• Allonzee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    224
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Remember about a year and a half ago when no expense or resource was spared to try to rescue a billionaire with a deathwish from the bottom of the Atlantic while AT THE VERY SAME TIME over 500 refugees that could have been saved, who were still at the surface, were left to drown off the coast of Greece.

    https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/titanic-submarine-billionaires-get-massive-global-rescue-effort-refugees-left-to-drown/

    The ship had been in distress almost two days before it sank, but help didn’t come until it was too late. How many might have been rescued with one-tenth the resources that were rushed to save the five billionaires and millionaires on the Titan?

    This isnt a healthcare problem. This is a global crony market capitalist problem.

    This is a class warfare occupation problem.

    Fuck valuing human life on the basis of ego score.

      • Allonzee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        I’d argue the allowance of passive shareholders is what causes the biggest problems. Shares of profits should go to active employees only, unless they’ve fulfilled the requirements of a pension, not entities that intend to collect capital while contributing no labor towards the products/services generating the profit.

        Passive income should only be hard earned. The only passive income that should be legal should be after 20+ of laboring/supporting the means by which those profits were generated, so it cannot be gamed.

        Not some random asshole leeches who don’t want to work showing up with chips from their last trip to the exploitation, insider info casino, demanding any, let alone all profit. People have to earn a living, it’s perfectly reasonable to DEMAND skin in the game in order to make money.

        • Hugucinogens
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          This doesn’t address the core issue of capitalism:

          Owners in general (of businesses, housing, everything) get all the money, thanks to the opportunity to mercilessly take advantage of workers/renters/everyone else. And taking advantage gets you more money to take more advantage of people.

          The passivest of incomes goes to the owners, the ceos are just the highest paid guard dogs of those people.

          Is that ok? Passive income being much harder to earn for everyone, unless you are rich enough to start your own business, that is.

          Are we not going to end up in the same situation? Isn’t it basically the same situation we’re already in?

          • Allonzee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 days ago

            I disagree, by untethering profit from the labor that makes the capital, innumerable problems arise.

            Passive investors have taken to buying enough of a profitable company to make it self-destruct for a short term burst of profit that then kills the company, stuff like “sell all your real estate in own to lease agreements, give us the profits next quarter, then choke to death on rent after we sell.”

            There’s no incentive to care about your product or service if you buy and sell for short term profit.

            If this could happen at all, you could make rules about how much profit the creating owners can retain relative to staff. New businesses could come from employees, now making enough to have excess capital, to form new companies if they feel they can make something better, and the promise of passive income ONLY After they’ve worked there for appreciable time would create commitment to making good products and services again instead of figuring out how to trick consumers with crap for a quick score.

            This whole mess is created because people with all effectively all the capital have no interest in an actual market of goods and services that benefits society, they live in a different, nationless world, it’s why they choke peasant schools and commons to cut their own taxes. Such people shouldn’t be allowed to make decisions for companies in a country they don’t care about. They should be restricted from it.

            If Elon Musk really wants ownership in company X, for example lol, he would be more than welcome to apply to work there for a small but growing share of profit over the course of his employment share of the profits.

            If he’d like to make his own company, he should be forced to take a reasonable share of the profits, tied to a non-insane multiple of his lowest paid employee, and if the employees, the shareholders, see he isn’t putting 40 hours of attention a week into running the company, they should have recourse to protect their interests they have skin in from him.

            New companies should be formed solely by laborers with an idea getting together with honestly earned money. Closer to a cooperative model. The idea of infinite growth needs to end decades ago as it’s making people suffer now and is on track to destroy the planet. We need equilibrium. Growth should be measured, or it is a danger. We need to go back to condemning rather than cheering people who wish to pursue extreme wealth, as that’s as antisocial a goal as “I’d like to set lots of buildings on fire.” People used to know that, but we’ve been propagandized to see greed as virtuous “rational self-interest.”

            I firmly believe the capital markets are what have detached any semblance of humanity from commerce. They must be destroyed. Labor is what matters and thus should be what capital is tethered to, gambling is a vice for entertainment.

            But we can’t even get our most leftwing, lol, party to do anything, not even healthcare. So this is all a pipedream. It will eventually collapse under the weight of its own corruption, but until then, this place is a dystopia.

  • Zombiepirate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    231
    ·
    7 days ago

    Because the police protect capital above all.

    If CEOs are dying there’s a potential negative financial impact, whereas unhoused people dying makes their job easier.

    • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      7 days ago

      Dying unhoused people don’t effect the economy which is why no one cares … unless we can use them as indentured servants or outright slaves, then we could care more about them.

    • UnpopularCrow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      7 days ago

      This. If you look very closely at police cars that say “Protect and Serve”, you’ll notice the fine print after that says “the wealthy”.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 days ago

        Barricade just looked around at US society and put the slogan on himself that made sense as a cop car. “To Enslave and Punish.”

        I’m starting to think the autobots weren’t the “good guys.” At least in Micheal Bay’s Transformers.

    • Botzo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      7 days ago

      I’m pretty sure this is the only way for Reaganomics to actually work.

      As wealthy people die, the wealth gets spread out and taxed (a little), so more people have access to spend it. Now we just need them to be more like musk and spawn a horde of children to increase this effectiveness.

  • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    92
    ·
    6 days ago

    This is why serial killers often got away for so long. Many serial killers picked their victims very specifically based on economic and social standing. Sex workers were often ignored by ignored by everyone and their killers frequently got away with it.

    Even historic serial killers like Albert Fish (a incredibly monstrous person) chose to kill poor black children because he knew that the (mostly white) police force of the time would not give two fucks about a missing poor black child.

    • Charapaso@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      6 days ago

      One of the most on the nose scenes in the Wire: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6r2a2PaQPI

      The conversation (copied from IMDB)

      Detective James ‘Jimmy’ McNulty : Guy leaves two dozen bodies scattered all over the city, no one gives a fuck.

      Detective Lester Freamon : It’s because who he dropped.

      Detective William ‘Bunk’ Moreland : True that. You can go a long way in this country killin’ black folk. Young males especially. Misdemeanor homicides.

      Detective James ‘Jimmy’ McNulty : If Marlo was killin’ white women…

      Detective Lester Freamon : White children.

      Detective William ‘Bunk’ Moreland : Tourists.

      Detective James ‘Jimmy’ McNulty : One white ex-cheerleader tourist missin’ in Aruba.

      Detective William ‘Bunk’ Moreland : Trouble is, this ain’t Aruba, bitch.

      Detective Lester Freamon : You think that if 300 white people were killed in this city every year, they wouldn’t send the 82nd Airborne? Negro, please.

  • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    6 days ago

    Its sweet and innocent that thinks the cops even give a thousand dollars of time and effort to investigating crimes against the poor.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 days ago

      Police clocking fifty hours of overtime at $75/hr playing candy crush while they claim they’re investing a bike theft is something in willing to believe.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Thats why the worst time to have an interaction with a cop is within 30 minutes before end of shift/shift change.

        Cause they make tons of false arrests to milk several extra hours of overtime slow walking paperwork and other bullshit.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    6 days ago

    They should close the investigation now before we waste more resources. Can’t they just get another CEO? Plus its not like the old CEO is just gonna wakeup and start ceo-ing … Not with all them speed holes.

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    6 days ago

    It’s very likely that NYPD is going to spend a lot more on this murder than an “ordinary” one, but do you really know they only spend a few thousand on an ordinary one or did you just pull that number out of your ass? Cuz I have no idea what the murder investigation budget is.

    • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      6 days ago

      To play the devil’s advocate, it is scientific fact that people are less deterred by gravity of punishment than certainty of punishment. if you understand the police’s job as both preventing crime and investigating crime, than crime prevention is the more important job than crime investigation, because every victim would be the happiest if they never had been a victim. So it is logical, that if a crime happened, you want to investigate and if possible, use the investigation to prevent crime. As perceived certainty is such a good deterrent of crime, you want to be perceived as highly successful with investigations and therefore punishment as highly likely.

      So that brings you in the situation where an investigation has a higher value for the police when the investigation is in the news, as a success in that investigation will raise the perceived certainty of punishment more, compared to a “unknown” crime. As the value is higher, the resources spend on it can be higher too, as long as the additional funds are relative to the additional value of the investigation.

      It seems immoral to spend more resources on high profile cases, as it seems to value certain lives more but arguably it raises the safety of everyone by making punishment seem more certain.

      Obvious counterpoint: If you know that they are doing that, you aren’t perceiving them as successful in the average investigation and there you don’t feel like punishment is certain, or more certain.

      • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Interesting article, but it says this $17.25 million figure includes besides police and court expenses, lost time for the victim and perp, and “estimates on the public’s resulting willingness to pay to prevent future violence.” And I don’t think they mention whether it includes incarceration costs. The detailed version still didn’t shine any light on any of that, or anything about the research team’s methodology. But that number definitely isn’t what people are talking about when they say, “Police spend $x to investigate crime A and only $y to investigate crime B.”

  • Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    6 days ago

    It’s only weird if you believe the prime function of the police is to protect everybody.

    If you think the prime function of the police is to protect the rich and their assets, these action of theirs make perfects sense as do many other actions (such as prioritizing fighting crime against property over stopping violence)

    • A7thStone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      6 days ago

      Fighting crime against the property of the capitalist class. They don’t give a shit about your or my property.

    • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      Imagine being the bystander who nopes out in the video - I bet their immediate future involved a serious change of underwear.

  • testfactor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    7 days ago

    Have I missed something? I feel like the NYPD is investigating this the same way they do every murder.

    Sure, the media is covering it like crazy, but I haven’t seen anything to indicate that the NYPD is doing anything different than their norm. And the NYPD can’t exactly control what the news covers.

    At worst they’ve been told, “hey, there’s a lot of scrutiny on this one, so give it a little extra attention,” but that’s not “millions of dollars” they they otherwise wouldn’t have spent.

    • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      7 days ago

      They don’t have press conferences, raise the bridges to stop traffic out of the city, put out (this many) ground units to question and collect evidence for every murder in New York. Not by a long shot. The location of the murder and identity of the victim are playing a big factor in this. Because coverage happened, they’re responding. If there were 270 news articles written about Non-Descript-Murdered-Citizen #6hey might give it the same attention.

      There were 808 murders in New York in 2020. Did you see this response from those deaths, do you recall?

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 days ago

        I mean, yes you’re correct on all points, but 2020 is a really bad year to pick. They kinda had people dropping dead all over the city to the point of mass graves. Pretty sure that might have stretched the emergency services just a teensy bit.

        • NABDad@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          6 days ago

          According to This, there were 29 murders in New York in October of this year. How many of those got the same treatment?

    • Drusas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 days ago

      They don’t typically immediately deploy helicopters, drones, and dogs when someone gets shot.

  • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    7 days ago

    I know it’s not the point but Jesus fucking Christ then is not than. How fucking hard is it to notice that they’re two different words?

    • FundMECFSResearchOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 days ago

      Idk maybe not everyone has a first language of english and had english lessons.

      Like english is literally my fourth best spoken language. And I’m disabked with cognitive issues.

      • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 days ago

        The vast, vast majority of these simple mistakes are native speakers

        ESL speakers know better

        • Ember@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          I’m a native English speaker. Honestly… who cares? We can still understand them just fine. Do you speak four+ languages like they do? I studied a second language for 10 years in school and barely remember it. I self-studied a third for a couple of years and it’s HARD. What in the world do they have to be guilty for? Being way better at being multilingual than the average native English speaker?

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            I obviously care. There is also nothing wrong with having pet peeves. Zero people need to agree with what my pet peeves are allowed to be. I see this dumb mistake all the time and that’s not really related to the linguistic status of this one individual.

            • Ember@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 days ago

              Sure, have your pet peeves. That’s perfectly fine. However, making someone feel bad about it and implying they should feel guilty, when they’ve already made a huge accomplishment in learning another language, isn’t. You’re not wrong, but you’re still an asshole.

              • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 days ago

                I would disagree with your assessment of this. If I implied they should feel bad, it was for guilting me with information I couldn’t have known and wasn’t at all personal

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 days ago

        Yeah and people who say “could of” instead of “could have”. Writing is not just mimicking sounds you make out loud but they don’t seem to know it

      • Nelots@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 days ago

        Direct correlation between

        There’s a certain irony in complaining about improper grammar while speaking in fragmented sentences. Why is it bad to omit “of” but not “There’s a” like you did?

        LaNgUagE iS alWAyS evolving

        It is.