stop treating them like how you'd like people from these places to believe and behave and start treating them like they do behave and what they believe.

Not to mention that China is able to secure a pretty good standard of living for its intellectual and STEM elite.

If that is the case why are so many working here already? If you go into any tech job you will find plenty. Not all smoke the government propaganda even if some do.

And those really committed to staying will not come. Enough will though.

Even though they offer a much better standard of living for the educated STEM compared to the factory slaves of course, they cannot compete with the US in wages or housing.

Career reasons, wanting to work with a major company, etc. But those are generally private enterprises with dealings in China, not industries who build tools to directly go against their home nation. And IP theft and Chinese industrial espionage is a major problem in places like Silicon Valley precisely because of those workers.

[Novus America]

If that is the case why are so many working here already? If you go into any tech job you will find plenty. Not all smoke the government propaganda even if some do.

And those really committed to staying will not come. Enough will though.

Even though they offer a much better standard of living for the educated STEM compared to the factory slaves of course, they cannot compete with the US in wages or housing.

Lol, yes they can, there are large provinces in China with higher average wages than any state in the US.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/170 ... iland/amp/

[United Muscovite Nations]

Lol, yes they can, there are large provinces in China with higher average wages than any state in the US.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/170 ... iland/amp/

Cool, a 6 year old study not related to what I was talking about at all.

[Napkizemlja]

Lol, yes they can, there are large provinces in China with higher average wages than any state in the US.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/170 ... iland/amp/

You do realize that the average private sector worker is not the same as their intellectual elite, right?

[Novus America]

If that is the case why are so many working here already? If you go into any tech job you will find plenty. Not all smoke the government propaganda even if some do.

And those really committed to staying will not come. Enough will though.

Even though they offer a much better standard of living for the educated STEM compared to the factory slaves of course, they cannot compete with the US in wages or housing.

Career reasons, wanting to work with a major company, etc. But those are generally private enterprises with dealings in China, not industries who build tools to directly go against their home nation. And IP theft and Chinese industrial espionage is a major problem in places like Silicon Valley precisely because of those workers.

Not all work in enterprises with dealings with the PRC especially.
Many have no loyalty to the PRC and would rather be US citizens

And that is fine if they work in the private sector, actually preferable in most cases.

We have a dire shortage of skilled manufacturing workers, even in things like aluminum and steel which are not directly military, and not real intel risks.

Sure for higher level stuff you have to get them carefully and show no mercy if they do spy.

Most do not though.

[Novus America]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/170 ... iland/amp/

You do realize that the average private sector worker is not the same as their intellectual elite, right?

Neither are US skilled STEM workers getting paid average either.
I do not have the exact data for the PRC but for Russia the US pays aerospace engineers more than ten times more.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/11/ ... rce-a41832

Obviously we are more competitive, far more people there want to come here than our people want to go there.

There are millions applying for US green cards every year.

[United Muscovite Nations]

You do realize that the average private sector worker is not the same as their intellectual elite, right?

Neither are US skilled STEM workers getting paid average either.
I do not have the exact data for the PRC but for Russia the US pays aerospace engineers more than ten times more.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/11/ ... rce-a41832

Obviously we are more competitive, far more people there want to come here than our people want to go there.

There are millions applying for US green cards every year.

China is wealthier than Russia. I don't have data but I can tell you from personal experience that skilled intellectuals in China have a comparable lifestyle and income to American skilled intellectuals.