Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò: longitudinal work like this helps drive the point home about basic income, but I think also supports the kind of point abolitionists make (particularly the Gilmore school within prison abolition, but I think largely applies to the police abolition rationale) for largely the same reasons

longitudinal work like this helps drive the point home about basic income, but I think also supports the kind of point abolitionists make (particularly the Gilmore school within prison abolition, but I think largely applies to the police abolition rationale) for largely the same reasons

A natural basic income experiment began in the mid-1990s and how the kids — now in their 30s and 40s — are doing is incredible. As adults, they have fewer drug problems and their average IQ is higher. By age 26, the benefits of the UBI exceeded its cost by 3-to-1. academicminute.org/2014/06/jane...

on long enough time scales, especially considering interventions that affect people early on in socialization, I think "what if we supported people to begin with" is at the very least as good a practical question as "what do we do about rapists and murderers"

the idea that only the second question is the practically minded kind smuggles in the short term focus. self-justifying stuff, in the end

I believe whatever causes some people to harm/kill will always exist w/in us—there’ll never be a society w/o some antisocial behavior. But seeing how much less crime occurs in countries that do take better care of their people & aren’t flooded with guns makes clear we can do way better than we have

question should be, is it really a "practical" bargain to burden everyone else in society but "guarantee" that something bad will happen to someone -after they've already raped and killed and gotten caught-? surely a "practical" approach would focus on stopping the raping and killing from occuring?

"its a disincentive" no it isn't - in this hypothetical the criminal is always this idea of someone who was going to kill no matter how society treats them! theyre the fucking Joker! you won't disincentivize them because, when posing the problem, you told me they can't be changed with incentives!

secret argument is "only punishment can actually change behavior" which is laughable but which i am increasingly forced to assume is so deep-seated in people that no Data will ever dislodge it

Notably, the study compares outcomes [before/after +control group] from a policy shift by a Cherokee tribal gov't, adding a casino & passing out profits. So this data doesn't even *measure* the effects of family policing on children outside tribes! These kids were protected from removal already.

Accounting for links between poverty & child removal among all other Americans (who don't live on tribal land), the study underestimates the effect of payments to parents. The comparison group were less likely than others at similar family income to be impacted by trauma related to poverty & racism.

Except there's no way to completely do away with police because there's no way to completely do away with violent criminals. Thinking every violent criminal necessarily came from a deprived background is overly reductionist.

Reminds me of this NBER paper that somehow managed to review the impacts of New Deal era maternal cash transfers and found them to be hugely positive. Evidence for this stuff working has been sitting around for the best part of a century now www.nber.org/papers/w2010...

The Long Term Impact of Cash Transfers to Poor Familieswww.nber.org Founded in 1920, the NBER is a private, non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to conducting economic research and to disseminating research findings among academics, public policy makers, an...

Any time my maga dad is confronted with the cost of imprisonment he recommends expansion of the death penalty. When confronted with the cost of pursuing death sentences he recommends the recision of rights to appeal and/or legal counsel.

Where is the community in US politics that listens to rational public policy arguments? I want to be part of that.

📌

The “ruling” class doesn’t want this. Hard to control happy, well adjusted people.

Post